Ushering in the new era

Televisions were on all over our school building today. I stepped back from "teaching" and did a lot of observing. I was so happy for my students, that they should have such a powerful and positive experience. "This is history today and all of us are a part of it, no matter our politics or ethnic background." That is all I said, and they sat so attentively and respectfully, drinking in every moment of the actual inauguration and the speech that followed.

I sat behind them, watching the young African-American students sitting up taller. The glow on their faces bounced around the room and I was suddenly struck all over again by the beautiful diversity of my students: Asian, Hispanic, black, white, students of native American descent and students who are children of immigrants -- all taking pride in the election of somebody who grew up "different" from the norm.

It was impossible not to reflect upon my own schooling, and I shared with one class that my education had been segregated because that's the way it was for most of us in the 1950s and 1960s. There was no diversity when I was in elementary school, nor in middle or high school. It wasn't until university that the faces around me in my classes took on a more global aspect. What a loss, is all I could think. We would have all been so much better off growing up mixed together rather than kept so far apart.

And then I thought of the times that we were drawn to the television for collective viewing when I was a student: the deaths of John and Bobby Kennedy and the death of Martin Luther King Jr. The race riots, The nightly Vietnam War death counts. The crumbling of the Nixon reign. About the only positive television memory I can summon was watching the astronauts take their first tentative steps toward outer space and eventually land on the moon.

But my students today were barely three years old when 9/11 shook our world. They hear others' memories of the ugliness of segregation, but have never experienced it for themselves. They have not seen the hatred that strikes down beloved leaders. I cannot expect that their lives will never be touched by a collective national tragedy. But I do expect that this youngest of generations will carry in their hearts and minds the memory of this day, and that they will find what it takes to move the human race further ahead socially, politically and ecologically.

Unfortunately, the bell rang in the middle of Obama's inaugural speech, and I had to usher out one class and bring in another, but what I heard was both bracing and inspiring and I couldn't wait to get home to find a transcription and reflect upon his words to us all. The following passage, in particular, is one to reflect upon and remember:

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

A concert made for you and me

I was trying to post a small tribute to Woody Guthrie tonight, after hearing Pete Seeger and Bruce Springsteen sing This Land Is Your Land at the We Are One concert held Sunday afternoon on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Unfortunately, the post got all garbled with formatting problems and I had to delete it after publishing it -- due to the weirdness of the way it turned out, with sentences chopped and lost.

So here it is again, in shortened version. It was a thrill to see Pete Seeger with his banjo exhorting the crowd to sing all the verses. And there are some great verses in that song, including my very favorites. This one:

In the squares of the city - In the shadow of the steeple
Near the relief office - I see my people
And some are grumblin' and some are wonderin'
If this land's still made for you and me.

And this one:

As I was walkin'  -  I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin'
But on the other side  .... it didn't say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!

You don't get to hear that verse very often. How fitting that it came about on national television, with rousing backing by a youth choir as well as Pete's grandson and Bruce Springsteen singing along. Pete, was on everybody's blacklist for way too long, radical rabble-rouser that he has been for 89 years now! He looked and sounded great, even had the energy to jog off the stage when it was over.

It brought tears to my eyes and it made me want to hear Woody Guthrie, the fellow who made up that song in the depths of the depression. He didn't really mean for it to be a patriotic number, but rather a tribute to those who struggle to survive. Here's a snippet with footage of Woody in action:

Washington, D.C. -- Obama's new community

Barack Obama, appearing on ABC this morning, answered a lot of questions about his administration's plans for the economy, health care, torture, Gitmo, homeland security and Mideast diplomacy. From the beginning of the campaign, we were all aware how many messes the eventual winner would have to clean up. Now we are not only aware of how many, but how deep and problematic in terms of finding solutions. Yet there he was, calmly and rationally dealing with George Stephanopoulis's questions, reassuring the American public that his various teams were on top of things.

