Results from the DNC Rules Committee:

I wish they had weapons!

Did you watch the Democratic Rules Committee meetings on CNN? The only thing that would have made them better was if the meeting used gladiator style combat, with the last man (or woman) standing getting to decide the fate of Michigan and Florida. I love it how they are so nasty to each other, yet every sentence begins with some meaningless salutation like, "I think you are a very intelligent, and dedicated public servant, but..." People who say the Democrats will not have a rough road ahead clearly are not watching these events unfold. If Hillary wins the popular vote, this may not be as easy as some have been saying over the past three weeks. Remember months ago when some pundits predicted this election would be decided in a smoke filled room? I may not smell cigarette and cigar smoke, but I do smell disaster.

Ron Paul, the revolution will be televised (on youtube)

Ron Paul might be a squirrelly little guy, but he continues to draw a crowd and his libertarian message continues to be popular among the faithful. Paul's youtube profile page has over 51,000 subscribers and over 7 million page views. While he has no chance at his party's nomination, he has created a force in the political year.

My take on Ron Paul is this...his contribution to the election cycle is far more valuable that Ralph Nader's. Why? Ron Paul is a representative in the United State Congress, that means that his name has been on a ballot and he has one elections. Ralph Nader has been on the outside of the political sphere his entire life and very few people that have ever actually cast a vote for him thought he would win anything. Ralph Nader for a time had an impact on American culture. Now he has become so enamored with his own philosophy his campaign is a waste of time.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul won 15% of the vote in the Oregon this month. There's a Ron Paul nation. Don't believe me? Check out this groovy video from his recent trip to Cali...

Are we still fighting a war?

It strikes me that we have talked an awful lot about the economy lately and the latest political gaffe. Many Americans have learned what a super delegate is and can now explain it by heart. But can we find Baghdad on a map? Are we up on the status of our troops? Where is the media coverage of what's going on?

If a country fights a war and there is not media to cover it, is it really happening?

Elite is a four letter word

Why are we afraid of elite’s in our government? One of the more irrational fears that has gripped the American electorate for a long time is the fear of someone too much more qualified than themselves might take the office of president.

Listening to the pundits this weekend one of them mused (and I’m paraphrasing), “President Bush back in 2000 didn’t have a lot of the qualities people might look for in a leader but he seemed like the kind of guy you could have a beer with, and people responded to that.” They went on to talk further about President Clinton, whom after winning the democratic nomination was seen as too “learned” and elite, being from the Ivy league and being a Rhodes Scholar and all. They had to relaunch and reintroduce "the man from Hope" to make him more like everyone else. What is it about our politics that makes us strive for the mediocre? Why do we fear having our best and our brightest at the top of the heap? Why does Barack Obama have to constantly remind us that he ate Jello molds as a kid and that he’s just a regular guy who can drink a boilermaker like the rest of us. Why did Hillary Clinton have to throw back drinks in a Pennsylvania bar to prove that she was ready to commander in chief? Why did Al Gore lose in 2000 because he seemed like too much of a nerd? Our recent history is full of examples of extraordinary people of high accomplishment doing whatever they possibly could to avoid appearing stellar.

This practice of who can be the most folksy wouldn’t bother me so much except that it takes intelligent people and makes them say and do dumb things. The best recent example I can think of is Iran policy. The latest political football to get tossed around, Barack Obama has positioned himself as recently as last July as ready to talk with any foreign leader without preconditions. This stance is of course ludicrous. Preconditions and talks with lesser members of government are a pre-requisite of presidential meetings, as they well should be. Senator Obama knows that, and he knows that when he is President he will be able to justify not actually having meetings with rogue leaders because of the specific circumstances involved at any given time. This is a pander to the left, a way of saying, “no, no I am one of you, I really believe that if we all were to just talk that the problems would go away…”

John McCain of course has allowed his pander machine to run off course in the opposite direction. The world according to McCain is a very quiet one, because apparently we would only be talking to our staunchest allies. Presidential interest is a reward for only the best behavior. Under the McCain doctrine we would clam up with Hamas, Iran, Syria, Cuba, and even China (its a communist country, and a human rights violator). Of course that’s not really what’s going to happen. McCain is smart enough and experienced enough to know that with the proper circumstances it makes all the sense in the world to come to the table and discuss.

