Archive for February, 2008

February 4, 2008

WHERE’S THE BEEF BARACK?

by MullOverThis

I JUST VISITED BARACK OBAMA’S OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN WEBSITE.  NOTICEABLY ABSENT FROM WHERE HE STANDS ON THE ISSUES IS ABORTION, GUN CONTROL AND LGBT AGENDA.  THE SITE HAS A WELCOME FEEL, IS EASY TO TUNNEL THROUGH, AND MARKETS OBAMA WELL.  THE QUESTION REMAINS,

 

“WHERE IS THE BEEF, BARACK?” 

 

HIS ECONOMIC PLAN IS INCREDULOUS IN LIGHT OF THE ERA OF CHANGE WE ARE TO ANTICIPATE.  HELEN KELLER KNOWS WE NEED TAX CUTS, MORTGAGE INDUSTRY FRAUD REGULATED, INCREASED EMPLOYMENT RATES, AND SO FORTH.   TO BRING CLARITY, EVERY ISSUE OUTLINED IS NON-SPECIFIC AND ATYPICAL OF A GLORIFIED COLLEGIATE ASSIGNMENT ON HOW TO IMPROVE OUR NATION’S (INSERT AN ISSUE HERE).   

 

“WHAT HAS BARACK OBAMA DONE TO BRING CHANGE SO FAR?”

 

“WHAT IS BARACK OBAMA GOING TO DO TO RESTORE THE ECONOMY, END THE WAR AND MAINTAIN SECURITY WITHIN OUR BORDERS, BRING THIS NATION BACK TO GOD, FIGHT THE SPREAD OF AIDS, DEAL WITH DRUG TRAFFICKING, AND THE LIST GOES ON?”

 

OBAMA’S CLAIM TO HAVE BEEN INNOVATIVE IN CONGRESS THUS FAR TO CREATE BI-PARTISAN UNITY IS ALSO A JOKE.  MAYBE HE WILL BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THIS WHEN HE HAS THE HIGH SEAT, BUT HIS CLAIM AND HISTORY OF DOING SO IS QUESTIONABLE.  JUST REVIEW HIS SUPPORT AND CONVENTIONAL DEALINGS WITH JOHN KERRY. 

WHATEVER YOU ARE LOOKING FOR IN THE NEXT PRESIDENT, UNDERSTAND THAT THIS CHANGE FLUFF IS A DIVERSIONARY MARKETING STRATEGY FROM SOMEONE WHO HAS DONE NOTHING DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE NORMAL POLITICAL MACHINE THAT HE IS VERY WELL A PART OF.  DURING AN INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTIANITY TODAY MAGAZINE, WHEN ASKED IF HE WAS FOR ABORTION, OBAMA REPLIED, “I DON’T KNOW ANYONE WHO IS FOR ABORTION.”  HE PROCEEDED TO REVEAL THAT ABORTIONS RATES SHOULD DECLINE AND DID THE VERY DOUBLE-TALKING THAT HE SAYS HE WANTS TO CHANGE.  OBAMA DOES NOT KNOW ANYONE WHO IS FOR ABORTION.  THE NEXT POTENTIAL PRESIDENT IS UNAWARE OF MILLIONS OF PRO-LIFERS AND ABORTION RIGHTS ACTIVISTS.  OBAMA DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION.  OBAMA DID NOT WANT TO ALIENATE A CHRISTIAN AUDIENCE, WHICH IS LARGELY AGAINST ABORTION.  IS THIS POLITICIAN’S RIGAMAROLE ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANYONE ELSE’S?

 

IF WE ARE SO CAUGHT UP WITH THE AGENT OF CHANGE AND NEVER GET CONCRETE VISION FROM THE NEXT POTENTIAL PRESIDENT, WE WILL HAVE NOTHING  TO WHICH WE MAY  HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE.

 

Advertisements
February 3, 2008

Three Kennedy’s Endorse Clinton

by MullOverThis

Regardless of where we go from here, either the first African American man or the first female will be Democratic nominee for President of the United States.  This is a great day in America when two generations ago, this was utterly impossible.  Certainly womens’ and civil rights movements have served to change the climate in America for the better, although we still have work to do in reaching the ideal where racism and sexism is non-existent.

While Obama is surging ahead to tighten the gap between Hilary and himself as the agent of change, some important news was lost in the flurry.  Three of Senator Robert Kennedy’s children–Robert, Kathleen and Kerry–support Hilary Clinton.  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31text-debate.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Robert+Kennedy%27s+children+support&st=nyt&oref=slogin   I’m not convinced that the Kennedys are the barometer for what is good or right in politics, but these Kennedy’s statements in preference for Hilary is what is telling.  After all of the motivation in the world, the pivotal question that needs to be answered is who is going to get the job done.   Obama says change is key.

What kind of change can we look forward to with Obama?  The kind of change that comes from retaining good counselors and speech writers.  Charismatic change.  Americans do not need to go to bed at night feeling good and inspired to get involved without any REAL change.  With Obama’s history as a public servant in Illinois and as a US Senator, what has Mr. Barack done that is substantially different than any other senator?  What exactly are Obama’s accomplishments that indicate he is not another spoke in the wheels of the political machine?   Please someone help me see the great change that has come as a result of Barack’s leadership.  Charisma and the ability to reach the masses is unique and critical.  But I don’t believe for one second it translates to effective leadership and transformation when it comes to the White House.  Action does.

This is the point that Senator Clinton made in reference to Obama’s MLK and JFK reach to believe beyond the norm.  Senator Clinton remarked that it took a president to get things done and a barage of criticism for racial bias ensued.  If Hilary Clinton were a smurf (merely a character) anything she says about Obama would be spinned and this is what is nasty and divisive.

