Blog de Ford

Entries tagged as ‘John Kerry’

High Speed Rail in the US?

November 26, 2008 · Leave a Comment

God, please let this happen:

Senators John F. Kerry and Arlen Specter introduced a bill today to fund high-speed rail lines along the East Coast and in several other key areas of the country.

Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, and Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said the legislation would help repair the nation’s crumbling infrastructure, and at the same time create jobs when the country appears headed for a deep economic recession.

“At a time when our economy desperately needs a jumpstart, we need an effective national investment that puts Americans back to work,” Kerry said in a statement. “A first-rate rail system would protect our environment, save families time and money, reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and help get our economy moving again.”

One of the many things that has me excited about the Obama administration is his promise to rebuild infrastructure in the US. Besides repairing crumbling roads and bridges, we need to build a rail system that will transport passengers across the nation quickly, efficiently, and comfortably to give Americans affordable transportation options that don’t involve airplanes, buses, or oil. We can get the economy moving again while making ours a better country to live in.

While we’re at it, can we also build a national Wi-Fi network that will include rural areas?

Categories: jobs · politics
Tagged: , , , , ,

Return of the Culture Wars

September 15, 2008 · 2 Comments

Since McCain’s chose Palin as his running mate, I’ve been worried that it represents a return to the GOP’s culture wars. The choice seems to fit into the GOP’s labeling Obama and his supporters as elitists for doing horrible things like drinking lattes and driving Priuses which the GOP base resents for some reason. Also, Palin represents the McCain’s campaign’s choice to make this election about “God, guns, and gays.” It worked for them in the past, so why not got for it again?

So I was glad to read this article from Gary Kamiya on Salon.

Palin represents the reappearance of the one part of Bush that never died — the culture warrior. Democrats may have forgotten about the notorious red state-blue state divide, or hoped that the failures of the last eight years had made it go away. But it hasn’t. It’s been there all along. If Palin catapults McCain to victory, it will be revealed to be the most powerful and enduring force in American politics. And that fact will raise serious questions about the viability of American democracy itself.

The culture war is driven by resentment, on the one hand, and crude identification, on the other. Resentment of “elites,” “Washington insiders,” and overeducated coastal snobs goes hand in hand with an unreflective, emotional identification with candidates who “are just like me.” Large numbers of Americans voted for Bush because he seemed like a regular guy, someone you’d want to have a beer with. As Thomas Frank argued in “What’s the Matter With Kansas,” ideology also played a role. As hardline “moral values” exponent and former GOP presidential candidate Gary Bauer told the New York Times, “Joe Six-Pack doesn’t understand why the world and his culture are changing and why he doesn’t have a say in it.” The GOP appealed to Joe Six-Pack by harping on cultural issues like the “three Gs,” gods, guns and gays.

The GOP is so good at playing to cultural resentment that they have voters working against their own economic interests. They might not have jobs, but who cares about that when you have to worry that atheists might infect your home or that gays might steal your children and your guns. It’s nonsensical, of course, but that line of argument seems to be very powerful for some.

It’s terrifying that so many Americans are so driven by resentment that they will vote against more qualified candidates simply because they seem “different” from them. For what this means is that anyone with expertise, unusual intelligence, mastery, special knowledge, is likely to be rejected by voters who are resentful of “elites.” This constitutes a rejection of the very idea that it matters if someone is better at something than someone else.

The peculiar thing is that this only applies to politics: voters who would not dream of taking their car to an incompetent mechanic or their body to an unlicensed physician have no problem electing totally unqualified candidates to perform the most difficult and important job in the world, simply because they identify with them.

Maybe a certain percentage of American voters think that who is in office matters so little in their lives that it serves them better to vote on resentment rather than what a candidate might actually do in office?

Most insidious, perhaps, is the fact that more and more Americans seem to see politics as just another reality TV show. You vote for Palin the same way you vote for a designer on “Project Runway.” As Katherine Mieszkowski reported for Salon, Palin’s rapturous supporters embrace her because “she represents me.” It’s the politics of sheer narcissism.

Snip

From the GOP’s perspective, Palin has all of the virtues of Bush, and none of the drawbacks.

Snip

Palin apparently still believes the ur- lie of the Bush administration, that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11. On Sept. 11, she told troops shipping out to Iraq, including her eldest son Track, that they would “defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.”

Sadly, many GOP voters that I know believe the same thing about Iraq and 9/11. It’s a con, but it’s one that serves the GOP well.

But where Palin most closely, and disturbingly, resembles Bush is in her dogmatism, her mental rigidity. Like Bush and the GOP in general, she is determined to appear tough above all else. She follows Rove Rule Number One: she stays on message, even if what she’s saying is an obvious lie. The GOP programmers know that toughness sells. But Palin’s supposed toughness reveals an utter lack of any introspection, intellectual nuance or ability to depart from programmed ideas. Asked if she had worried she wasn’t prepared to be president, Palin replied, “I — I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can’t blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we’re on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can’t blink.”

If what America wants is a more uninformed, more right-wing, equally macho version of Bush, Palin’s the perfect choice.

