Speaker Pelosi Can't Say "Unity" Now, But....

Some Obama supporters in my party are hanging their proverbial hats against the idea of a party unity ticket based on what they read from Politico's Ben Smith, who, at the end of the day, is not participating in his professional endeavours in order to create arguments that will win for Democrats .. and is making a living in a business that showcases the most controversial issues of the day for an optimal amount of eyeballs looking at a money-making website. I think it's wrong to hang your hat on just one temporal quote from Speaker Pelosi bluntly dismissing a unity Democratic ticket [sparked by her current displeasure with a compliment Clinton paid to McCain at the expense of Obama].

At Real Clear Politics there's a brief analysis by Blake Dvorak that I found to be astute:

I'm going to call Pelosi on inconsistency here. She says the differences between Obama and Clinton are nothing compared to the chasm between Democrats and Republicans. But later on she dismisses a "dream ticket" as impossible because the Clinton campaign has said McCain would make a better commander in chief than Obama. Well, assuming the need to beat the Republicans in November outweighs the differences between Obama and Hillary, which is what I think Pelosi is getting at, then a dream ticket is not only possible, but preferable.

But we also know why Pelosi is being inconsistent. Endorsing in any way a joint ticket is a nod to Clinton right now, given the campaigns' difference of opinion on the idea. And Pelosi needs to appear "uncommitted."

Speaker Pelosi's playing the part she imagines she needs to play while remaining uncommitted to either candidate. Perhaps she knows what time can do, if both candidates' campaigns are listening, to erase the memory of bold albeit temporal statements like this one.

But everyone knows there's no such thing as "impossible". Using the word creates an easily-breakable frame. A worry for me, though, is created by such an unimaginative and hopeless-sounding statement from a party leader. Absent of vision at a difficult time for the party, it emits a sad signal to already-conflicted Democratic voters who, unlike some party extremists defending Obama or Clinton, genuinely like both Obama and Clinton. I can't blame Nancy Pelosi, though.I blame the lack of harmonious spirit betwen two extremely (and equally) popular party luminaries who are running for the highest office of the land.

It will soon be time for them both to grow up and start coming together for the sake of their party and for the change they both say they wish to bring to our country.

It's no wonder Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Bill Richardson, and John Edwards have remained uncommitted.

Edwards & Gore on Iraq at Current.com (Current comes to Converge South)

Former VP Al Gore and 2008 presidential candidate John Edwards have made videos for Current.com where they've expressed their opinions about the Iraq War.


Related:

Current.com comes to Greensboro, N.C.



Saskia Wilson Brown of Current.com




Current's Brandon Gross (on right) with co-panelist Jason McHugh (CrapTV)


Saskia Wilson-Brown and Brandon Gross of Current.com appeared at the 2007 Converge South conference held at North Carolina A & T University in Greensboro this past weekend. Photo by Jude Nagurney Camwell (Iddybud).



My set of photos from Converge South
Go to the link to see larger versions of the photos below.

ConvergeSouth 2007 Flickr Group
Technorati Results for ConvergeSouth2007
Anthology of Converge South postings [by David Beckwith]
Posted at Current.com by Saskia Wilson-Brown

Gore Wins Nobel Prize - Bush Moves To Steal It!

Moments after the Nobel Peace Prize committee turned its sights on the battle against global warming by bestowing the 2007 award upon former US vice president Al Gore, George W. Bush moved in to steal it.

"I'm the disseminator," claimed Bush, followed by a weak, disbelieving laugh.

In a shocking turn of events, Mr. Bush's legal team filed papers to dispute the Norwegian Nobel committee's claims that Mr. Gore's efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change were sound reasons to give him (and the IPCC) the coveted prize instead of giving it to Mr. Bush.

Bush reiterated his position: "Al Gore may be the single individual who they say has done the most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted to combat climate change, but - heck, I'm the disseminator and I'm confident that history will cement in the minds of all future human peoples that I, George Dubya, and not Al Gore, deserved the Nobel prize."






Congratulations to Al Gore!

Who Will Labor Endorse for 2008?

David Sirota, in a diary about the future of a populist momentum on the Democratic 2008 campaign trail that's "building like he hasn't seen in his lifetime".

He wonders what Labor will do about their endorsement of a Democratic candate in 2008. I think that he was spot-on when he said that John Edwards simply believes in the Labor agenda and isn't out there supporting them only for their endorsement.

