Within this original context for this thread and its rebuttals, Jefferson's was much more of a seminal influence than you insinuate. Not that I or any conscientious critical thinker could be entirely comfortable with this, of course, given the obvious reasons you state. Still, his influences spread and continues to pervade so deeply and broadly not just because of the Declaration of Independence, an epochal document even ahead of himself though he understood its significance and progressive intent, but because of his national character-shaping work throughout his philosophical writings (especially Notes on a State of Virginia) and politically through such measures as the Louisiana purchase. Though they did have progressive and/or meritorious intentions and effects, these are of course not things any conscientious historian critic or theorist could characterize as wholly beneficial and humane either. Their legacy has shaped our country so deeply in many complicated, interrelated ways some good some bad other neither and still more that can't be so readily diagnosable ethically or morally. In all these respects they've been woven into the fabric of the American enteprise, identity, conflict and penance, which itself as a melting pot of the world, is culminative not only of the tangles but also of the richness within the larger tapestries of world histories and character(s). More on the pragmatic level than the idealist one, FDR has had a similar impact. Wilson, as I see it, not nearly as much as these two, though some of the OP's points pertain on a less immanent level than the former two, Kennedy, or, now, Obama....

.

One quick side note-- Did Jefferson himself purport the 3/5 ID? That was the Constitutional Congress which he was not a member of. Of course its really just a moot point because he did support the constitution, though it might be a stretch to imply he's the originator of that particular article and concept. In Notes on a State of Virginia he argues in detail for the freeing the slaves, though he also does personally purport considerable racist and/or racialist views there as well.

Then another note.... I can't say I respect the man either, but I don't think the OP was requesting we do that--rather, if I read it correctly, he was forming a proposition on legacies, which are different from personal respect because they are transactional and national rather than based on individual moral verdicts....

Hi Everybody!

I just have to say I'm still overwhelmed by all of this, the galvanizing energy throughout the country all day yesterday, the realization that we have done it last night and the celebration since of our achievement as America now begins this new and exciting chapter. I feel fortunate and blessed to have a prosperous and engaged representation of all this here at DU, whose own roller coaster ride I believe closely reflects that of our people and nation, and like to think affects and contributes in its own little way to the life and progress of each.

So, though it takes a long time, I highly recommend reading through this entire thread. Besides documenting a day none of us will ever forget, it brings our diversity, excitement, faith, and mandate together, offering a nice perspective on the advent, finally(!), of all these through a roll call or register of so many of our members. I like to fancy it as a Homeric catalogue of ships, the best and greatest of our people standing up to be counted as a representation of our greatness, and of all we stand for. More than a record of recs on DU, this is a record of who we are and how we have taken back our country.

* * * * * * * * *

For the record, 1646 shatters the previous high of 1189 recs from the primary thread on Hillary dropping out (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu... ), which had 727 posts.

For perspective and posterity, here are a couple of other former title holders on DU. The first (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu... ) was a thread on the impeachment proceedings that garnered at least 950 recs (the total #'s not documented, but is attested by various members). The second is the famous "My name is Steven Joseph Vincent" thread posted in defiance and solidarity after the stolen 2004 election (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu... ). There is no rec count but the 934 posts within it remains to my knowledge a DU record. In both it and this thread, DU came together to demand we be heard, known, and counted, with different electoral results but similar assertions of character and creed.

These historcial nuggets fascinate me not only because of the momentous occasions they mark, but because of their contrast as well as parralels to this thread and yesterday's election. I'm proud of us in all of them, and appreciate our solidarity and conviction in both the trials and tribulations of the past eight years and in the buoyancy and achievement of a new era dawning beginning here and now.

Cheers DU, and god bless you all

mythyc

your voice can change the world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmUUYo9o9eg



.

edit: if you vote add a quick message to keep this kicked!

Yes We Can!!!

At 8 years old my grandparents took me to see Ghandi w' Kingsley when it debuted and I watched transfixed and reverent. This was the first time I remember feeling respect, thinking this is a great man.

At 16 as a junior in high school I read Dr. King’s "Letter from a Birmingham Jail" and still today, as a student and teacher of literature, I have read no work with so profound and prodigious a righteous humility as this. There, logic and compassion united in an unimpeachable notice not only of the truth and worth of its cause, but of what our best nature can, must be.

At 21 as a freshman in college I read Thoreau’s "Civil Disobedience" and glimpsed not simply how noble it is to decry the hatred and hypocrisy of entire societies that would silence and oppress the god-given humanity and dignity of others, but how imperative it is to do this with a calm temperament and principled spirit that will not let justice be muted.

It is only today, at 35, that I am realizing how not only essential but so very difficult it really is to emulate the tremendous labors and examples of these tremendous individuals and so many other courageous women and men like them who have given me and us such a paramount and exigent inheritance.

We have all been hearing and witnessing what’s been transpiring in the election these past two weeks. If for any reason you have not, you must make yourself aware; must educate yourself not only as a citizen but as a moral human being so that you have no illusions regarding the severity of the trials this country is facing, and of what it even more so at stake here; must assume your responsibility to know, face, and help overcome the challenges that we are facing at this our most pivotal and critical point of our generation, if not our country’s history.

A small sampling of video clips bares what we are up against:

(I’m posting a range to show how pervasive this has been becoming both in and out of the campaign)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBmO6YAszGU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjxzmaXAg9E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itEucdhf4Us
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkFG1ebuKZU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOU9xZ4zcss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsjybbvd__o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyGH-n93r5U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGngj_35D_s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ykBr3SO6sg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQBr7JKhvI4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiESklGDuH4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41yS81RXKIs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJghQMq49dw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMCl49x8BfY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woNYeyOQnuI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvXf9AUHTqM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rUAFUoz3jc

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/...

