It is probably the best kept secret in the blogosphere, but remember back when Presidential candidate Barack Obama called a reporter Sweetie? Then he apologized and promised to give her an interview later. Well, someone left a message on a thread here earlier today saying Agar was going to get her interview. But when I googled it, I found out the interview had already taken place–back in June.

What did Peggy Agar want to ask a presidential candidate back in May?

I wanted to ask him what he plans on doing for, you know, auto workers in America, which of course specifically means Detroit…. you know, he’s shaking hands with auto workers, he’s running for president, he hasn’t been here in ten months, you know. That’s the time to say what you’re gonna do for these people, how you’re going to help them keep their jobs and keep their homes.

When the interview did take place on June 2, that’s exactly what Agar asked him about. Then she went on to ask about seating the Michigan delegates at the Denver convention, about education for Michigan’s children, continuing with questions about how his answers for Michigan differed from McCain’s.

Early in the interview, she even got a laugh from him

AGAR: Most people I think are probably saying now that they think you’ll have the nomination. If that does come to fruition, do you think Hillary Clinton will vote for you?

OBAMA: Yes, I do.

Not a difficult or hostile interview, and not one that asked any tough questions, but to the point and done in a way that let him give his prepared answers to the issues. About what you would expect from a local reporter in a major metropolitan area–if one who got an unexpected 15 minutes of fame.  And since everyone wants to comment on how women look these days, let me just say that Agar looked very put together and so did Obama.

Transcript and video here.

I get all my best rumors from McDonald’s on the South Side of Chicago. Today I was drinking my coffee while at the table on the other side of the tray return area came the following conversation from a group of African Americans:

“I’m a Republican.”
“You shoulda voted Democrat, you’d have a check comin’.”
(The Republican leaves.)
“Whether he’s Republican or Democrat, he’s got a check comin’.”

Last night I turned on the television long enough to hear McCain’s concession speech and Obama’s victory speech.  And of course between speeches the pundits had a little time to fill.  “A historic candidate”, they said about Obama.  Changing channels, “…historic…”  Changing channels again, “..historic…”.  Well, at least they all agree.

Today the pundits are asking who will be on the staff of the executive branch. Good question. Currently the the United States ranks 69^th in the world with regard to women in government.

Surely the new president who says he wants to unite people will have an inclusive staff? Doesn’t look like it. Obama’s people say there “aren’t enough qualified women” and call the idea “stupid”.

After the last Democratic Primary was over and it was clear Senator Clinton was not going to get the Democratic nomination, myself, and a small group of Clinton supporters met with Senator McCain.I personally explained to Senator McCain that women comprise well over half of the population, yet you will not see a single picture of a woman on paper currency. Women are underrepresented in every branch of government and there has never been a female president or vice president. I personally asked Senator McCain to choose a woman for the Vice Presidential slot and to increase the number of women in the cabinet and on the Supreme Court. Senator McCain listened respectfully to my request. Little did I know then that he heard me and the millions of women of this country who have gone unrepresented in the Executive branch of government for far too long.

When I made similar requests of the Obama campaign, I was laughed at by the canvassers outside my home, told there weren’t enough qualified women by a member of his Finance Committee, and asked by a member of a policy committee why I was making such a stupid request.

But that’s just the finance and policy staff, right? Obama himself really stands for fairness, doesn’t he?  Maybe not.

Obama’s female staffers, on average, make just 83 cents to the dollar his male staffers make.

Ooops.  And it looks like Vice President Elect Biden’s pay practices are even worse. Despite the fact that Biden employs 27 women and only 14 men (could that be a Clinton problem?), very few of the women and men share common titles.  The one job where there is overlap is staff assistants.  These are traditionally entry level low-wage jobs in congressional offices.

So how do Biden’s salaries stack up?

The average male staff assistant in Biden’s office (based on the most recent salary figures) made $39,162 in the time period.

The average woman in that position made $21,323.

McCain’s promise:

By the end of my first term, I promise you will see a dramatic increase in the presence of women in every part of the government. You have my word on it.

For those of us who don’t have a trust fund, this could be a looooong four years.
(Thanks to Madamab at The Confluence)

Waiting for the election results can be tedious.  And how to keep track of those pesky electoral votes as the states are called.  Here is a little electoral map with plenty of space for doodles.  You can color the states in as they turn red or blue.  If you prefer jpeg format, for importing to a Word document or whatever, a slightly higher resolution is here.

Me?  The weather is perfect for a little stroll by the lake.