I believe that the way that we citizens tend to view Labor is influenced by the way our leaders support Labor. If the leader's support seems genuine to us, we are more likely to get out more activism to more fully support Labor's causes. I am impressed not only with his level of longstanding support for and commitment to Labor, but also with the fact that Edwards, of all 2008 candidates, doesn't speak of Labor as something retrograde or static. I think that this was Dick Gephardt's problem. Edwards is new-school Labor - he sees the face of its successful future. He envisions a wider future with the Labor movement adapting to progress, globalization, outsourcing, et al. Dean had done much the same early in 2003, promoting foreign labor unions and saying that fair trade could deter terrorism. He was right then as Edwards is now.

Labor can endorse any candidate they choose, but why would they want to endorse a political power structure that has failed them in this new Century? Do they not realize that they can shape their future by being the big change that I'm assuming they seek?

To me, it seems that they are faced with a choice similar to that of which they faced in 2004, as you have mentioned. They were courageous (at first) and went with an endorsement for Howard Dean, as did Al Gore. Later, Dean's campaign was sabotaged by the powers that be when the droning dullards of mainstream media, the right blogosphere, and the DLC trounced Dean's campaign but for one innocuous scream. Labor lost a champion and a troubled AFSCME leader Gerald McEntee abandoned the Howard Dean campaign just before the 2004 Wisconsin primary. He made the dreadful mistake of classifying Howard Dean as "nuts." This is precisely how Labor has sabotaged itself in the past - by allowing the old power structure to come in and do their damage and then say that they agreed with them all along when, in reality, Labor knew they had a real friend in Howard Dean.

Labor has learned some lessons from 2004, but I'm not quite sure what the result of the education will be yet. As a citizen who supports them with my heart and mind, I hope they won't cut off their own collective nose to spite their collective face.


UPDATE: Steve Greenhouse of the NY Times says that Labor may sit back and wait before endorsing any Democrat. However,

...“If our board voted today, it would be leaning toward Edwards,” Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers, said. “He showed up at a Goodyear picket line. He just called and said, ‘I’ll be there.’ That kind of stuff really rings home with our members.”

* While at Working Assets, don't miss Mr. Sirota's juicy piece: More Rocky Mountain Republicans Rejecting Grover Norquist-ism

Al Gore Apparently Not Running in 2008?

Taegan Goddard has a quote from Kristin Gore, as quoted by ABC News, indicating that her Nobel-prize nominee dad is satisified in his political liberation and apparently doesn't plan to run for President in 2008.

Etheridge and Gore Soar at Oscars!

Congratulations to Melissa Etheridge for receiving the Oscar award for her song from "An Iconvenient Truth" titled "I Need To Wake Up." A video of the song can be seen here.







Congratulations to Al Gore for "An Inconvenient Truth's" Oscar for Best Documentary. You can see the video of his "formal announcement" here






I was very happy to see Alan Arkin, one of my all-time favorites, get the Best Supporting Actor award and to have heard his gracious award acceptance speech.

"Acting for me has always been and always will be a team sport. I cannot work at all unless I feel a spirit of unity around me." - Alan Arkin, who won best supporting actor for "Little Miss Sunshine."

One of the funniest lines I heard all night was during the pre-Oscar show on ABC when Access Hollywood's annoying Chris Connelly asked Steve Carell about what it was like filming "Little Miss Sunshine" and Carell went on in his imitable way about Kinnear's smelly sweat problem and how it made the hot van a tad uncomfortable at times.

WSJ Poll and Al Gore Rumors

Raw Story is reporting that, in the field of 2008 POTUS candidates, Sen. Barack Obama is quickly closing the gap in a Wall Street Journal poll of a wide sampling potential voters with his fellow 'media-darling' candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Clinton 45%
Obama 37%
Edwards 28%
Gore 26%

The poll should direct us to the fact that John Edwards, although he's rarely showcased in the media compared to the "rock star" treatment received by Sens. Clinton and Obama, has snagged a greater percentage of Independent voters, out of the total percentage of poll-votes received, than either Clinton or Obama.

What this poll also shows us is that among all Democratic candidates, the Edwards campaign is making impressive strides, off the media's radar, to reach the hearts and minds of American voters. The media tends to give lip service to the candidates with the most cash. If cash were actually "speech", the mainstream media would be considered to be objective truth-tellers. Unfortunately for all of us, we know that that is not true.