I watch these in shock and disbelief and my instincts react---they want to make my brain seethe and blood boil. Not simply because it is happening but how readily it is happening and how widespread the contagion so directly is.

Inasmuch my immediate gut reaction is disgust commingled with ire, abhorrence, revulsion, resentment, distress---and most of all nausea from and ill will towards the perpetrators of such hatred, cruelty, bigotry, and greed.

It is a pain wrought by the circumstances we find ourselves and our country, and therefore our shared fate, engrossed in.

But, just like these circumstances, this pain and indignation are not new: they have been there beneath the surface our whole lives, skulking around the various shades between our consciousness and subconscious and unconscious experiences, festering like a cancer of the psyche and nerves.

We have grown up knowing this anger and pain, feeling them in response to the senseless violence and bigotry that we have all our lives witnessed infesting not merely the dregs of society, but some of its most core institutions and venues, figures and characters.

For some of us more or less than others, this experience is like a crucible---at sometimes in the depths of our selves, restrained but constrained, repressed but impressed---at others right here, scratching grating or tearing at the surface of everyday consciousness, incessant and relentless, torrid and riotous.

.

Like many of you, throughout my adult life I have wrestled like Jacob with the erratic degrees of this crucible, but never so acutely or painfully as I have these past two weeks witnessing, as it appears, the full force of their cruelty and abusiveness begin to emerge.

And a sick sense warns it is just beginning.

So I have been getting more and more angry, I want to hate what is so plainly wrong, perverted, and abhorrent.

And it is exactly here that I to am just beginning, just beginning to realize what it means to face evil head on, what it really meant for Thoreau Gandhi MLK and countless countless others to have faced and still face the most destructive element--germ--virus of the worst of human nature----

Not simply to face it, but to take a stand against it. Not simply to take a stand against it, but to do the most essential and difficult work of effecting progress beyond this evil----

This is why I—we—must not simply , but learn by and inhere as and take forward their consummate example:

If I hate them I am like them. If angry, I am like them. If I war with them I hurt my country, my fellow man with them. Just as much I hurt myself with them.

…

We must not forget or neglect that we are and must be better than that, or else everything we strive for is compromised, menaced, threatened. Violence only begets more violence, whether that be physical, emotional, psychological, or social. The same is true for hatred, anger, bitterness, malevolence, discomposure, condescension, disdain, hurt.

And most of all, the same is true for the sources of all these in feelings, gestures, and affectations of conceit, grief, pride, and fear.

Emerson, Thoreau’s mentor, wrote “it cannot touch me”, and I’m beginning to understand that this is what he and the others meant, in both the declarative and the imperative senses: it must not touch me and if I achieve this and you and you and you achieve this, becoming we achieve this, only then can we transcend the infirmities of immediate evils and experience and declare that we—not I or you individually, but we in our common solidarity and stake—will not be touched by these.

Only then healing begins, then progress begins.

.

I write so deliberately and urgently because we all knew this was coming, yet who among us are still shocked and disturbed by the ugly and menacing face that it is taking? I have been exceptionally angry these past two weeks, have written and spoken nauseously about what has been transpiring all around us, have felt like the walls are closing in even though I have not once wavered from my faith and strong belief that the truth and what’s right will prevail in this election.

Because this is about more than the election.

Right now we are at a, the critical juncture in our shared history and future. At this moment how we proceed is vital, is everything. With as much as we are up against, everything depends on how we face the challenges that are arising so intensely and exactingly before us.

If we give into the visceral reactions I’ve been describing, we will not succeed, we ourselves will frustrate and thwart the very change we want to bring. Instinct is not always the better nature, and particular challenges call for a higher character within.

This is what I’m finally learning from the three seminal figures in our lives and history of Thoreau, Gandhi, and MLK, and from the thousands and millions of other either like them or following their examples. Righteousness must have patience, discipline, and humility to achieve the best of and for ourselves. To achieve this dignity humanity deserves, strives for, demands, we must have dignity ourselves.

…

At 31, four years ago, now as a teacher myself, I heard Obama attest to exactly this in what is still the most important and transformative speech I’ve heard delivered.

In the four years since and the past year in particular, I have been learning from this great man every time I hear and read him. Like his precursors, his patience and buoyancy and conviction are more than sincere inspiring or even purposeful---they are the foundations upon which change and progress must be built, without which these cannot be built. Foundations as much in the individual as in what we feel and work for in common, towards the vision of the fierce urgency of now. It’s an example that I must constantly remind myself of, the renewal of the most crucial vow: Stay positive, stay dignified, keep believing, and keep working. Only the audacious, determined, and composed hand can steer the ship through the tempestuous maelstrom of the impending storm.

Here is a mid-length compilation of the greatest hits among the hundreds upon hundreds of youtube comments replying in baffled befuddled disbelief to Palin's failure to name a single newspaper when responding to perhaps the softest softball question an interviewer has ever floated at a major political candidate. (at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkWebP2Q0Y )

I can't recommend highly enough that you read all of these, for more reasons than I can list. Primarily though, over and above the rich, thick satire and interminable humor Failin (*cough*) inspires, the below selection attests to the fact that Americans are waking up to the utter fraud that she is and realizing how much of a laughing stock she really is. Besides how Classic some of the comments are and the depth of sociological interest herein, that this is going on with such disapproval, wit, and solidarity over there (as opposed to other political sites like DU, Kos etc where you'd already expect it) is a great representation of what your average online voter, citizen, or wo/man on the street is finally and definitively recognizing, thanks to the horse's errr moose's mouth itself. Enjoy!

.



































































.

As a key comment bringing all this together and underscoring its significance:

.