My only hope is that in all this hope to stop being elite, our candidates don’t lose their minds.

The Rove Factor: A Negative?

Karl Rove was the "architect" of President Bush's election and reelection. He's a political operative extraordinare. But I wonder if his consistent role in the public eye Rove has maintained since his "retirement" from the Bush White House isn't something of an albatross for the Republican party. Scott Mclellan's book was yet another description of Rove's critically important role in the White House. In many ways, I wonder if the Democrats will not attempt to link Rove to the larger Republican party. The "architect" of a failed administration that won't go away. It would be an easy charge to deny except that Rove remains a fixture on Fox News and shows up regularly for grilling on the Sunday morning shows. Op-Eds, speaking engagements, it seems Rove can't escape the public eye. While Mclellan's book won't fundamentally change the presidential race, I wonder if it won't provide yet another rope in the public eye for Rove to get tied to the larger Republican party. To be sure as long as Fox News is having interviews like this, somewhere John McCain winces.

Obama on Education

Education has been a popular riff here on policythought, with good reason. Education one of the most important domestic policy issues facing America long-term. In America today one third of all teenagers drop out of high school. The candidates have lobbed this football back and forth, with little substance. Well in a refreshing change of pace, Senator Obama talks education policy yesterday in Thorton, CO. Take the time to watch his speech, I think it gives a clear window into a change on education.




In the interest of equal time, I was able to find this, far briefer statement from John McCain. It was an interview given to the Des Moines Register, way back during the Iowa Caucuses. If anyone has any links to a newer education policy statement by McCain, please let me know and I'll put it up.

Dodging the (Gas Price) Bullet

I find few sales pitches more abhorrent than the Dodge/Chrysler promotion to actually subsidize the cost of gas for new buys for the next THREE YEARS. In case the ads haven't penetrated your living room, Dodge is willing to guarantee you 2.99 gasoline for the next three years if you buy a new car during their promotion.

Here's a quote I read in Thomas Friedman's NY Times column today, attributed to Tim Shriver, head of the Special Olympics, "So Dodge wants to sell you a car you don’t really want to buy, that is not fuel-efficient, will further damage our environment, and will further subsidize oil states, some of which are on the other side of the wars we’re currently fighting. ... The planet be damned, the troops be forgotten, the economy be ignored: buy a Dodge.”

Friedman goes on to explain what a mythical truth-speaking presidential candidate would call for. I would prefer to stick with Dodge/Chrysler here. This promotion runs completely counter to what the United States needs economically, and some would say morally. What we don't need is auto manufacturers subsidizing the cost of an outmoded fuel model for the sake of short term sales. Dodge's attempt to revive and resuscitate its flagging brand with the offer of cheap gas appeals to the lowest in our consumerism.

Americans are better than that, our free markets innovate their way out of problems. Consumers organically change habits as the economies of scale take hold. For a corporation to defy that basic law of the market is wrong.

The Mclellan Problem

Politico broke the story yesterday and already the pundits are commenting. Scott Mclellan buried the administration in his book. The interesting timing and rapid media release has infuriated the White House. I'll be interested to see how Obama and McCain line up with the book. Can McCain create daylight between himself and the administration on the subject of competence and honesty? In the mean time, take a look at the Today Show's summary.

The newest front in the media war

What if independent people created their own home-made attack ads? Not just for youtube, but for mass consumption on local television? Network affiliates for CNN, Comedy Central, and ESPN to name a few. Then what if like minded voters could buy the air time to get those ads seen.

Thats the the idea behind SaysMeTV go check it out, it's a distrubing look into the future of political discourse.