The mainstream worships at the Temple of Cash, and they report accordingly. As long as campaigns are run outside the scope of public financing, we will not have an honest media. What happens over the course of this upcoming presidential campaign season will be interesting but as long as we have a campaign finance system stacked for dishonesty, funded by lavish private interests, I will place my personal trust with the everyday citizens of this nation and I will continue to listen to and trust their voices over the select interests that fuel today's mainstream media. I have supported Sen. Edwards because he is the candidate who most clearly shows and articulates that he listens - and listens well - to the everyday citizen even though he has been forced, for the sake of competitive interest, to forego public financing.

In light of what I've just said, a major surprise in this poll is the public's obvious admiration for General Colin Powell. Gen. Powell is rarely discussed by the media, yet he was chosen at the top of the list of potential Republican candidates for President 2008.

The New York Observer's Steve Kornacki is reporting that, according to the latest rumors, former VP Al Gore will consider entering the race for the Democratic nomination in September "if an opening presents itself." Kornacki writing leads us to see that Gore would wish to be a Clinton alternative. One reason Gore stated that he might not choose to enter the race was that, if Obama or Edwards make gains against Clinton, he may not want to further crowd the fray.

In a press conference this morning, President Bush forewarned the press corps that he will not become a "pundit-in-chief on the 2008 Presidential race.

Edwards Chapel Hill Rally Draws Thousands

Photo from One America Committee




Photos by "saltman" at One America Committee blog

Bora was at the John Edwards Chapel Hill rally yesterday, as was Kirk and Exile on Jones Street. Kirk provides a clip. [mov version]

Live blogging toook place here.

At the One America Committee blog, Thread Opener writes about the dynamics of a central campaign theme that focuses on the People:

Joe Trippi: It's About Us
True transformational leadership can only come from a candidate who fundmentally gets that it isn't about him/her -- its about us.

Over the Christmas Weekend Matt Stoller started a conversation about John Edwards that got me thinking again about the difference between transactional politics and transformational politics.

I had an epiphany one day in the middle of the Dean campaign about what made us so different...

Its incredibly simple and defines what I now believe is the essential ingredient in any campaign or candidacy that hopes to be transformational.

All modern campaigns and transactional campaogns are built around a candidate who proclaims to the nation "Look at me -- aren't I amazing?".

The Dean campaign (and any transformational campaign successful or not) was built around a candidate who proclaimed "Look at you -- aren't you amazing?"

This strikes me as essential. More than ideology, or any other factor -- true transformational leadership can only come from a candidate who fundmentally gets that it isn't about him/her -- its about us.

So in terms of 2008 is Hillary capable or realizing that she is not the center of the universe -- that the political world and even her own campaign does not revolve around her? Obama? Edwards? Who? Anyone?

The Dean campaign was different not because of ideology or because of opposition to the war -- but because it revolved around its supporters and empowered them. It was the only campaign in a long time that realized that the people were more important than the candidate.

James MacGregor Burns wrote "A transformational leader stands on the shoulders of his followers, expressing coherently those ideas which lie inchoate in the hearts of the followers -- and in the process makes his followers into new leaders."

Al Gore is doing this right now around the issue of Global Warming. Dean did it in 2004 for President. Who in 2008?

As A Dean supporter in 2003/2004, I had similar feelings and comments.
December 21, 2003: How the name of Howard Dean has become synonymous with the investment of our very selves

Along came Howard Dean, promoting joyous citizen participation as avidly as Bush was oppressing it.....

When I hear people attacking Howard Dean (as I have heard so often lately), I am beginning to take each word in each attack in a deeply personal way. I am not saying this because I am partial to Howard Dean (although I admit to being so). I am telling you this because, most simply, it is true.

The name of Howard Dean has become synonymous with the investment of our very selves in the betterment of our nation, our love for healthy and strong American democracy,and our individual interests in preserving our American rights and performing our American duties. This man, Howard Dean, has caused us to believe in ourselves and all we can be for our vision of America. Most important is his reminder of the fact that America is ours...and we need to take her back. The Bush Administration is beginning to see the danger to Dean's candidacy and I don't think they ever really saw it coming. Every attack they will make on Howard Dean will be felt (quite deeply) as an attack on every American who feels they have the right to participate in American government. What a paradox! With every attack on Howard Dean, he is further empowered. ...

Governor Dean became our DNC chair because the people who came politically alive because of his inspiration wouldn't have it any other way.

RFK JR on MySpace Not At All Welcoming

I had the strangest "conversation" with a MySpace friend called "RFK Jr. 2008" today. Here's how it went.