.

and as the grand finale to this fireworks show:


.

well sort of. I came across this snipit from our first President's farewell address:

The first part is excerpted to get to the main point. I highly recommend you read the whole thing....



Now compare Washington's admonitions and advice to Obama's 2004 DNC speech:



.

Though the historical circumstances have changed, it is startling how akin the two messages are across two centuries of American History.

President Washington ended his tenure as our nation's first President by urging us to stand in solidarity as a People united by a common idea, an ideal that amidst so many pernicious forces both within and outside our shores, that even then our collective and individual survival, livelihood, and prosperity are dependent on the integrity of our convictions that a greater truth, perhaps the greatest truth of humanity's intrinsic good and dignity, which themselves guarantee and foster our independence and happiness, that this greatest truth depends on the unity of the American body politic.

There may be differences of opinion, belief, and even ideology amongst us, but we all share a common creed and vision that lends conviction to our trust in the great potential our nation offers not just its citizens but humanity and history.

In potential at least. History is giving that potential the ultimate test right now, and I believe what we have been witnessing despite all the distortion distraction and dissembling is a truth re-asserting itself---our truth---and it will not be silenced. The potential is actualizing: everywhere, all 50 states. There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come (my sig below).

And so I believe Obama was in his speech and is in his candidacy striving to articulate and actuate a correspondent ideal. Yes we can --- the we is ultimate and can preserve that dignity and uphold the great integrity we still have within us despite all that has happened this past decade, to sustain us through the dire straits of Washington's "covert and insidious artifices" and Obama's "spin masters and pundits." Don't forget the wise words of Lisa and Homer Simpson: "Dad, Did you know that the Chinese use the same word for ‘crisis’ as they do for ‘opportunity?’” Homer: "yes! Cristunity...."

The current critical moment provides us with a ripe opportunity to achieve, collectively, something more than any one "I", to bring about a better "US". This past year I have seen it happening everywhere across this great country, and I an both humbled and made proud by it. We as Americans are taking, are seizing that momentous and uniquely American opportunity to renew ourselves for a better future, and neither growing pains nor the selfish sycophants in our midst nor the tired strifes of our recent past can stop this irresistible force, whose impetus has now gained its full and profoundest momentum.

yes we can --- When enough of us believe it and enact it as one nation, as I wholly believe is happening, it will be so. Keep the faith fellow patriots on DU!

The most powerful rhetorical moment and deliberation I have ever been fortunate enough to witness. It's what I sometimes imagine being there 45 years ago would have felt like and meant to those present when MLK shared articulated and ordained his dream.

I'm speechless. Immanence ~ this moment the promise, in our better natures unfolding. Our aseity, our provenance, and pride.

This is the moment, this is the time.

This is our moment, this is our time.

Thank you and bless you, Barack, for awakening and galvanizing the generation this monumental and inimitable epoch demands.

.

True Faith is more powerful than fear, when a true soul on fire we hear.

 


On my thread title I kid. I honestly am not trying to fuck with you. I seriously think impeachment is not just futile but foolhardy, not because of the impeachment itself (of course they deserve it), but because it would fail, and the consequences of this failure would not be pretty, in this moment of American history especially.

you have not once addressed my question about what happens when impeachment trials fail.

not because I don't think they deserve it, because i do. I want bush and cheney and rumsfeld and rice and wolfowitz to burn in hell. i carry every day this angst like i've never felt before for what they've done not just with iraq but this country.

how did they get that kind of power?

think.

you never answered my question: please answer it: Pelosi couldn't even get a veto override on "propositional" timetable on Iraqi withdrawals. Fuck that, she couldn't even get the override for children's health care.

unfortunately, TRAGICALLY, painfully, what's right fails epically at this moment and time (ever heard the expression "A time and a place"?): and then after as well as during that, then what?

--Bush goes on congressional record as having been officially exonerated, acquitted, sanctioned, approved in fact and in the letter of the law no less. The thought of that is far worse to me than not going forward with impeachment trials.
--All the media attention on the failure to convict him gets strums up the propagandistic sensationalism brigade who's just salivating (have you forgotten about the rife incest b/w the media agencies, the corporations, the military industriral machine, the gas companies, etc etc) for 4+ more years of Republican power on the one hand to fear-monger the public further and on the other to (convincingly) paint the Dems as weak, ineffective, inconsequential etc.
---Americans have a good reason to continue distrusting the Dems as failures at following through with what they promise, worse, with what they define as a worthy agenda for their elected officials.
---Dems shoulder the blame for wasting precious time, money, and resources on an endeavor they knew they would lose at from the beginning. This as America sinks into its worse recession in decades no less.
---Rethugs use this fact (1) to blame the recession on the Dems, I can see the campaign stumps now: when they could have saved America's economy, they squandered both our congress's time and funds, 100s of millions on them, on a trial against a man proven not guilty in the end, and (2) to strum up support for themselves across the board as the decisive actors, doers, agents for the American people in times of political economic and societal crises. O my god they just reversed the narrative.

So instead:
(1) Wait it out. Let the Rethugs sink their own ship. Come November they take full blame for everything: the war, the economy, the scandals, the corruption, the damaged American identiy at home and abroad. The Dems have fully washed their hands not just in the present but for posterity of this shit of a state that were in.
(2) Furthermore, as the I told oyu so alternative they get to come to the rescue, and by being smart and strategic (see #3 right below) they save our damn country, help change the course of history, achieve a more critical long-term victory/history rather than shake their fists more frustratingly and futile at their incapacity to positively influence the present.
(3) Expend the resources and political capital on something constructive rather than destructive: continue with Dean's 50 state strategy, build even stronger majorities in both houses of congress, strengthen ties within those houses and within the party, solidify solidarity both at the federal and state levels, continue making strides for honing and then implementing the party platform once the presidency is taken back, ...