Lots of commentators and bloggers have been passing the time until January 20th, praising or dismissing the various picks for the new cabinet and administration leadership jobs. Not having a crystal ball, I've been mostly content to wait patiently. Let's give the folks assigned the clean up task a real chance to get in there and actually work at it, before harping and carping. The only move Obama's made that really rubbed me the wrong way was the selection of Rick Warren to speak some mumbo jumbo as prologue to the inauguration. (You can read my comments here.)

So he made one mistake so far. Nobody should expect him to be perfect. What is reassuring is his insistence that he is not attaching himself to solutions based upon who comes up with the idea, but rather that plans are flexible and that we focus on finding the best solution. It does sound like a huge breath of fresh air is about to sweep through Washington. D.C.

Speaking of D.C., one of Obama's missions is to involve himself with the city's community -- not just the federal workers, but the folks who live and work within the city. He has mentioned this consistently and so has Michelle. He has set up a Community Inaugural Ball for residents to enjoy, met with the Mayor and will do his best to get out and about and involved in the life and culture of the city. Most presidents and politicians hunker down in their various domains and seldom get involved with the local community.

I moved to D.C. in 1976. It was my first time away from Akron, and I moved there because I had some college theatre friends already living there and they gave me a place to sleep while I looked for work and a place of my own. My first impressions of D.C. were this: enormous white buildings were everywhere, and the city was studded with statues of white male generals. Yet as I rode the buses and subways, looking for work, I found myself riding with people of color, through burned out neighborhoods (left to rot after the riots of 1968). The core of the city was as white as the government buildings, but the rest of the city was primarily black and living in poverty.

The great disparity on display in Washington's daily life shocked me. Homeless people sleeping on sidewalk grates, taking in the warmth vented from the subway system below. Bag ladies scurrying down alleys and across the mall, carts filled with garbage bags containing who knows what. Anyone who could afford to was moving to the suburbs of Maryland or Virginia, leaving the rest to hustle, thieve or sell drugs and/or their bodies.

I lived in the Adams Morgan area, a multicultural progressive enclave with a food co-op, a Hispanic theatre company, and other assorted store front ventures. I was hired as company manager for Earth Onion Women's Theatre, an experimental theatre company existing on a small NEA grant. We worked and performed in a tiny store-front theatre space that we shared with the local Socialist party group. My apartment was "illegal," an unfinished dump above a porn shop, with rear windows looking out on a trash-filled alley. I kept those windows closed whenever possible to keep out the sickening greasy smell from a McDonald's across the alley. Every day when I left for work, I had to step over a wino sleeping in my door way. Fun times.

What is the D.C. area like in the 21st century? According to the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless:

Washington, D.C. has the 7th highest poverty rate in the country-- 16.4% as of 2007, and has the highest proportion of people in the U.S. with the lowest income levels.

At least 17,800 people are homeless in Washington, D.C. over the course of a year, one of the highest rates in the country.

In the District of Columbia, a worker earning the Minimum Wage ($7.55 per hour) must work approximately 140 hours per week in order to afford a two-bedroom unit at the area's Fair Market rent.

For the year 2007, the Fair Market Rent (FMR) for an efficiency apartment in Washington, D.C. is $1025 a month. The FMR for a 1-bedroom unit is $1168; 2-bedroom, $1324; 3-bedroom, $1708; and 4-bedroom, $2235.

The unemployment rate in D.C. was 6.7% as of July 2008, higher than the 5.7% national rate.

Funny how these statistics are ignored year after year by the politicians who come to D.C. to work for the good of us all, isn't it? If the Obamas continue to pay attention to the entire community in which they intend to live for the next eight years, maybe some positive change will come to all the residents of Washington, D.C.

Obama for President

Fantastic speech tonight! I'm listening to the bloviacs on MSNBC tell me what to think about what I heard and saw tonight. Mostly, I've avoided the pundits this convention week. It's been much more interesting to watch the unedited CSPAN coverage.