John McCain's Good Sense Problem

Senator McCain is a good man and a good American. He's been a loyal and faithful public servant. He's also well know and well respected for his "maverick" status. But John McCain has a youtube problem. His problem stems from being too flexible in his thinking too often.

Mind you this is not the ideological flip-flopping of a Mitt Romney. It's more the nature of being a good in the moment leader. McCain has always been a fearless member of congress out in front for the Sunday morning shows explaining his opposition or support for a particular policy or plan, then as the situation develops months or years later, he reevaluates his position. He's also given to hyperbole, its not that the conditions in Baghdad have improved, its that you can walk around without armor. It's not that General Petraeus can patrol the streets himself, its that he can do it without a protected vehicle.

Well in the hands of an expert (or no so much) video editor at home with his laptop you get the following.

Political Paparazzi

To many, it would seem that this batch of candidates has an affinity for ill-worded statements. Hillary had her Bonsia story and her most recent RFK reference. McCain said that he would remain in Iraq for 100 years if that's what it took to get the job done. (Bet you wish you could take that one back sonny) And today Barack Obama said that his uncle liberated Auschwitz when he actually liberated Buchenwald. 

In my previous post on enjoying the weather I voiced my displeasure at the media's  tendency to manufacture headlines in order to create drama. For those who don't believe me, how else can you describe the scrutiny of Obama's latest statement? We're really getting picky when we're saying that because he liberated ANOTHER camp, Obama is a liar. While I have rolled my eyes at Hillary's constant excuses that she "misspoke" this instance with Obama may generally be one of those occasions. I have made mistakes when presenting my lessons on numerous occasions, but does that make me  a liar? I don't believe so. We need to stop criticizing every little soundbite, and focus on something more important, issues. 

Why isn't there an equal amount of disdain on the part of Republicans when it comes to soaring gas prices? Why aren't Democrats bringing about all those "changes" promised in the last election? How about we stop focusing on what camp Obama's uncle liberated or what awkward statement Hillary made about RFK and focus on something of substance. Why do people become so disenchanted with politics? It's because politics is an ugly business that generally doesn't address the issues at hand. Political parties merely use important issues as political fodder for the latest election and then puts them back on the shelf for use in another four years. Excuse my recent aggravation, but I'm growing weary of all the pathetic attempts to keep the candidates in the spotlight. I believe this election has seen the birth of a new trend, the political paparazzi. Now that's something I can truly live without.

Brooks: Running Mates

Today Brooks takes on running mates and why the current discussion in the talkosphere is headed the wrong way. Brooks talk about how the VP shouldn't be seen as a short term answer to winning a swing state, but a long term investment in good governance. It's nearly impossible to disagree, but I will argue with his take on what Obama needs.

Brooks says he'll need someone seen as an unorthodox liberal with legislative chops that can take lofty rhetoric and turn it into real legislative action. I think he actually needs an ideological liberal driving the agenda with a very bipartisan cabinet in the wings. Thoughts?

Going on (and off) the Attack

This month's Conde Nast Portfolio asks if we're seeing the end of attack politics. Howell Raines recalls his invitation to the annual press dinner in Washington where he was seated between top political operatives Karl Rove and the Doug Schoen.

While these 30 year veterans battled it out over whether or not Hillary's 3am phone call ad amounted to negative campaigning, our author muses about whether these attacks are going to work with the youngest generation of voters.

He mentions the rise of the blogging class and his belief that we are still in a teenage phase of development simultaneously emulating our parents (big media) but seeking to strike out our own path.

I found his article interesting on two fronts. Were he a member of the new media, he would have blogged about the argument he witnessed as soon as he got home, or from his blackberry in the men's room, gossiping to the web at large about Karl Rove's bluster. Perhaps his not being a blogger is what got him invited to the table in the first place. Secondly, I think its a wide generalization to say that all blogs are created equal. Blogs like the moderate voice, or even policythought are dedicated to trying to invigorate the landscape with substantive debate and not boilerplate "527" style attacks. It's worth noting that this blog refrains from attack politics and might be suffering traffic loss from it. Make no mistake the Internet age is indeed hyperkinetic and eyeballs are what count in the newest age of ratings.