I don’t get that aspect of many GOP voters. Why do they prefer to have a president that changes reality to fit policy rather that one who changes policy to fit reality?

It’s puzzling, but I think much of it goes back to the politics of resentment. Do they think that Obama is too much of a smarty-pants that they wouldn’t want him to be at their Fourth of July barbeque?  That was certainly a problem that both Gore and Kerry had.

But in the end, it’s not surpising that McCain picked Palin. The GOP base resents him for pretending to be against torture (he was against it before he was for it) and for not being batshit insane on immigration reform.

He knew that to get his base excied, he needed to pick a batshit crazy culture warrior.

And now, it’s on. I just hope that Obama is more JFK or Bill Clinton than he is Mike Dukakis or John Kerry.

Categories: US Presidential Elections · culture · politics
Tagged: , , , , , ,

New Feature: Daily Palin Update

September 2, 2008 · 7 Comments

Item #1: Bristol Palin is pregnant:

John McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, said Monday her 17-year-old unmarried daughter is five months pregnant, an announcement stealing even more thunder from McCain and a Republican presidential convention already overshadowed by Hurricane Gustav.

Adding to the day’s drama, McCain aides said the announcement was aimed at rebutting Internet rumors that Palin’s youngest son, born in April, was actually her daughter’s.

In itself, Bristol’s pregnancy is not a big deal. It’s a private matter for the family to deal with. The fact that Palin is an “abstinence-only” kind of governor makes it an issue, as it highlights the failure of abstinence-only sex education.

If teenagers are going to do something they like to do, doesn’t it make sense to give them information so they can avoid pregnancy and disease?

Item #2: Palin Hires Attorney for Troopergate Allegations

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the GOP vice presidential candidate, is being represented by an attorney in the investigation into the firing of her public safety commissioner.

The Legislature is investigating whether Palin fired public safety commissioner Walt Monegan after he refused to fire a state trooper who had divorced Palin’s sister.

I wonder what McCain was thinking when he brought on a governor under an ethics investigation. What I find most shocking about this story is that Palin waited until McCain chose her to be his VP before she sought to hire an attorney to deal with this matter.

Item #3: Palin Bridge to Nowhere Angers Many Alaskans

It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain’s vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called “bridge to nowhere” has upset many Alaskans.

During her first speech after being named as McCain’s surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress “‘thanks but no thanks’ on that bridge to nowhere.”

In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called “Bridge to Nowhere,” political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska’s Congressional delegation during her run for governor.

So what I’m getting from this item is that Palin is either a liar or disingenuous on the “Bridge to Nowhere” issue. Was she like John Kerry in that she was for it before she was against it?

Hold on for some more updates tomorrow.

Sarah Palin: The gift that keeps on giving.

Categories: US Presidential Elections · politics
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

McCain: Flip-Flopper

June 10, 2008 · 2 Comments

In 2004, one of the great weapons used against Kerry was that the was a ‘flip-flopper’ or that he changed his position on issues out of political expediency. We can thank Kerry for the whole “I was for it before I was against it” thing.

Lucky for us, McCain has had a lot of different positions on different issues, and I’ll be pointing those out as they arise, but this one is priceless.

John McCain on the estate tax in 2005?

I follow the course of a great Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, who talked about the malefactors of great wealth and gave us the estate tax. I oppose the rich passing on fortunes.

John McCain on the estate tax in 2008?

The estate tax is one of the most unfair tax laws on the books.

This promises to be a really fun five months.

Categories: politics
Tagged: , , ,

Clinton Apologizes to Black Voters

March 13, 2008 · 2 Comments

Or does she?

Her biggest apology came in response to a question about comments by her husband, Bill Clinton, after the South Carolina primary, which Obama won handily. Bill Clinton said Jesse Jackson also won South Carolina when he ran for president in 1984 and 1988, a comment many viewed as belittling Obama’s success.

“I want to put that in context. You know I am sorry if anyone was offended. It was certainly not meant in any way to be offensive,” Hillary Clinton said. “We can be proud of both Jesse Jackson and Senator Obama.”

Right, Hil. Apologize if people were offended. Don’t apologize for the words. Apologize for people being too stupid to understand what Bill said. And no, it’s not patronizing at all to say that we can be proud of the two most successful African-American candidates for president in American history. That’s not the least bit condescending.

As first lady and senator, Clinton rarely cedes an inch to her critics. On the issue of her vote to authorize the Iraq war, for instance, she steadfastly has refused to apologize, coming close by saying she regrets it, despite calls from many anti-war voters in the party to make a more explicit mea culpa.

If Clinton had the ability to admit mistakes, she’d be in better shape to win this nomination. Kerry and Edwards both voted for Bush’s war in Iraq, but they admitted that it was the wrong vote. The Democratic base accepted the apologies and moved on to support those two.

Had she just simply stated that her war vote was a mistake, anti-Iraq war Democrats would have gotten over her vote and she would probably have the nomination locked up by now.

Hillary, doesn’t karma suck?

Categories: politics
Tagged: , , ,