Last night I kind of dozed out in the middle of it all. Bill Clinton has never been one of my favorite politicians, his folksy voice and demeanor, not to mention his far from progressive policies, were not my cup of tea. I did wake up in time to see Jon Stewart's coverage of the prior night. A half hour of Jon and company is worth far more than 6 non-stop hours of MSNBC. And what's with all the public feuding over there, anyway? How unprofessional can you get? Even Rachel Maddow looks stressed beyond measure.

As a former Hillary voter (but one who never did send her any campaign funds), I never had any doubt after she lost the primary that I'd be voting for Barack Obama over John McCain. I think Obama has grown immensely over the campaign, and I look forward to him stepping it up even more for the debates.

Barack Tour

Well I'm impressed! Mr. Obama is looking mighty fine in every photo op we've seen so far. Andrea Mitchell did her best to downplay the footage with Obama and the troupes, insisting that since no journalists were allowed into the event, we can't know exactly how staged it really was.

I've looked at a lot of audiences in my time, and in my professional opinion -- those soldiers were not pretending to be thrilled to be in the same space as the Democratic candidate for president oh no, the excitement was genuine. Images of GW Bush meeting troupes and foreign leaders over the past 7 and a half years immediately came to mind in order to compare the performance styles. While Bush goes for the good ol' boy from Texas, he nevertheless delivers from a posture of swaggering superiority. With Obama, there is a warmth that radiates and lights up those around him.

I am imagining this will be the same with the various leaders Obama will be meeting during his Barack Tour. WE know that GW has done precious little listening to other people during his regime. In order to solve conflicts, the parties must be willing to listen to each other, and even look at problems from the other's point of view.

No, I haven't turned into an Obamamaniac, but I do see the potential for his "Change" mantra, if he continues to be direct and open in the way he approaches people. He can be the antidote we need to heal foreign and domestic relations, if we can just keep Bush junior busily occupied with Olympic team photo ops from now until Inauguration Day.

Is there some other guy running for president this year? He has completely slipped out of my mind today!

Obama and The New Yorker - Inside and Out

The latest New Yorker has a very long and detailed account of Barack Obama's political career in Chicago written by Ryan Lizza. Be warned -- it's heavy on Chicago and Illinois politics, but I rather think that the kinds of characters, scenes and maneuverings depicted in this article happen in every state. Politics ain't pretty.

In the article we get a clear picture of Obama's pragmatic choices that propelled his climb from community organizer to Illinois state senator to US Senator and now on the road to becoming president. There's nothing really disgustingly sleazy there and the only real innovation in his politics is that when called upon to defends his actions, Obama will always admit that this is the way politics is and isn't it a shame that he has to do the things he does in order to get elected. His backing away from taking public campaign financing is very typical of the way he has always operated.

Obama had his eyes on the top job for many years, and we are reminded of that as we follow along his career steps. He stays in one job or position only as long as it takes to get his resources aligned so that he can move up to the next level. We really don't get many clues as to what he will be like when he gets into the job he plans to stay in for eight years. No wonder it is called the politics of hope -- I'm going to be hoping that my vote for him leads to genuine progress and that he is capable of getting things done.

Unfortunately, the New Yorker is pairing this article with what is already considered a controversial cover (see it and read about it here) that might detract from the story inside. I looked at the art work by Barry Blitt and read the artist's statements about it. He wants to illustrate all the lies about Barack and Michelle all at once to satirize "the politics of fear." I get what he was trying to do, but I bet a whole lot of other people won't.

Down but not totally out

The title of this post could reference Hillary Clinton, but I'll save her for a bit later. I'm the one who has been down -- with some kind of bug that would not go away. Not a normal cold. Not the flu. But something that brought about fever, swollen glands, scratchy sore throat, lung congestion -- and would not go away on its own. I'd think I was getting better only to feel the symptoms coming on again.

Finally the fever came back and the swollen glands made my face balloon, so I gave up and last Thursday went off to the doctor who didn't have a clue, but sent me to get X-rays for possible pneumonia (negative), prescribed an antibiotic, and set up an appointment for me with an eye, ear and throat specialist. That appointment is for two and a half weeks from now. Sheesh. I sure as heck hope I'm not feeling like this in two and a half weeks. The antibiotic seems to be helping and I think I can drag myself back to work tomorrow.