While people seek to find a new media age, I think the changes we will see are both rapid and glacial. The under 30's out there were born into an age of internet consciousness. While the immediate fit of blogs and youtube show up as a new front in the war of attack politics. It will take a generation growing and changing, sharing their thoughts on everything from shoes to China's rising political clout on the web in real time to truly measure what it will do to the electorate. Make no mistake, the times are changing, but no one knows where's we're headed.

V List Cross Over: Top Five Reasons People Dig This Election

This election cycle has proven to be one of the most exciting in recent memory. The drama and headlines, some natural, some manufactured have kept the public unusually interested in the reality TV show we call the presidential election of 2008. However, there five reasons above all that keep this one interesting...folks if you enjoy this list there are more to be found on topics ranging from sports to star wars over at the v list...

#5. The first open source campaign

We saw inklings of it in 2004 for the Howard Dean Campaign, and some of the mechanics of the machinery for the Kerry Campaign, but the online juggernaut that has exploded in political coverage since both of those campaigns is astounding. The blogs are a whole new level of political importance-the third leg of media checks and balances. There's the official line of the politician, the media's spin, and the the blogosphere hyper-spin or counter spin. Convince the MSM of your point is one thing, read the blogs the next hour, did you convince Kos? 

#4. It's Reality TV

Hillary Clinton's quest to break the highest and hardest glass ceiling, Bill Clinton's obsessive desire to regain the White House by proxy, the public break up between Senator Obama and his off-the-wall pastor, Ron Paul's never ending crusade. This political season has become the best reality show o

n television. 

#3. Bill Clinton

Just when you thought the story line might get boring. Bill pops back up like the plastic dad in Don't Wake Daddy, wide eyed and pissed that some 2 year Senator woke him from his dream of he and his wife going round #2 at the White House. In his agitation he might compare Obama to Jesse Jackson, or maybe he'll claim Hillary's faced brutal sexism, or maybe he'll say that the race card was played against him. Sometimes he just wants to scream at people at campaign rallies. Whatever it is, Bill's always there as ex-presid

ent combatant in chief. 

#2 Yes We Can!

I know its a simplistic and some would say lame campaign slogan. Some would say that the hope Obama promises is hype. But whatever way you slice it, Senator Obama has generated a new an very exciting interest in politics. He has turned the youngest voters on to the process. His charisma, his political skill, his oratory and his thoughtfulness have turned him into the Vin Diesel of politics. I bet he hopes he has a longer shelf life. 

#1 President Bush

Let's face it-we all wouldn't care who was going to be the next president so much if not for the fact that we all disapprove of President Bush so much. Mr. 28% per cent approval has given all of us a reason to be interested in who replaces him. Maybe you hate the war in Iraq, or his administration's abuses of power, maybe you think negotiating with enemies is intelligent, maybe you like a President that can string together a sentence with more than 3 multi-syllabic words in it without getting that dim sort of glazed over look is appealing. Maybe you don't want a vice president that reminds you so much of Darth Vader. Whatever your particular beef it's reason enough to want someone new, desperately. And so we all watch with great intent the buffon reality play that is our current presidential cycle. 

From the Land of Over Reaction

Sometimes we say boneheaded things. We all do. Senator Clinton recently made remarks considering the timeline of other nomination contests one of which being the Robert Kennedy's win in California in June of 1968 only to be followed, tragically with his assassination. Her invocation of the event was stupid. But it was not the political football that some have chosen to make it...Keith Olbermann took a nearly 11 minutes of air time to attack the NY Senator for her remark. 

I have not been a Clinton supporter this cycle, but I fail to understand how her bringing up a historical timeline, even in these charged political times warrants the following reaction from Keith Olbermann.

Enjoying the Weather!