I could go on but I doubt any of this gets through. When a lynch mob demands justice all that matters is revenge. See my most recent journal entry (before this one) on pragmatic progressivism. My problem, in a nutshell, with people like Shirley Golub is all that matters is what's "right and just" -- at all costs, even if ridiculously pursuing it knowing you will fail sets us far far far far far far far far far further back then where we were when we started. Worse, by then, we only have ourselves to blame. There's a fuck lot more going on and at stake here than holding Bush "accountable". The court of history will take care of that, and honestly, I bet the next administration, if it conducts itself intelligently and judiciously, will make sure that happens sooner than later (Obama, at any rate, has said he will direct his DOJ to prosecute crimes of the Bush administration).

If you want to respond do it in a realistic way to my points. Or, at least, tell me, to return to the top:
... "what now?" after the impeachment trial fails because it has fallen leagues short of the 66% vote needed in both houses?

...

Or at least tell me if you'll take my 10-1 odds. I could care less that I won't get to vote for Pelosi: I don't need to. Golub doesn't stand a chance; Pelosi will decimate her. And all the rubber chicken wavers will have to go back to their day jobs after trumpeting a cause that was lost before it was adopted. And not feel a tinge of guilt for having expended all that precious energy on achieving real and tangible results where they can be had (and of course building on more from there). Back to their day jobs if they're still there with the economy taking the way it is, that is. Bigger fish to fry eh. Mark my words, Pelosi will win in a landslide while miss ""my only real platform different from Pelosi will be to impeach a guy who will be out of office by the time I'm (not) elected into office"" can go back to trying to get a clue about what's really going on in America (yeah, I read her "Issues" section on her website... 999 out of 1000 DUers know more than she does, and that's not a compliment to the armchair politicos of DU. Sparse info on issues that are dangerously ignorant of the realities of world and domestic affairs. end NAFTA and WTO? Single-Payer in America??? End the War in 90 days (do you actually follow the war???, besides which she'd never succeed at that b/c all 3 pres candidates are saying lengths considerably longer than that---like she'd end the war anyway, yeah, America leaves and the war is over, yeaiiii! sheesh)??? Abolish the Electoral College??? "Education at a young age" (her words) as a way to solve the climate crisis??? She's a hack living in a dream world who doesn't have the slightest idea of what she's up against or what's actually going on in this world, and so is anyone who votes for her (all couple thousand tops I'm betting). Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, and Barack Obama do, and they'll actually get things done, step by step until these steps become real sustainable strides, instead of the Tiny-Tim tippy-toes through the tulips she's selling....

My apologies that it took me all day to respond. I had class this afternoon and then taught this evening, and am only now getting time to get back to you.

Let me begin by saying that I more than anything was replying to the final paragraph of your original post (the one I block quoted) than to your other points. As I'll get into in one second, this engaged me so much because of my beliefs about progressivism. Still, having now re-read the entirety of your original repost more, I can see it in better context, and must say that throughout this campaign cycle I've been asking myself many of the same questions you bring up, albeit while coming to different conclusions. Sorry if I came off gruff in places, to my detriment at times I can get passionate rhetorically, and hope that this didn't give the impression I have of you being sincere and engaged yourself. I saw this especially after just now reading over some of your blogs (good music too by the way ) , so especially here want to emphasize on the one hand that I respect your point of view and on the other I hope our differences of opinion are constructive rather than argumentative, something we can both learn from rather than beg to differ upon. Along that line, I appreciate your reasonable points and thoughtful mood in your rebuttal, and hope ideally that we can have a good influence on each other.

So in reply to your replies...



We're in complete agreement on being with Obama. My added rejoinder is not only that he's the best candidate left, but was the best to begin with. I went over some of my reasons for thinking this in my first post above, though you can also check my journals and profile for more of my reasoning on this. That's not an opinion I had at the race's beginning (like I said I was originally "for" Kucinich, but one I've developed by following Obama's campaign closely and from researching his life, record, vision etc. He's earned my vote and support whole-heartedly, and speaks ultimately to both sides of the "pragmatic-progressivism" balance discussed above that I hold to be so essential.




A series of 'How?' questions. How do we provide vision? I see Obama and his campaign providing as much concrete vision *as it possibly can at this juncture of the campaign*. I mentioned above the three pillars, so to speak of that vision: grass roots organization, transparency in government, and curbing of special interests. A word before expanding on those points though, if these three are the pillar, he is the foundation, one still upheld in my opinion despite a shocking all-pervading juggernaut of an attack by all threatened parties (HRC, the GOP, the MSM, the corporate special interests who control the messages and means of America and much of the world really) to bring him down. It's not just that he's still standing to me, it's that he's not only standing but standing tall and firmer then ever with his resolve and purpose to stand up for what's right. I won't pour out a list of links and info on these, but they're all out there:

(1) The whole success of the campaign has been achieved through well-organized campaigning and reaching out to voters and activists alike on the ground, at levels this country has not seen in contemporary time. I find this that more amazing given the conditions against him especially, how unknown he was, the corporate, capitalist, and conformist machines he's running so stalwartly against, the mind-numbing pundificating and distractions of an MSM that has a lot to lose if he wins (see #2), the deeply embedded fear, bigotry, and lack of responsibility pervading and infecting America that he's been helping heal (don't doubt the power of this--- that GWB won once is enough; that he won twice is a shocking wake up call to the state our citizenry has devloved to; even if those elections were corrupt or stolen, the margin was still close enough to demonstrate how many problems the national psyche has against it). Yet on the ground he and his vision inspire not just "people" but a majority to work together. To unite for a common purpose. Literally millions of American who have never done anything are now galvanized and engaged. I've said it before and will say it again: the ultimate success of his candidacy depends on how successful he is in sustaining this not just through November but through his term of office.