Sitting in the waiting area of the X-ray clinic, I happened to overhear three nurses at the desk discussing the presidential race. They were all white middle-aged women and they were all for Hillary and adamantly so. One of them stated rather loudly that if Hillary wasn't the nominee, she'd be voting for McCain. The others nodded in agreement. Here in front of me was living evidence of what exit polling and pundits have been blathering about for weeks -- Hillary's base support.

If I'd felt at all well, I might have spoken up and tried to get them to consider how awful it would be to vote in McSame for president. And yet, I kind of know what they are feeling. Once again, women are supposed to be nice and step back so that the men can take the leading roles. The saddest thing of all is that there are really no great prospects on the horizon for women -- other than Hillary -- to step forward and vie for the prize. A very depressing NYT article mentions a couple of women here and there, but confirms that the pickings are slim and the road is still very difficult for women to gain power in government.

It would be great if Obama picked a woman for VP. But the chances of that happening are slim to none, because that would "weaken" the ticket in the eyes of all the male pundits, politicians and bloggocrats. If he really wants to convince me that he's the candidate for change and for a new form of politics, he would ignore the conventional wisdom. What do you want to bet he goes for a white male southern conservative democrat to balance the ticket?

I'm going to vote for Obama, no doubt about that. But if he wants my active support, then he needs to think long and carefully about what to do about women of a certain age who feel the glass ceiling smashing down our hopes once again. If he doesn't pick a woman VP, he could take up some of Hillary's core issues, especially health care, and take a more progressive stance that meets the needs of working people.

The numbers keep going up - post election notes

I began writing this post last night only to be dumped by the weather -- both my Internet and cable TV connections went down about 10 PM, most likely due to the ice storm that hit our state. So I enjoyed an old fashioned election night via listening to WAKR AM's Larry States.

Last night at this time, the counter in the right hand column of this blog had not yet reached half a trillion dollars. Today it has gone beyond that -- amazing how fast a billion dollars can be spent by our insane governmental "leaders." This is what I had written before the power went off:

Not talking about the election returns this evening, but the numbers of dollars spent on the useless War in Iraq. You can see them ticking away to the right of this post. We are fast approaching 500 billion dollars. That's half a trillion not spent on health care, education, low-income housing, science research, developing green technologies and so on.

Soon after I began this blog, I found the counter you see embedded here and at that time it was around 350 billion. But dollars wasted isn't the worst aspect of this war. It's the loss of life and not only soldier lives. Every Iraqi death creates more potential terrorists among the survivors. No wonder McCain feels the need to stay there for 100 years.

Woke up this morning to find that Hillary had taken 3 out of 4 states, doing extremely well in Ohio. I wasn't surprised. Most people I had talked to were voting for her, although they also expressed admiration for Barack Obama. Many folks continue to want both of them on the ticket.

In local news, we are thrilled that Issue 8 passed and that public transportation will not be diminished in Akron.

Saddest election story is the defeat of Louise Heydorn for county council. Full disclosure -- Louise is a colleague of mine. I can attest that she is an outstanding leader: bright, collaborative, science-minded and a diligent worker. She has been the only Republican on Summit County's council for many years and had been working to develop green initiatives for our county.

She was defeated by John Widowfield, a conservative endorsed by the local Republican party. I wonder if Heydorn was hurt by Independents and Republicans crossing over to vote in the Democratic presidential primary. I hope she picks herself up and runs again in the future -- come join the Democrats, Louise! We need women of your character and intelligence to represent us.

Hillary in Akron

Some pics from yesterday's rally. My Olympus Stylus didn't really pull this one off. Or rather, I didn't do a good job with it. The best shots were outdoors, but even those were terribly out of focus for the most part.