Is it me, or is anybody else enjoying the media silence of the past few days? As James mentioned earlier, there will be a lull in media coverage over the course of the next few months, however I view this as a good thing. The media's coverage has been like a feeding frenzy lately, rather than objective, accurate journalism. I've grown tired of the manufactured headlines and drama. I'm sick of Reverend Wright and Bittergate. I can't stomach anymore talk of racism in this election or the voting tendencies white, blue-collar workers. While the media is certainly still trying to convince you of the hype and controversy (see Hillary Clinton's remarks on RFK) I'm not biting anymore. I've come up with a brief list of things of family friendly activities to occupy the space between the nuclear holocaust of a primary and the upcoming category five general election.

5. BBQ

Nothing says summer like a nice day in the yard / or on the deck like a good ol' Barbeque with your friends. Open a few beers, kick back and talk about better times. Get some fresh air and take in all natures wonders in the waning days of spring.

4. Catch a Flick!

The spring / summer box office line-up is chock-full of goodness this year with titles like Batmans Returns, Ironman, Kung-Fu Panda, Indiana Jones, and the Hulk just to name a few. Enjoy a film with the family and suspend your disbelief for two hours. Forget all the rising gasoline prices and political infighting and feel like a kid again watching your old big screen faves return to a new generation of moviegoers.

3. Play catch...

Dust off your old Baseball mit and throw the baseball around for a little bit with a family member. There's nothing like a talk over a game of catch. I don't know what it is about this activity that is totally Zen. You'll feel so good that all your problems will melt away.

2. Ice Cream and a Walk

Nothing says summer and beautiful weather more than a nice ice cream sundae. Get a gigantic ice cream cone and take a nice walk around the neighborhood. If you neighborhood is skanky, go visit somebody else's. Bring some friends along. Much like there's always room for Jello-O, I would argue that there's always room for ice cream.

1. Hit the open road

Get a handful of your summer music collection, open every window in your car, and start to drive. You don't need a particular destination, just drive. Put on your sunglasses, blast your music, and sing at the top of your lungs. Take a navigator with you. Don't be afraid to pack a little overnight bag, just in case you don't want the journey to end. You don't need an expensive Carribean vacation or flight to gain some peace of mind. Travel to small towns that are not in a brochure. Sample some local customs on this low budget vacation. You don't have to go far (it can only be a weekend) to feel like you've taken a break from your life. Get away from all the negative and break the monotany of the Monday to Friday grind. Don't worry the political infighting and career will still be there when you get back. Take a break from them for a while, I guarantee that you will feel better for it.

Harrison Ford Waxes Conservation

Indiana Jones and The Inconvenient Truth. Or, in this case, the absolutely gross truth. What a bizarre PSA...

#400

Hello All!

This is a special post. This is the 400th post here on Policythought! We are still in the infancy of this blog and what we believe it can offer our readers. We strive to deliver potent policy debate, political insight, humor and varied points of view. That being the case I wanted to take a brief pause for our 400th post and ask our readers to suggest what we can do to improve the blog. the comment section awaits, and if you have something more personal to say...well you can always email us policythought@gmail.com

Beware: Lull Ahead

As the delegate math sews up for Senator Obama look for the lull to set in. Political coverage in MSM is going to slow down in the coming weeks as media organizations have fewer contests to cover. To be sure the blogs and cable news will go on dissecting every uttered syllable, but the public's attention span and therefore big network coverage will shrink on this topic until the conventions. This is good news for Senator Obama. He hasn't won a dominant victory over Senator Clinton, but rather a war of attrition. As long as Senator Clinton doesn't do anything to make their battle more public in the weeks and months leading to the convention, the media will yawn as she makes her arguments on electability. The lull will be the media slow-down Obams needs to quietly mend fences after a divisive primary battle.

The lull hurts Senator McCain. He needs all the free media coverage he can get with so little in his campaign coffers. With Republican brand ID so startlingly low, McCain needs open air to declare himself the unconventional Republican. If people fall asleep to the election season and wake up for McCain's convention speech he might get tagged with that brand clear to November.