(2) transparency in government, which elides with responsibility of lawmakers to the people and not to themselves or their "bank-rollers". For this I will cite his oft-referenced ideas about the public domain, linking govt documentation with google and other online free information outlets, training the citizenry on how to monitor its investments, etc. His early presentation before google outlined a plan for this that was not only incredibly detailed, but highly practicable and ingenious really. I will cite one source for this (there are many more): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4yVlPqeZwo . This ultimately is about much more than either transparency or even citizenry engagement. It builds on these and extends to forming a constituency among other politicians that will uphold ethics in government (mark here his dedicated and careful work as both State Senator and Senator on Ethics Reform), responsibility in legislation, and accountability at all levels. This translates --and don't doubt that he's already working on this, on phase two of extending the connections built at the grass roots levels and further actuating Dean's 50 state plan-- to the building of consensus among lawmakers, getting corrupt politicians out of office wherever possible, giving better direction to those who need more motivation to promote the common good, and to getting a majority of politicians at every level actively directed to pragmatic achievement of social, political, economic, and humanitarian progress. Never since FDR have we had this much of a chance for this broad a consensus, in my opinion.

(3) Eliminating the choke-hold lobbyists, corporations, special interests etc. have on the government goes without saying; it's the starting point of his stump speech, the basis of his campaign (shattering all records for fund-raising in donor numbers, funds raised, and restrictions on lobbyist influence). It's the glue needed to hold this all together and a daily message of the campaign. I only add that I don't doubt him for an instant that he means this. There will be a new sherriff in town if Obama is elected, and this precisely is why every dirty trick in the book is being used against him. They're terrified, and once it became evident that he actually has a chance to win this thing, immediately following the Potomac primaries and Wisconsin, that he ceased to be the "interest story" media darling and has been fighting off the entire system from every side at every moment since. This will continue, and if he survive this just wait...

Now isn't that an actual vision? Where is the pandering in this? Wright in my opinion, no, by my judgment, was not pandering. Wright went on national TV knowing the entire MSM and all of America would be watching and basically antagonized from every angle. That is divisive, that is destructive, that thwarts instead of constructs. Why praise Farrakhan so unflinchingly? Why continue insisting on conspiracy theories like HIV or the imperialistic Roman soldier equivalent. Some of these could very well be true, and all of them are of course complicated by context, but enough (not all) of the American people have neither a long or honed enough attention span to pick that up, not the historical awareness and critical acumen to process it and unravel the underlying critical content when caught in the matrix of a fast-food electronically-driven, you-tube, sound-bite, evanescent permeability of the instantaneous. all enough of them see is a crazy angry black man and fall for the media programming because this feeds their fear, malcontent, and distrust... I could go more into this, but my main point is Obama did not pander Wright away. Wright unwittingly undermined everything Obama stands for because in the end what he did was divide, not unite, pressure, not assuage, nurse wounds, not heal them. We need to move ahead, that's what progress is, and Wright is tangled in the pains of yesterday. I feel bad for him because much much much of what he said about social injustice was point on. But a doctor heals. This is not just about diagnosis but about treatment. Wright chose to reopen the wounds and in the process couldn't have threatened not just Obama's candidacy more, which is enough, but his vision, which is at this phase irredeemable. Not pandering. Wright earned his exit ticket because he allowed himself to be baited by the very MSM, GOP, HRC, CEO alliance desprate to bring him down.

On his own part, Obama has gotten more and more cautious precisely because he's too smart and aware of what's going on to allow it to happen to him.




I'm exhausted, it's late, so only a quick reply. You misread me on Individualism. Conformity not only subverts but obliterates individualism. I teach Emerson, and he writes "The objection to conforming to usages that have become dead to you is, that is scatters your force. It loses your time and blurs the impression of your character. If you maintain a dead church, contribute to a dead Bible-society, vote with a great party either for the government or against it, spread your table like base house-keepers, --- under all these screens I have difficulty detecting the precise man you are. And, of course, so much force is withdrawn from your proper life. But do your work, and I shall know you. Do your work, and you shall reinforce yourself. A man must consider what a blind man's bluff game is this game of conformity. If I know your sect, I anticipate your argument...." (from "Self-Reliance"). That's very close to what I'm calling for above. And it's also what you wrote about questioning "accepted truths and puts truth and ideas above unity." Unity for unity's sake is dangerous. Very very dangerous. The unified front --a dynamic, socially-engaged, and socially-responsible front-- that I describe in #2 above, that has nothing to do with what you call having the same impulses, and I would argue Obama does not advocate "gut-instinct" political conformo-unity of that ilk (the Colbert Correspondence Dinner Bush "gut" witticism. Nowhere is that present in Obama's platform, character, or vision... or campaign in my opinion). On the contrary, we have a purpose. "your voice can change the world..."




really tired now. I'll leave this one be and just apologize for coming on so hard there. One word to add is that to me my job is indeed also to demand, but to that I add my job is to do. To do in a productive way, do in a way that things get done. Support other minds so that they may not just do, but do responsibly (this is how I teach my college classes, a principle form for me of doing). I want Bush Cheney Rumsfeld Wolfowitz and the whole brigade to burn in hell for their crimes against humanity. They will. Impeachment, however, will not be "done" with this administration, with this congress, with these state legislatures. Maybe the next, retroactively. I pray we get that majority. I believe, and trust that we are ready that we can. Yes we can, yes we will do. And I believe that, when we are our best selves, doing is contagious. The more we do rightly, the more, to build on Old Crusoe's reply below, WE CAN DO, and be.

peace.