Inside, conditions defeated me. Every time I tried to take a picture, I had to wait for dozens of hands holding cameras aloft to shift and part until I could get off a shot. I noticed that some cameras were getting really nice close-up shots, but mine doesn't have the capability.













Enough of my photographic travails. The rally was full of females of all ages with a hard core group of "Husbands for Hillary" in tow. An old codger next to me said he was there to find out about Hillary's health care plan. "Kucinich was the one who had the real thing," he said to me. I agreed with him whole-heartedly.

I was listening in a detached analytical way to Hillary's stump speech for most of it, until she got to getting rid of No Child Left Behind and then I let out a big cheer. Ditto to ending the war in Iraq. I thought she did a nice job of laying out her points. She was clear and concise, and had a few tender moments with a tale of a young woman who lost her baby and her life due to lack of health care availability in a county in southern Ohio.

Both Senators Clinton and Obama have obviously studied the campaign rhetoric of their colleague, the junior senator from Ohio. We heard about fare trade instead of free trade and bringing jobs back to Ohio. One little request please, dear candidates -- make sure those jobs don't involve polluting the air, water, or soil.

I've taken some unscientific polls among people I know and trust here in Akron, Ohio. Women are going for Hillary in a big way. But so are some men, including one tonight who gave an impassioned impromptu speech for Hillary at the end of a local theatre group's meeting. I think he gave me the final push toward marking her ballot tomorrow. That and the following picture from the rally.












So who am I voting for tomorrow? I am going with my gender demographic. If anybody has a problem with that, then I ask them if they have a problem with 80% plus African Americans going for Obama. Because I don't have a problem with it. They are proud to at last be represented at the highest level. As are these young girls to finally see a woman competing for the ultimate leadership role.

And further more, if Obama wins the nomination, I won't have a problem supporting him. I understand the great excitement within the black community surrounding his candidacy. I feel the same way about Hillary's.

They both have flaws, and they both have strengths. They'd make a great team, but they'd have to get over a lot of ego for that to happen. So may the best person win and may we all pull together to defeat the Republicans at every level in the fall.

Don't forget to vote tomorrow, and if you are living in Summit County, please vote for Issue 8 to maintain the current level of public metro bus service for our citizens. That may be the most important of all your votes.

Huckabee fans in Montrose, Hillary at Garfield HS

Yesterday, driving along Route 18 in the center of Consumer Paradise (Montrose), I could not help noticing a handful of young college-aged males waving Huckabee signs and shouting slogans into bullhorns. It was the kind of sight that makes one shudder -- poor deluded youth! No cars were honking back at them. As I drove by, I gave them a crisply delivered thumb's down sign.

Hillary Clinton will be speaking at Garfield High School this afternoon. Doors open at 3:30 PM and she is scheduled to arrive at 5:30 PM. Since this is just a hop, skip and a jump away from Kenmore, I'm planning on being there. Would have liked to attend Obama's rally last Saturday, but it was the same day and time as a major school fund-raiser, so I wasn't able to be there.

I'm still on the fence in this election and have only a couple of days left to make up my mind. It is never wise to trust any politician to the point of emotional involvement, as they will
invariably let you down. Even our wonderful senator Sherrod Brown, made the wrong choice on voting to abolish habeas corpus for the detainees. Obama and Clinton are politicians, not anointed ones come to save us from the evils of the world. They each have messages that are crafted to gain votes, but in reality -- we have no way of knowing how effectively either will carry through will all the promises. So it becomes a matter of weighing what evidence is out there while tuning out the propaganda from either side.

There are still moments when I'm considering casting my vote for Kucinich, whose name will still be on the ballot. After all, his positions were always the closest ones to my own ideas of what government could be.

Other times I think I want this divided Democratic party to unite as soon as possible, so I lean toward voting for Obama. Yet every time I watch one of the debates, I end up wanting to vote for Hillary. And thus I remain -- Undecided.