Perception and Politics

Just one more quick hit before I must away. Oregon and Kentucky have been at the polls all day. Early returns are coming in, but the the press is already carrying Obama's water for him. His campaign initially had planned to announce victory of sorts today after winning the majority of pledged delegates. As the month rolled along they decided instead to back off as the media seemed to be minimizing Senator Clinton on it's own. 

However, media outlets have widely reported the milestone for Obama today even if the campaign plans on making no mention of it. While I am no Clinton supporter, the media is ending this thing for us, whether Hillary likes it or not. 

Brooks Tuesday: Who's gonna bring the reform?

Today Brooks lays out his case the it is McCain the elder statesman that will actually be able to bring change to Washington from his seat at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Brooks takes the farm bill as an example of an opportunity missed for Senator Obama. Take a look and see what you think. 

Oh, and we'll dive into the farm bill soon...

Demogogues and Demographics

The electoral college was invented to respect the differences between states politically speaking. It was a way of localizing a national election for president and respecting that the interests of New York are different from those of Alabama.

Yet today it is likely not the state you live in or even your income that are likely to determine your party allegiance. Rather it is your cultural demographics and tendencies that will likely determine who you vote for in a primary or in the general election.

In 1976 a relatively close election 25% of voters lived in a "landslide" county. Landslide being defined as a win by 20 points or more. In 2004, that percentage went up to 50% of voters. This has led to the continued "Balkanization" of voters. As the general election progresses the candidates will begin to spend the bulk of their time in the swing states, the electoral battle grounds that will determine the election.

The candidates involved in this general election (assuming Senators Obama and McCain do indeed become their party's nominees) are seen as bridge builders. They are seen as candidates that can reach across the aisle and work from a centrist position. They are swimming against the tide of demography.

But let me return to my original premise. The electoral college breaks the country into states. But when a state is broken so sharply along its own county lines into shades of red and blue, one wonders if simple state wide counts tell the story any more.

Is the Democratic Party's system of proportional delegate counting a more accurate way of assessing the electorate? Or should we do away with all slicing and dicing and do our elections by a simple popular vote of all citizens? The way you count is the determining factor for how the game is played. Do our rules and the country's trends force our candidates to play into a box?

The New Math

What can you do when your opponent will probably cross the finish line on Tuesday, securing him the nomination? Move the finish line backwards of course, silly! For those of you who thought Hillary might come to her senses, think again. The new math according to the Clinton camp should include the disenfranchised voters in Michigan and Florida, despite Hillary's prior commitment to follow the DNC rules which stripped them of their delegates prior to the Iowa and New Hampshire votes. Amazing isn't it? Let's talk about how important Iowa and New Hampshire are in the voting process, and denounce Michigan and Florida's decision to move their primaries up. Then once New Hampshire and Iowa are in the rearview mirror, change your song about Michigan and Florida. How typical of a Clinton. I did not have sexual relations with that woman... Why do most Americans think that Hillary is untrustworthy? It's because she even lies to herself. Hillary, the math is 2026, it's over.

Nature vs. Nurture: Fostering New Hate

In a time where the wounds of war are constantly being inflicted upon generations of children in Afghanistan and Iraq, it seems the US would find it within the best interest of all, the children and ourselves, to foster a better relationship with the families and youngest hurt in the footsteps of the war on terror. Instead, an article today on AOL.com proclaiming "US Military Holds 500 Youths in Iraq" shows us that we are hosting a war on terror, as well as fighting one.

(http://news.aol.com/story/_a/us-military-holds-500-youths-in-iraq/20080519064909990001)

If our country was in turmoil, and another governing nation stepped in to help us correct the insurgence and the unrest, how might we feel if those who disagreed were captured or killed? Or furthermore, if the children we have left, fighting under the only ideals and memories their dead fathers have given them, were captured and held, without warning or deadline of release? What then?

This is what has happened over in Iraq; as the article goes on to state, "a total of 2,500 youths under the age of 18 have been detained, almost all in Iraq, for periods up to a year or more in President Bush's anti-terrorism campaign since 2002, the United States reported last week to the U.N.'s Committee on the Rights of the Child."