(Metaphorical, actually synechdocal question) are you one of those progs pissed all to hell that Pelosi won't impeach Bush? How bout climbing down from that soapbox and telling us HOW SHE WOULD ACTUALLY FREEGIN DO IT WHEN SHE'S SO FAR BENEATH THE NECESSARY NUMBERS....In the meantime, how much money would be wasted? How much TIME? How much damage would the fruitless endeavor do, especially amid the carnival of an MSM media blitz which would undoubtedly undermine and pundificate all the pith and life out of not only it but out of any hope for resistance, healing, and future progress in this country...

Trying to be more reasonable now: ... I want all of these things too. So do Dennis Kucinich (my first choice in this and the last election though only for about a split second before I instinctively knew it ain't never gonna happen) and Ralph Nader--------neither of whom had or will ever have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected to a higher office in this country.

Quit your complaining and your insular isolationism. They not only achieve NOTHING, they set us back because of the intentional fallaciousness of such polarization. Prog values and agendas will never be fulfilled without reaching out to the majority. Denying this is not only living in a dream world, it's narcissistic solipsistic and an epic and oxymoronic waste of good intentions --- worse, actually, in my opinion, for the intentional thwarting of honorable principles and good values.

Mind you, I say that concerning *today's* America. We can get there, or at least somewhere, but not by dividing and denying. Americans will not get out of their cars, stop being so wasteful, shed their fears of spooky spooky socialism enough to adopt single payer, will not elect the majority of representatives needed to raise the taxes to pay for our precious social educational and humanitarian projects and aspirations, etc: they will not do any of things in the majority needed without the right kind of voice, leadership, and citizenship evolution (i.e. PROGRESS) needed to shed the individualist myths and selfish concerns and adopt a new way of thinking.

I write this realizing that individualism is not a myth but a reality, one that has its value (hell, don't we all want to own our home and have a yard and our own space in life for solace and reflection: :never mind that- shouldn't we all work and strive and dream to achieve our best selves, to have the opportunities and freedom to pursue that, to have the capacity of spirit and breadth of self-empowerment to lead autonomous, independent lives?:: and: ideally, isn't it a worthy goal to contribute to the common goal so that all willing to do the work to improve themselves have the mean and ablility to do so? Isn't that waht progressivism, after all, ultimately is?

These are aspects of the American dream that are beautiful and worthy, all the while although these present (1) significant challenges to harmonizing individual paths and social responsibility and (b) significant potential for the corruption of values and responsibility that we are replete with now at this critical juncture of our history. I won't even bring in the racial, social, and identity corollaries here, though be sure that particularly to a progressive, it is here PRECISELY that individualism and social responsibility both assume their own importance as well as the need to achieve an interdependency and reconciliation. That's hard work, and it ain't never never never going to happen through PC thugery, prog isolationism, or libero-mongering.... subverts each one of these purposes actually and presents a demand to ask oneself what they really stand for....)

digressive case-in-point: Clinton, Edwards, and Obama all OBVIOUSLY, so so so OBVIOUSLY want a single payer not for profit health care system. Why do you think those words have never once been uttered on a national stage (YET --- emphasis on yet) since Hillary's crash and burn back in 93?

You want to live in a progressive utopia go move to the Netherlands. Mind you, I am one of the most progressively minded people I know----and i live in SF. But I'm also a pragmatist, and am not so starry eyed and idealized to realize that you have to work with what you have. And Barack Obama has offered the best chance America has had of that actually tasting "progressive" from a viable Presidential candidate.

But yeah, he and his most liberal voting record in Congress are just B.S.

Until you can offer me a realistic achievable plan, I think I'll stick with Obama, and be not only happy and grateful about doing so but also optimistic about his sincere mission to actuate the strategy of grass-roots participation, transparency in govt, and thwarting of special interests needed to but only begin the work. that's only where it begins, and a starting point or commencement is of the utmost importance to any progressive venture. By throwing Wright, who was right in principle but epically wrong in performance and timing 2 days ago, Obama proved he has his eye on one prize at all costs: inviting enough people on board that bus to gain the power needed to empower enough Americans to move us ahead. That's real progressivism. That's pragmatic progressivism... That's why I'm proud to be contributing to and participating in the best chance I've ever seen in my 35 years for real, progressive change in America.

--The billing records showed up "on their own": ...

.

--Urged and urged Bill to intervene in Rwanda:

.

--Didn't know her brothers were paid for Bill's pardons:

.

--Chelsea was jogging at the WTC on 911:

.

--Named after Sir Edmund Hillary: ...

.

--Life-long New York Yankees Fan:

.

--Learned futures market in the Wall Street Journal: ...

.

--picks Penn and Wolfson to run her campaign:

.

--Daily Show breaks with "the cackle" story: ...

.

--"Will honor the DNC nominating calendar":

.


--Plants questions at Iowa debates:

.

--doesn't count.... doesn't count... doesn't count...

.

--"I'm proud proud proud to be standing here with Barack Obama":
------>Shame on you Barack Obama for sending out mailers like mine: ... =

.

13 successive victories by Obama, no congratulations:

.

--"It DOES matter!" ... "Change you can xerox":
. --> (steals "this is personal" in NH from John Edwards) :

.

-- "Maybe you should ask Barack if he wants a pillow":


.

--Boy wouldn't McCain make a better President than Obama:

.

--"The Sky will open ... Celestial choirs will be singing":

.

--Opposed NAFTA at the time it was passed:

.

--Played a central role in the Irish peace deal:

.

--Barack is not, a muslim "as far as I know":

.

--"disagrees" with Ferraro... ... 'sometimes it gets personal':

.

--Landed in sniper fire in Bosnia:

.

--Misspoke because sleep-deprived:

.

--"Rocky and I have a lot in common. I never quit":
.