More thoughts on the great Rodham (Clinton) - Obama divide

The more I look at this conflict, the less I like it. I don't want to bash either candidate and I don't want to have to wince every time I read nastiness from Dems addressed to other Dems. We should be having a blast, looking at McCain stumble toward the finish line, dogged by party conservatives -- while Dems prepare for a glorious run in the fall.

Remember the last debate? How respectful and thoughtful both candidates were toward each other? And the immediate post-debate comments were variations on the theme of "dream ticket?" What happened to that moment, anyway? My guess -- it wasn't exciting enough for the media. No, we have to have conflict, the more bitter and scathing the better. That's old style politics, and I don't care for it.

Whoever wins the Democratic nomination ought to immediately announce their proposed cabinet members, which should include as many of their primary opponents as possible. It is going to take an enormous amount of creativity, intelligence and disciplined commitment to overcome and turn around all the Bush damage. It will take women and men of all ethnicities as well as support from Democrats across the board.

So how to resolve this situation where roughly half of Dems want one candidate and the other half want another? I'm not talking about super delegates, either. I'm talking about looking beyond numbers to a ticket that gives everybody a stake in supporting it.

If Rodham (Clinton) and/or Barack Obama cannot bring themselves to make a deal that furthers the interests of the Democratic party, then their egos may very well bring about the decline and fall of the United States of America -- should McCain win in the fall. Likewise, if Dems can't get beyond accusations of racism or sexism because they support one or the other of the candidates, we will all lose.

This Ohioan is Leaning toward Hillary

I've been ambivalent about Hillary here, and I have had some compliments for Obama. However, as the campaign has drawn down to the final two, I find myself leaning toward Hillary Rodham (Clinton) as opposed to her opponent.

Bear in mind that I am about as Left as you can get, so I am looking at two people who do not represent my views very closely. Both are overtly religious, but I know that in my lifetime there will never be an avowed freethinker running for president. Both have voted consistently to fund the Iraq War. However, no one on the Republican side could ever get close to offering up a platform that I could accept in any way.

Realistically, if you look at Rodham (Clinton) and Obama, they are more alike than different, except Hillary's health care plan is better and Obama seems weak on details, although strong on metaphors. I'm in a detail kind of mood these days and not so keen on oratory without substance.

But the truth of the matter is, the more I read Democrats viciously attack Hillary, the more I'm inclined to vote for her. That's what it is coming down to. I cannot stand to see the term "Billary" for example. Like the users of said term have some kind of deep insight into the Clinton marriage. I know I don't and I don't trust the media to inform me about it either. Look at the Urban Dictionary's definitions of the term "Billary" and you see definitions that reek of unkindness if not downright cruelty.

Likewise, the critique that we don't want another Clinton is spurious. She has no Clinton DNA in her, which is why I will call her Rodham (Clinton) from now on as a response to the "Billary" derogatory.

The term "triangulation" -- why is it used to denigrate Hillary, but not Barack? I just saw a speech in which Barack boasts of his "Obamicans" -- Republicans that are voting for him. He is putting his ideology "above and between the left and the right" -- just as his fans accuse Hillary of doing.

In short, I am seeing way too much Hillary hatred and far too little in the way of concrete reasons to vote for Barack other than "we need change." Well duh, yes we do! Change from Republican theocratic war-mongering. Here's an example of a list of reasons why a Democrat blogger (Dave at Radio Free Newport) doesn't want Rodham (Clinton). Where's his list of reasons why he wants Obama? What is he doing to the outcome of this race? Rodham (Clinton) represents a large group of constituents. Why alienate the white women? Because Dems assume we'll just come around and forget the way Obama fans talked about Hillary?

I have said repeatedly here that I'd like to see them both on the same ticket. The Hillary attackers will have none of that, and are are attempting to make sure that the label "unelectable" sticks. What a shame it is to see Democrats smearing their own.

For a more thorough critique of Hillary-hating, please go here. Stanley Fish deals quite nicely with the media play-up of the supposed Clinton race-bashing for example.