I got a bulletin from RFK Jr 2008 saying

RFK Jr. ---

A potential CANDIDATE with INTERNATIONAL support.

The Volunteer Staff of RFK Jr. says Hello to Ireland today.

Other than Barack Obama, is there ANY OTHER POTENTIAL CANDIDATE who could TRAVEL ABROAD to any COUNTRY IN THE WORLD and be greeted with an outpouring of affection and goodwill like RFK Jr. could drum up, especially in Ireland, which is of course where Irish-Americans come from ? No, there isn't. So again, Hello to Ireland, even though you can't vote here.

Seeing what I thought was a question to which they'd expect an answer, I wrote back:

Dec 28 2006 1:29 PM

Subject: RE: RFK JR:A CANDIDATE with INTERNATIONAL
support.Hello Ireland.
Body:

"...Other than Barack Obama.."

Seriously??????

I can think of others, but I agree the Kennedys will
also be great ambassadors for the U.S. when it comes
to Ireland.

Jude

I was actually thinking, the time I wrote the reply, of how Ireland would embrace Hillary Clinton, especially at the side of her husband Bill who had done so much to support Ireland's peace process. I wondered why only Barack Obama showed on the list of possibilities.

Look at the doozy of a reply I got:

Dec 28 2006 1:33 PM

Subject: RE: RE: RFK JR:A CANDIDATE with INTERNATIONAL
support.Hello Ireland.

Perhaps Al Gore.
Nobody else.
Don't argue with us about it.
John Edwards campaign slogan is
stupid by the way.

"Today is Tomorrow"
"Tomorrow is Today"

whatever...

The ad agency who came up with that should be fired
TODAY. No wait until tomorrow actually.

I got this kind of unwarranted attack simply because I had a photo of myself with Senator Edwards on my MySpace page. God forbid I'd had this one...



or this one.....



On top of that, whoever this MySpace caretaker is removed me from their "Friends" list so I could not even reply.

"Don't argue with us about it"?!?!

What a jerk! And I had just written about how John Edwards reminded me very much of Robert Kennedy Sr and how much I'd admired RFK Sr...and I got an unsolicited attack.

Needless to say, if the Draft RFK Jr 2008 movement continues with this kind of vicious attitude toward people showing the slightest bit of moral support, they aren't going to get very far. If anyone should be fired, it would be grassroots activist who represents their candidate by acting like a dictator, an aggressor, and a censor.

WSJ Columnist Still in Denial About MSM Decline

Media dinosaurs like Joseph Rago continue to bemoan and demean the impact of the power of the Second Superpower. Sometimes change rolls right over the ones who protest it. In an ideological sense, the one lone man in Tiananmen Square was rolling right over those big old tanks and the big old tanks never even saw it coming. Some joke about Al Gore being the "father of the internet", but in spirit, the Founding Fathers themselves - and all who've ever believed in the unvarnished meaning of democracy - inspired the ghost in the machine that has materialized as the many once-silent voices of "We, the People."

Mr. Rago, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Tom Delay may have blogs, but they ain't got nothin' on us - the big "us" - and you know it.

Leadership Wanting on Iran/Iraq

IRAN and RUSSIA

Last spring, the United States called on all countries to stop all arms exports to Iran. Yet, the first of 29 Tor-M1 systems in a $700m deal have been delivered to Iran by Moscow. Hugh Hewitt points out the mixed messages being sent by Russia to Iran:

Iran must conclude that if Russia is willing to sell it the weapons necessary to defend nuclear facilities, it cannot really be intending to force the halt of construction on those facilities.

How long should Russia be allowed a "most favored nation" status in the UN? Former Senator John Edwards co-chaired a Council on Foreign Relations task force examining U.S.-Russian relations with Jack Kemp last winter. When asked by Newsweek last March whether or not he felt that the Russians have been helpful on Iran, he replied:

If I were going to choose a single test for our relationship with Russia, Iran is the test. We're united with the Europeans on this, so it really matters what Russia does in the Security Council. If ultimately the Iranians reject what we're demanding—us and the Russians—then we also should be saying to the Russians: "You should stop this Bushehr project because you can't continue to help them develop a nuclear facility while they're obviously in the process of trying to build a nuclear weapon.