The truth is there was no insensitivity towards MLK Jr. because MLK Jr. was not the Civil Rights Movement.  MLK Jr. joined a movement that already had national prominence before he arrived.  The work of Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, circuit court justices, civil rights attorneys and civil rights groups helped to provide a sweet context for MLK’s voice.  His voice was a voice of inspiration, unification and non-violent social change.  Surely his leadership and motivational style affected change.  However, it was one that sensibly epitomized the convictions of millions of Americans.  That is why MLK was supported.  All of the sit-ins, boycotts and freedom rides  provoked attention and compelled action because of the economic weight Black folks and our arms in the struggle brought to the forefront.  These actions would have been mere exercise if the President, and so many other politicians and legislators, did not enact and enforce laws and regulations to guarantee our security and entrance into a new era.  THAT IS WHAT TRUE UNITY IS ALL ABOUT. RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF MLK JR. in a proper  perspective.  It took LBJ and the gamut of federal leadership to sign, authorize and approve laws and to use their authority to abate the wickedness of Jim Crow eighty years later.  The great national climate did not shift because JFK offered a butterfly soliloquy and locked arms with MLK.  White supremacists did not put down their hoses, stop burning crosses, cease race riots and using nooses, destroying Black owned property and businesses, raping Black women, murdering and lynching black folks and liberal Whites because they were motivated by some speeches.  They got arrested, tried, pushed back by federal troops, US Marshals, the National Guard and the whole nine yards.   Protection and the enforcement of laws came because politicians were part of the formula. Just as the stroke of legislative pens formally established color lines with the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws, it took the stroke of pens to erase them.  The climate is still shifting today because racism in America still exists.

What concerns me is this so-called movement for change, on a platform of nothing distinguishing Obama from his colleagues or predecessors.  This rhetoric is a smokescreen that is questionable in that we really need to examine what lies behind it.  This campaign strategy is brilliant because Americans may become more patriotic but when it comes down to it, some will fan the war that Obama and Hilary are against.  Patriotism is subjective and this reality is what will always present a divide.  Americans may unite in our love for this country, but what we love and do not love about America will never be agreeable to all.  The President’s job is not to over-import the role of national unity which oftentimes conflicts with what decisions are right for America.  This concept is a fairy tale.

 

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/clintons-kennedy-backers/?scp=1-b&sq=robert+kennedy%27s+children+endorses+hilary&st=nyt

February 3, 2008

MAD MONEY

by MullOverThis

         th-m78.jpg                                                                                 th-m075.jpg    

No doubt all of the people who might have normally elected to see Mad Money opted to take their children to see Hannah Montana last night.  I don’t need to wait until the weekend is over to know that Hannah Montana was the top grossing film.  The lobby of the movie theatre had a line full of cackling young ladies waiting to see their heroine, or at least cable TV friend,  Hannah Montana.  Britney, Raven, Lindsey, and Jamie Lynn move over cause Miley Cyrus is having her reign as the pre-teen/teen queen.   Mad Money?  That is what the daughter of country singer Billy Rae Cyrus is going to rake in from this movie.

Mad Money, starring Diane Keaton, Queen Latifah, Ten Danson and Katie Holmes is just another Hollywood flick.  Since we haven’t seen Mrs. Tom Cruise in a while outside of austere & primped paparazzi posings, it was refreshing to see her acting again.  I don’t think there will be any Golden Globes or Oscars ascribed to this picture unless it is for “Best Dingbattish Performance from a Re-entry Actress”, in which case Tom will have to make some space in their awards room for Mrs. Cruise’s statute. 

Diane Keaton plays the desperate fru-fru upper middle class housewife (Bridget Cardigan) who falls upon hard times and has to be-little herself to toilet-bowl cleaning at the opportune Federal Reserve.  Necessity is the mother of invention.  In an inverse yet decrepit application of this maxim, a precipice is sure to follow.   Keaton’s character becomes the mastermind who  convinces her co-conspirators, played by Latifah and Katie (Nina Brewster and Jackie Truman, respectively), to embezzle old dirty money that technically doesn’t exist.  There isn’t any major harm in stealing money to help save the family home, provide a better life and education for a single mother, and acquire things normal working class people will never be able to afford–especially when the cash is money that is removed from the system.  Ted Danson (Don Cardigan) plays a displaced corporate executive who joins the subterfuge along with the others’ love interests, and micro-manages the entire debacle.  The everyday charlatans enjoy the benefits of their thievery to surpass their original goals in a film aura 10 notches shy of the pretentious intensity in Oceans 11-13, but 5 notches above a King’s Ransom type film.  The free cash is too good for the syndicate to stop stealing when their so-called needs are met.  They keep pilfering and gratuitously follow the paths that great crooks have set before them–get busted.  Of course, they are able to legally hoodwink their way out of the charges because of lack of evidence. Quandary moments of worry are soon placated for there is no eventual dismay.  The kingpin Bridget Cardigan had the wherewithal to hide a boatload of cash for the thieves to divide and live happily ever after. 

To the deeply indebted, easily influenced, tired of working, seem to never get ahead folks, and baby-step criminals, do not see this movie.  I kept laughing throughout the movie, not only because it was humorous, but more-so because of the reaction I witnessed.  A dear friend and fervent Christian admitted that the movie provoked her to think of ways to get money without having to pay any consequences.  She immediately recognized that this was only a thought pattern, but a thought pattern it was nonetheless.  Imagine the vulnerability and subtle credence a young person might feel after watching ANOTHER flick that highlights crime, corruption, greed, embezzlement, beating the system, getting ahead at any cost, ungodly self-fulfillment, and an unwillingness to suffer.  So from the perspective of a Christian, there was no universally good moral to this picture, other than re-affirming the principle that the love of money is the root of all evil.