I don't have time to answer all of Newport Dave's list tonight, but I will try to deal with them throughout the week. I will say that I am a huge fan of his blog, but his post today really got my goat! Not because I think he is sexist, but really -- the comment about Baby Boomers. Talk about your blatant ageist remarks! Look buddy, I didn't choose to be born into a generation that was tagged with such a hideous name, and I can tell you that throughout my life and in my art, I have been actively anti-war! And I am not alone in my generation to wave the banner of peace. Shame on you for such stereotyping!

Half way through the debate...

And I still want them both on the ticket. I like the focus on the policies and the plans to implement them. I like the tone of civility between the two -- they'd make a fantastic ticket. The longer the "debate" goes on, the closer Clinton and Obama appear to be on all the issues.

Wolf Blitzer is trying to stir things up as we go into the Iraq portion of the debate, but fails miserably. Both candidates are taking the arguments to the Republicans and getting strong audience responses.

As far as Hillary's vote for the war, yes -- she shouldn't have done it but she explains it in depth. It leads to a broader question that no one has answered -- is it a good thing to use the threat of force in negotiating? These are the moments when I think about Kucinich's plan for a Department of Peace at the cabinet level. It seems to me that threats generally lead to lines being drawn and bombs bursting in air.

Almost reaching the end, and the question arises of a "dream ticket" with both of them on it. I'm still rooting for it at the end of this debate.

Thank you NH for providing some balance

What fun watching the media types scrambling to figure out that beating up on a woman for stupid things can lead people to turn out to vote.

Women are going for Hillary in a major way in NH.

Maybe I'll get my dream ticket after all!

To see rankings based upon progressive views, you can go to Progressive Punch to find that Hillary Clinton is ranked at 29, which is two positions higher than Ted Kennedy. Barack Obama is 43, one below Claire McCaskill, Our own Sherrod Brown ranks 6 -- go Sherrod!

Meanwhile, it is loads of fun watching the media pundits get slapped in the face by the women of New Hampshire. Those bad media boys totally can't handle tears. Don't they know real men aren't ashamed to show their emotions. Neither are real women. Emotions are part of what makes us human.

Media Uber-dumping

The headlines are all about Hillary in tears. Well I watched the video footage expecting to see tears dripping down a face and instead, I saw Hillary showing her human side. Hey, isn't that what everybody has been clamoring for? We don't want to see the policy wonk robot woman.

Even Keith Olbermann was dumping on her for so-called crying. Tear her apart for her vote on Iraq and for any other policy, vote or position. But all the nastiness directed at her for having the wrong emotions or too many emotions or not enough emotion is unnecessary.

The Iowa caucus vote gave the media it's big story and now the sell is on. I like Obama a lot. But I'd rather see him win without the press providing such a big push. Suck it in and provide some balance, please.

Caucus Racing

Hey, how come only the people of Iowa and a few other odd states get to caucus? Sounds like it could be fun, getting together on a cold January night for two hours with members of one's own political party to debate and stand up for the party's presidential candidate.

On the Democratic side, I'll take any of them, and really want all of them to contribute to the upcoming Democratic administration. So I charge them to kiss and make up quickly after a winner is sorted out, then all unite to defeat whatever bizzaro Republican is left standing.

The Republicans are looking like a freak show, with the party fragmented and despised by a good many people who once voted for them. They've made awful messes that will take a lot of creative solutions in order to clean up. It will take enormous cooperation and determined action to return to a collective viewpoint rather than the imperial one so ruthlessly implemented by Cheney, Rove, Bush Inc.

So go Dems! I'm still hoping for a Clinton/Obama ticket. The US needs a huge public relations makeover, and that ticket would speak volumes to the rest of the world as well as to those of us in the US who would like to see a different gender/ethnicity providing leadership for a change. And since we've been on a long extended swing to the right, we need to go back through the center on the way to the progressive left. For purposes of balance and seeking some kind of equilibrium. Eight years of Hillary should do that, and then 8 more of Obama who will have the time to gain experience on the international stage as VP.

That's my primary outcome fantasy at the moment -- what's yours?