--Threw her bookbag when MLK was killed / photo op: ...

.

--In this until the end:

reposted from above, because I must....



Do you really think voting for LBJ is enough? Did everything go away that day he passed the Civil Rights Act???

I'm going to completely bypass all the hell the south put African Americans through after the Civil War. Let's just go to the "noble" north, not just right after the civil war but all the way through just one generation previous to our own, well after the passage of the Civil Rights Act. Let's for the moment also suspend all the other forms of ideological as well as legal discrimination and oppression against them and focus solely on redlining, just to show how unfortunate and blind a statement you just made.

Read up on redlining, for the love of god and the right to call yourself a responsible citizen and human being. then come back and then talk to me about “it’s in the past, let’s get over it”. what you wrote was depressing, and you need to take some medicine for making a statement like that.

So here, I'll give you some links to make it easier. I beg of you to read them and come back and rethink what you wrote:

>start you off easy, with Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining
>step up, a PhD dissertaion, in progress, w' plenty of links: http://cml.upenn.edu/redlining/intro.html
>The legal logistics and urban ramifications: http://public-gis.org/reports/redindex.htm...
>Mental & Physical Health repercussions / also does into how the discriminatory practice extends to other ethnic groups: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlere...
>think it's "history"/done with? think again: contemporary redlining: http://wjcohen.home.mindspring.com/usnclip...
... and: http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/79/isurre...
... and: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/1...

These sources don't even begin to skim the surface of the phenomenon. This phenomenon alone -- and its perpetuation in hybrid forms well into the present day---- on its own is a hard pill to swallow. Add to that diet other forms of institutional discrimination and oppression such as gentrification, white flight, restrictive covenants, racial profiling, blockbusting, the list goes on,, add to it these and then ask yourself is this really a closed chapter in our history? I could easily go on, but on the one hand I must quell the indignation that results from seeing someone try to so simply deny, reduce, and diminish not just our real inheritance of very recent history, but contemporary issues that continue to be far from being solved in part because a too sizable portion of our population pretends they have passed, no longer exist, and those oppressed should just move on. On the other hand, I hope this to be an opportunity to educate some of you to rethink your position and ask yourself what notmypresident in reply #2 so acutely points out: ask yourself not how far have we come, but how far do we still have to go.

peace.... and please please please please at least skim a couple of those sources and post back. This is exactly the kind of (1) educating and (2) dialogue which Obama was urging us to enter into in his speech last week.

Is it just about single, one-time votes, or about an awakened political consciousness such as we have never seen before and which could and should be woven into all the fabric of American life, enterprise, responsibility, ingenuity, progress, ideology, hope, faith and creed? Has that money been "wasted", if the party is more energized than it's been in generations, if more people across the board are politically conscious, ethically conscientious, and humanely optimistic for the kind of change the Democratic party is calling for, invested and engaged in this no less? Furthermore, have our primary season efforts really been wasted if these numbers are already galvanized organized and mobilized to bring this into effect, not simply by casting a ballot but by getting involved and helping the cause? Just think, Obama has won more primary votes than any Democratic candidate in U.S. history ever has ----- not just in raw #s, but in proportion to the overall population as well (the youth vote alone, if not disheartened, affords great promise for this nation's future). and guess what: Hillary has too in the hair's breadth behind him. I'd say this is something we should capitalize on through unity, rather than risk losing through internal warfare and strife. This may very well be the most achievable opportunity we have to form the united front that is so vital to this moment in our history and its call that we reinvent ourselves as both a nation and as individuals. --- if concord could be achieved of course.

Yes, those questions of votes, money, candidacies, and "investments" remain to be answered, but they don't strike me as absolutely far-fetched if seen as parts of the greater picture and good the contribute to. Quick point before I go on though, I see good reason for having the doubts of many of the posters on this thread over whether drafting Gore would happen in actuality. I don't see it as so effortlessly simple, though not as so weird unfair or unusual either.

To extend the devil's advocacy though, I've been a staunch Obama supporter ever since Iowa, have donated, have energetically campaigned not on an official level but among all my friends family and acquaintances, and the more I follow the campaign and consider his ideas, and what to me is an authenticity in conceiving and enacting them, I have developed deep loyalty to him and his cause, a loyalty I've never had for another candidate. -- My loyalty to Gore as a humanitarian, as a public servant, as a man of integrity, as voice of reason, and as more respected envoy and representative to the rest of the world than we have had in decades, that would receive due consideration from me should necessity, good sense, and opportunity present themselves, as I think they are.

So, if the party were unanimous on drafting Gore, and if the proposed arrangement were a compromise by which party unity could be achieved, that great a cause and that greater of a good would be something I wouldn't just accept, I'd give it my enthusiastic, full support. Not just because of how profoundly I also believe in Gore's character and integrity, but also because I think he and Obama would make one hell of a team; because I believe Obama would benefit more from Gore's vast experience and expertise than some of us too-sensitively focused on the change-experience meme would like to admit; because Gore I think would be more than receptive--he'd be supportive and energetic about Obama's ideas (grassroots, transparency, ethics reform, social consciousness etc etc) and would very well help build the foundation to make them more secure and integral. And on top of all that, the party would have one hell of a chance to hold power in Washington long enough not only to realize, actualize, and advance all these principles and policies, but also to heal the country, turn the tide of our economic social and individual welfares, secure a SC looking ahead to the 21st century rather than mired in stuffy 20th century ideologies, make a lasting effect on how Washington works, stop the corporate corruption that threatened not simply our personal livelihoods but the environment and humanity's very soul as well, the list goes on, but this is where I get wide-eyed and should remind myself that the purpose of this discussion is devil's advocacy .

The more I think about it, the more I LOVE the idea, though again, I see plenty to consider in the posts of other DUers above who doubt this actually coming about.