Photo: Bushehr - 400 km south of Tehran




Libertarian writer Bernie Quigley of Free Market News believes that ideas like NATO expansion with nuclear potential into "Holy Roman Empire territory when Russia was perceived to be weak" was 'a mistake of historic proportions' by the best foreign policy minds" and continues proving to be so. [see foreign policy minds who disapproved] Mr. Quigley says:

Its strongest proponent was Vice President Al Gore. But the greatest danger of One Size Fits All Federalism is what we are seeing today in the Middle East; the smallest and quirkiest of well-funded political tribes can conjure influence and commandeer the will of the entire 300,266,521 of us, as they have in Iraq.

Here we are - millions upon millions of citizens, an alleged democracy - beholden to the whims of any one tribe at any given moment. How could we have allowed this to have happened to ourselves - to our democracy?

William Hartung, Senior Research Fellow at the World Policy Institute at the New School, said this in May, 1998:

Senators need to know that voting for NATO expansion could have serious political consequences down the road, once the public understands the full risks and costs involved.

With our foreign policy mistakes coming home to roost in the embers of a failed Iraq and in the light of Russia's bold hypocrisy and betrayal on Iran, will it now be time for the leaders who supported NATO expansion to be held accountable for the reality of the results of such a policy?

_________________


IRAQ

"He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue... In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns."

Sun Tzu
The Art of War

Consider this statement from Senator John Edwards from May, 2003:

One of the root causes of both the unease in the Middle East and terrorism is so many people in the Arab world live lives of hopelessness and despair. We have to make it clear that we care about addressing those root causes.... the political and economic stagnation in the Middle East and in the Arab world in general is astounding.

We can address the state sponsorship of terrorism in Iran, what Syria’s doing, Iraq, all of those issues, in a discreet way, one by one. But at the end of the day, unless over the long term we’re going to address the root causes of terrorism, we’re not going to get rid of the problem....the world needs to see America as a country that will reach out to them, that cares what they have to say, that cares about their problems, and that will work with them and the international community, including the United Nations, to solve the problems that exist in this world.

It is the only way that we’re going to be successful, number one. And it is the most effective way to keep the American people safe.

If keeping America safe is our goal in foreign policy, and if the solution is tied to addressing the hopelessness, despair, political injustice and economic stagnation for so many in the Arab world, then we have failed - and miserably so. In Iraq, over a hundred thousand American troops have fought, risked their lives, and died on a lost-track mission with no clearly delineated goals at the whim of the head of one tribal faction or another (depending on what day it is) in a place where our presence has exacerbated hopelessness, despair, injustice, extremism, and hatred. In short, it is an insurance policy for the perpetuation of terrorism.

Well over three years ago retired Marine General Anthony Zinni said "There is no strategy or mechanism for putting the pieces together," we're in danger of failing."

Retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey told the Army Times this week that the U.S. would have to slash combat forces in Iraq to 10 brigades by Christmas to keep the Army from breaking. Hope is not a strategy, but it should be a goal. Despair is not a method, but it is a real result of a misguided foreign policy that, as of tomorrow, will be a war that is longer than World War II, but with disastrous results. Generals are tap dancing around the fact that we need to leave Iraq to the Iraqis to not only let them decide their own fate, but also to remove our Military from the brink of disaster.

Recruiters hoping to appeal to military service in our society will never succeed while this blunder of major proportions continues in Iraq. A draft, if indeed reactivated, will have our children and their parents in the streets demanding for this insanity in Iraq to end. We'd be ignorant and remiss not to expect that reaction - take one look at the public opinion of this war. They all know it, too - the ones who generate the debate about the draft. In the Art of War, Sun Tzu advised

"Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys.
Look on them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death!"

What kind of father would mislead his children - telling them to expect roses and cheers - and then set them on a dangerous path with no clear plan for victory?

Al Gore Will Help UK Lead on Global Warming Issues

Former VP Al Gore Speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative Meeting in Manhattan, September 2006
Photo by Jude Nagurney Camwell

The hiring of Al Gore by the U.K.'s Chancellor Gordon Brown is a sign that, in the absence of moral, responsible, and ethical leadership at the national level on environmental issues in the U.S., Great Britain is willing to take over the position as the new international leader on global warming. They're borrowing Mr. Gore - one of America's greatest resources - since George Bush has squandered him just as Bush has squandered the good will and good faith of most of the world's diplomats.

For all his squandering, his name should be President George W. Squander.

Gordon Brown is being pegged by many as Tony Blair's successor as Prime Minister. What Mr. Gore decides to do about 2008 is anyone's guess.