The the idea that a child, on the brink of adulthood, fighting for all that they have ever known, is imprisoned from their family, and we are just finding out about it now when it started in 2002, scares the hell out of me. What else might we not know about? What else has this administration been doing over there in the name of peace and ending war, when it is ripping families apart and brewing new hatred? And lastly - who will answer our nation if another attack happens, because it was provoked through the imprisonment of a child? I cannot imagine anyone, even Bush, having an argument for that one.

A Minor Tale of Racism

Barack Obama is poised to be the first mixed-race nominee for president of a major political party in the United States of America. His nomination is a quantum leap forward for the status of minority Americans across the country. It is also a reflection of the growing demographic changes of the United States. While Obama's story is highly unique, his racial make-up is not necessarily so. His mixed race background is the leading edge of a trend that will change the landscape of American political and social life.

There has been ample discussion about whether or not he can't win the white working-class because of underlying racism, there has been talk about his known ceiling when it comes to support from those white americans that will never vote for a black man. I know in reading these stories, I said to myself, "these must be isolated cases." Sure in some backwoods areas of the country people still feel this way, but with a little education, and a little exposure to different kinds of people, surely most Americans are open minded enough to vote for who they think is best qualified to be president.

Well this past weekend I was given a first hand example of why that is not true, why racism exists everywhere. Even in the greatest city in the world.

Those of you that know me personally know that I love to play roller hockey. I've done it since I was a kid and I'm pretty passionate about it. I recently got back into the swing of it and now I try to play 2 or 3 times a week at a rink in Queens. As I've gone more and more I've fallen in with a crowd of regulars. People I don't know very well but who come down to the rink often enough that we recognize each other and are probably on a first name basis. One of the games I play in comes on Saturday morning, around 11am.

It's always been a fun game, usually anywhere from 15-20 people show up, with a few goalies, we divide into teams and play for a while. Lately, a new group of younger players has been showing up. They are "good enough" despite their age, probably 15-18 that they get to play with us.

Despite their age and relativly small stature they could hold their own. In fact I often found myself getting frustrated that I would take them too lightly and make a mistake. They had only two things in common as far as I could tell-a deceptive speed moving with the puck and dark skin.

This past Saturday was one of the hotter we have played on this year. During a "sweat break" so the goalies could cool down I took a knee by the boards to fix my shin guard, unconsciously making myself appear anti-social. After tossing some jokes out from my kneeling position about one guys lousy wrist shot, and somebody else'w lousy stick handling one of the players I had known for a few weeks rolled over to me.

"What is this bull____?" he asked me.
"What bull____?" I replied.

He answered in a low whisper, "These kids? What are they black or Indian or what...?" I answered truthfully that I didn't know, but their names were Kevin, Tony and I didn't know the other kid. He shook his head. As I was answering, another player came over probably in time to hear me naming the kids. The two of them commiserated on how the dark-skinned kids "didn't know the game." I found myself stuck between hating where their sentiments were coming from and not wanting to get on a soap box. So as I rose from my kneeling position I said simply, "Well for not knowing the game they get around us pretty well." and then I skated away.

The point of this story is that when people are threatened by something new, by something that they don't quite understand or isn't exactly like them, they try to find ways to separate so they can attack. Whether it be on the roller rink or in the general election, people are scared of something different. There is room for hope though, despite our fears and differences, when it came time, we dropped the puck and started the game.

The New Role of VP

The Sunday morning talk shows didn’t have a lot to talk about this week. With the democratic party’s story line getting decidedly less exciting as it appears Senator Obama will be the nominee, it was time to fill some air. I only caught parts of This Week, on ABC and Meet the Press for NBC and both shows were covering the same topic for at least part of their round table discussions. The ever looming Vice Presidential debate. Who should near-certain nominees Barack Obama and John McCain choose as their running mates. I don’t really feel a need to engage in more speculation. Both candidates will choose based on a calculus on they really understand, so why try to guess?