...

Great thread all-in-all --- This is the most unified spirit I've seen in GDP in the short time I've been at DU, and that, if anything, is enough to indicate that the idea is worth entertaining at least. True, there has been disagreement, but none of the infighting or name-calling or mania that can, despite many of our better natures, rear its ugly head in just about any other context (beside McBush scorn), and this also is a good sign of how the mere thought of Gore can have a good effect. Go from the possible to the real, and from the micro to the macroscosm, and consider how lasting and comprehensive Gore's positive and constructive influence *could* be ....

Final note: though a passionate Obama supporter, & despite my faith in his character and leadership abilities, I really truly do worry about party unity on the one hand and the right wing attack machine on the other. As we speak, we are experiencing the greatest threats yet of this election cycle from both ends. Gore could very well neutralize each in one fell swoop, and that's something we should all consider. Let's not fool ourselves, Gore's so radically and determinately re-invented himself -- a person who was already a great man, leader, and figure -- that he could offer us the same, all while continuing to evolve himself in partnership with Obama's own acumen and vision.

This post is inspired by garthranzz's own rhetorical analysis of Obama's speech today. I orignally started as a response within the thread, but went pretty far with it, so thought it would be good to post it as its own thread.

If you're interested in or intrigued by the deep and resonant impact Obama's rhetoric has on you, and are convinced it's more than 'just words', read on. Hope you enjoy the ride as much as I enjoyed staging and exploring it:



One thing top of my head I noticed him doing a lot throughout the speech was juxtaposing phrases and even sometimes clauses of equal length (called "isocolon"). It's a rhetorical structure that brings things together and magnifies their similarity and/or commonality, something quite important in this speech, and he used them masterfully at key moments. The most masterful one to me came when he juxtaposed not being able to condemn Wright any more than his grandmother. The whole structure merits a closer look:

<snip>
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

...

Notice the two parallel clauses in the first sentence. Besides being of equal length and sharing the same compact rhythm, they unite the two prevailing themes and conditions of the prior paragraph, making them integral to each other as they are (the best rhetoric, and that which is simultaneously most authentic and ethical, is that which mirrors both reality and your thesis on it).

But he doesn't stop there; the same predication structure is then transferred, unexpectedly, to his grandmother. This surprise rhetorical turn is impacted masterfully by further isocola, first by means of (1) opposition in the switch from black to white, reinforced by the intimation of his grandmother's bond to him, and then from there by means of (2) apposition building on this via the long, 2 part, appositive phrase elaborating on the significance of this figure within the frame of the larger idea,, in its two complex associative vs. dissociating dimensions, and then also, for both, by means of (3) stacked adjectival phrases ("who...") which complement our picture of the character (his grandmother) even as they heighten the sense of paradox which typifies this entire situation. Remember, in a paradox two opposite things are true; we try to acknowledge this complexity to if not make peace with it, then to recognize and work with the truth on both sides of the equation----which is why isocolon is so effective here.

Note, for the first associative dimension, how further isocola expand our impression of his grandmother intimating qualities. For this first, warm half of the phrase Obama pulls the syntax together, makes it intimate on the one hand by making himself the syntactic "object" of each transitive verb ("helped raise me", "sacrificed ... for me", and "loves me") and on the other by increasing the length of each successive phrase (in rhetoric called a "crescendo"--you can feel the feeling behind it swell) to emphasize that bond; this he does first with a simple adverbial phrase, itself an isocolon ("again and again") and then with a conjunctive comparative phrase, another isocolon ("loves me as much as she loves..."). In sustaining this syntactic and semantic bond (literally and figuratively), these devices render a compelling impression of her meaning not just to him, but to the greater purpose here.

But, this all turns out to be setting-up the powerful final portion where it all comes together. It starts with the emphatic "BUT" at the center of the entire appositive phrase, almost a 'core' for the core principle and point's greater idea. Whereas the first half accentuated a tight 'subject-verb-object' bond between the speaker and his grandmother, this second half emphasizes the difficulties of the difference between them. Over and above the simple removal of "me" from this second half, Obama continues to use isocolon to build his point. This he makes more complex, so as to represent the complexity of this final "dissociative" dimension of the paradox. This time, instead of building "S-V-O" sentence structures through simple phrasal modification, Obama adds a clause to each point. This parallelism resonates both syntactically and semantically, juxtaposing yet dividing the characters under discussion: first "a women who ... black men who" , then the more complex "who has uttered ... that made me cringe." Now observe the displacement of both thematic and grammatical objects. In the first half of the appositive Obama used intimate, physical verbs ("loved", "sacrificed" etc), verbs which united both in body and spirit. In these dimensions "true, authentic" relationship dominate the idea. Now, verbs of speech *separate* both sense and logic, fear and intent. So she "confesses" and "has uttered", never actually connecting, but dividing. Finally, note how he at last *breaks* the intricate chain of isocola in the coda at the very end by (1) for the first time not repeating "woman" (a sort of anti-emphatic) and then by (2) separating subject ("who") and predicate with the emphatic "on more than one occasion". The parallels, it turns out, halt. This abrupt change in rhythm as well as in syntax and in *effect* makes the impact that much more powerful: we rhetorically *feel* what it likes to be the object of a slur uttered against you. It's not just Obama that's cringing, but the words themselves. Because his own grandmother is the offending party here, we feel the impact that much more acutely, which means that the paradox has entered our system.

...

masterful. some of the most effective rhetoric I've ever analyzed -- if you read my profile and were wondering what I meant about the difference between authentic, ethical rhetoric and vacuous, shifty sophistry: this is it. Remember the end point: EVERYTHING in the above section sets up the actual point of all this:

-------- "These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love."