From Love at First Sight to Marriage Jetters...

Obama's still the man according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC Poll released today. His negatives post-America realizing that yes there is a race problem (aka Rev. Wright controversy) are roughly the same. And even more importantly his positives are sweet and Hillary's are bitter.

This is very good news for all the Obama-ites out there. It seems that the only folks who are moved negatively by this are mostly Republicans, but with the news of huge Democratic registration numbers things are definitely looking on the up and up.

Go 'bama!

UPDATE: Okay, I'm obsessing about campaign news yes, but this is good. Superdelegates, lot of 'em non-elected party activists it seems like in this article, are on the verge of revolting against the Clinton's for their shadiness over the past week. Check it out.

The Unforgiving Hillary

The woman who *chose* to stand by her cheating, lying, blow job in the White House man apparently has no such forgiveness toward a pastor. Saying that " [Rev. Wright] would not have been my pastor," and that she would have just up and walked out. A cheatin' husband and politically connected husband is another story, I suppose.

This is outrageous and further proof of the audacity of the Clintons and their utter disregard for a healthy Democratic party. I will not vote for Hillary *ever*. And I will work my butt off in progressive communities to vote "no" against the Clinton machine until kingdom come.

Ferraro: My comments weren't racist, it was a fact.

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position,” she continued. “And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”
-Geraldine Ferraro, Clinton Supporter and Former Vice Presidential Candidate

"It wasn't a racist comment, it was a statement of fact."
-Days later the potty mouth farts again

Those words are clear proof that Blacks are considered invited guests by the Ferraro-wing of the Democratic party. We have no right to compete, even when we compete fairly and in an unprecedented grassroots fashion.

We as a group of people who have formed the foundation for countless numbers of victories by white, female and male, Democratic politicians, including Ferraro. We who as a group have been stubbornly supportive Democrats even oftentimes against our own self-interests (welfare reform, affirmative action compromise, the war, lack sufficient HIV/AIDS funding for Black communities, etc.).

Yes, this group, us, we, y'all, you who reading this blog, should know that when white men leave the room, it's white women who get first dibs.

That's what the Ferraro-wing of the Democratic Party's logic boils down to.

Honestly I'm more interested in how this all is going to resolve between the two campaigns than anything else. Hillary can win *only* if her campaign trumps the voter's will with backroom deals and superdelegates.

How then will the majority of the Democrats who voted for Barack Obama respond to their voices been shut out? And what about the super-majority of Blacks who voted for their man? Will Barack Obama be able to calm the masses of ***90% of Black America*** who voted for him? Will we sit out this election out of protest? Will we do like engaged Latin American voters have done in the recent past and simply vote "no" to all electoral options?

Post November 2008, how will our participation change, if at all? Clearly those in power will try to hold on to their power. But what will the voters say? Will black communities elect less coons and more progressive boons and 3rd party politicians? Or will Blacks be so disillusioned that in a Post 2008 climate, voter participation will be so morale-less that the status quo prevails.

Ferraro's words might help Clinton rally her base now, but I'm not so sure democratic love will last for too much longer.

This blog entry was originally posted as a comment on kenyonfarrow.com.

Well, at least his heart was in the right place.

I had high hopes for Gov Spitzer. He was going to come in and change Albany. Knock down the three-headed, politically corrupt monster in the state's capital. Bring power back to progressive Democrats in state run by neo-conservatives since the early 90s. This is a man who had the audacity to be pro-gay marriage with a political record and resume that screamed future U.S. Presidential candidate.

But then Spitzer-gate happened. And bad poll numbers happened. And that whole weird Driver's License drama that my boy Obama kinda helped fan happened. And now this.

Sigh.

I was struck by one NYTimes.com reader's comment reacting to today's news:

Another commenter, identified as Tom Conroy, had this to say: “Spitzer’s governorship, thus far, has been a case book example of the ‘Peter Principle’ at work. A hitherto successful public servant has stumbled badly, perhaps irrevocably, by rising above the limit of his own competence.

Saturday Night Blackface

When you really want to cut to the chase of political discourse, or any discourse for that matter, don't turn on the Evening News or pick up a newspaper. No instead check out the funnies, flip to Comedy Central. Laughter is an awesome force of sharing and shaping social thought. Think Richard Pryor, Chris Rock, Margaret Cho, Family Guy, and even Jerry Seinfield's shows about "nothing" actually proved to be a remarkable something for Jewish identity in popular culture. These comedians and cultural phenoms wear a mask of laughter that gives them carte blanche access to controversial, politically incorrect, and just down right uncouth subjects that sometimes has no business on television or for that matter said in ear shot of anybody's momma. This is why the introduction by Saturday Night Live of its new Barack Obama character was as anticipated in some circles as it was. What better political figure to parody than Obama. It's gotta be a hit, right?

Wrong.

Scholars, columnists, and bloggers (ahem) are outraged at the casting of a non-Black actor as Barack Obama. Turn's out Fred Armisten is half white and Asian. Granted whoever plays Obama, parody and implicit sarcasm and masking will be in play. But blackface? Come on now, it ain't like we should go there. To assume that NBC does not have the resources for a proper national casting call among Black or actors of Mixed Black heritage to find an Obama actor based on merit is delusional (And doesn't SNL's merit defense sound uncomfortably close to something one of my hateful fav 5's UT Law Professor Lino Graglia has been known to fart out?).

Reading between the lines of the Washington Post article linked above, I get the feeling that the SNL producers are pushing back with the "he played Prince and nobody cared then" line. My response to them is: we didn't care cause we didn't know boozo heads! And I think others might also push back with the fact that Obama is mixed race himself and has positioned his campaign as post-race so colorblind casting is just deserts and fair game. I say hogwash. Obama has said repeatedly that his election would not end racial inequalities (citation to come).

I have watched the video of Mr. Armisten's first performance of Obama. At the time I did not know Armisten was wearing darker makeup and was non-Black. I was underwhelmed by his performance and thought he seemed a bit nervous. Knowing now that the actor isn't even Black is further proof of how much of a better performance Obama needs than his opponents to get a laugh and win the election.

Onward!

P.S. I have purposely not provided the link to the SNL video out of protest. It is only available on NBC's website which has a number of ads on the site and embedded with the SNL footage that undoubtedly are paying the checks of the very same producers and casting agents I've been hating in this blog entry.