As a matter of policy however, the role of Vice President has changed vastly in the last eight years. Dick Cheney wasn’t simply an adviser and President of the Senate as the constitution provides. He was at the center policy decisions and by many accounts was running a parallel white house. So the question is for all you policy thinkers, without delving into your personal feelings for Dick Cheney, which I’m sure are only warm and fuzzy, what kind of a role would you like future VP’s to play? Policy-drivers? Or political back-seaters?

 

The comment section awaits your thoughts. 

Gay Marriage in California allowed again (for now)

A better writer would give you all the background and previous information needed to full assess the California gay marriage ban and subsequent ruling but the state supreme court deeming that ban unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the constitution.

What I found amazing in listening to a debate about it yesterday on Newshour, wasn't that people are opposed to gay marriage, it's that opponents of gay marriage called the judges decision legislating from the bench, but never attempted to explain the constitutionality of the ban. Why? Simply put, there is no constitutional defense of a gay marriage ban. It just makes some people uncomfortable, period. No one is saying that your particular church or place of worship has to start performing same-sex marriages. But why should two men or two women who are in love and want to commit for a life time, not be given equal ability to do so under the law. Their right to do so would in no way effect anyone else's rights. 

Much the way conservative groups stick to their "keep the government out of my life" argument when it comes to the 2nd amendment and bearing guns (an argument they are correct in making by the way), under the same constitutional grounds two consenting adults of any gender should be able to get married under the law. To say anything else I think is unpatriotic to the ideals this nation was built on life liberty and and the pursuit of happiness. 

The media is talking about how this ruling will be the law in the land only for a short time as opposition groups plan on a ballot initiative that will bake a same sex marriage ban into the state constitution. They are calling it the officially homophobic act of 2008. Alright maybe I made that one up, but if that ban passes I hope the California courts will strike it down. It is not legislating from the bench to strike down an unconstitutional law. 

Brooks: Obama Hearts George (H.W.) Bush

Today my man David Brooks at the NY Times delves a little deeper into Senator Obama's plans for Middle East negotiations. Far from appeasing the Nazi's as W's thinly veiled comparison tried to portray-Brooks seems Obama as far more pragmatic. 

Obama/McCain: Will this be the candid cycle?

Every season the same thing happens. We all start off with so much hope for the election cycle. New faces emerge with the potential to radically change the electorate or the face of our politics. Then as the race wears on, the battle lines become more entrenched, the mud starts to fly and in the end the voters are so disgusted with both, no one is excited any more. 

I wonder if this cycle won't be different. Not because we are such better people but because of the nature of the campaigns both of these candidates have promised to wage. The nature of the politics Barack Obama is trying to sell to the American people is supposed to elevate up above the realm of name-calling. He is essentially supposed to be changing the game in Washington. It will hurt his brand if he begins to the pivot away from that. 

McCain as well will be looking to stop attack politics. Elevating our discourse to helping the American people is part of the McCain brand and if he lets that aspect drop, Obama will too easily tag him as being part of the old-style politics. 

But I also wonder if there isn't something more cultural at work here. We are in an age not just of 24-hour spin meisters, but 24-hour bloggers and a never-ending commentary cycle. The YouTube effect has already been felt throughout the primary season, as not only can pictures and text be transmitted in the blink of an eye, but so to can video. More important than it's abundance is the nature of peer-to-peer sharing the internet enables. Six million people watched Barack Obama's speech on race in Philadelphia on Youtube. I wonder if that's why the spin camp of team Hillary has run into such opposition, maybe its the legion of bloggers there to parse her words, or compare her positions to past ones. Perhaps its when she talks about dodging sniper fire, there is video that proves it's a lie. Not just on the local news, but posted again and again on blogs and across the internet. 

The home-made-media cycle is beginning to prove its worth this cycle as not only can it be a cash cow, but it is a place for minds to come together. I wonder if these candidates consciously or unconsciously play well in this environment and we might actually see some policy thought this election cycle.