Last night I wrote a post about Chad Micheal Morisette in West Hollywood, California who thinks lynching Sarah Palin is nifty Halloween art.

Already this morning I had a creepy comment. Someone with the handle “Buzzometer” left a message saying:

If only this was real!

Now this isn’t exactly a political blog. Sometimes something about politics catches my eye and has enough depth to write about it, but only when it intersects with culture or language or the general topic of understanding between divergent groups of people. When I wrote about Barack Obama’s church, long before it became popular to do so, and then wrote about it again after attending a service, I got a range of comments, some of them difficult to process, but all of them sincere.  Many had strenuous disagreements, but none of them said they wished Obama dead.

So who exactly is this “Buzzometer”? A quick check of Arin’s Whois shows an IP address from Comcast in Mount Laurel, New Jersey. And another search shows the IP is listed on a spam database. Spammers, huh. But even more interesting, he left his blog address and his email address, even though none of that is required to post a comment. Apparently he (yes, the name is male) doesn’t see anything at all wrong with what he is saying and isn’t worried in the least about having his name associated with that comment.

Oh, and the website?  Well, I’m happy to say that although he left a link, absolutely NOBODY has clicked on it.  But just for giggles, if someone were to click on it this is what they would see.  The title “Buzzometer (DOT)net” , and the subtitle “internet buzz, measured rectally”.  Yeah, I bet. It’s nothing but a series of polls. Clicking through one of the polls will lead you to an advertisement, the same one, no matter which poll you click :

And who are the corporate sponsors for this little gem of a website (whose archives go back a whole two months)? One is Consumer Incentive Promotions with an address in Davie, FL. The other appears to be FedEx, whose name is also featured prominently on the page.

I wonder if either Consumer Incentive Promotions or FedEx is aware that someone is using their corporate brands to wish for a genuine Sarah Palin lynching.

Whatever you think of Sarah Palin’s politics, there is no excuse for the hate speech that has been unleashed against her.   The latest is some guy in West Hollywood, California, Chad Michael Morrisette, who thinks hanging Sarah Palin with a noose makes for good art.  Is anyone else as dumbfounded by this as I am?  Here is the link.

Listen to the video too. The guy who put it up, Chad Michael Morrisette, says:

I know if we had done it with Barack Obama people probably would have thrown things through our windows…I mean, the image of a hanged black man is a LOT more intense than the image of a hanged white woman…

I am thinking of one person who has the eloquence to talk about this disgraceful episode in the way it deserves to be talked about.

A year ago, a certain candidate for president stood up for justice in Jena , Alabama :

Today I stand with those who stand for justice in Jena. The thousands of Americans from every race and region who have descended on this small Louisiana town carry forth the legacy of all those who sat at lunch counters and took freedom rides to strike a blow against injustice wherever it may exist. When a noose hangs from a schoolyard tree in the 21st century and young men are treated in a way that is not equal nor just, it is not just an offense to the people of Jena or to the African-American community, it is an offense to the ideals we hold as Americans. I renew my call for the District Attorney to drop the excessive charges filed in this case, and I will continue my decades-long fight against injustice and division as President.

Yes, it was Barack Obama who uttered those words.

During the last presidential debate John McCain was asked whether he approved of threats that Barack Obama said were shouted at his rallies (the accusation was later found to be untrue). McCain unequivocally said he did not.

Then McCain brought up the t-shirts (language alert) with degrading slogans (NSFW) worn by Obama’s fans. Obama talked and talked around the issue, but could not bring himself to say he did not approve.

Now imagine this scenario–Obama makes the following statement about the Sarah Palin noose:

When a noose hangs from the roof of a house in the 21st century and young women are treated in a way that is not equal nor just, it is not just an offense to the people of West California or to the women and girls of this nation, it is an offense to the ideals we hold as Americans.

Does anyone think Barack Obama is ready to utter these words as part of his  “decades-long fight against injustice and division” at this particular moment in time? Will Barack Obama stand with those who stand for justice?

Nope. Not gonna happen.

As the stock market dropped 770-some points today, the blogosphere trembled with rhetoric. Citizens called their elected officials by the droves, and most expressed opposition to a bailout–at least 80% and maybe more, depending on who you ask.  In Indiana today I saw the following impromptu demonstration and stopped to see what was going on.

Protestors were holding up signs that said “No bailouts for banks”, “Constitution R.I.P.”, and “Capitalism Works”. Quite a few cars were honking as they passed by. I asked one of the demonstrators about how they came to be out there together. They first met at a political meetup for Ron Paul supporters. The crisis is real, they told me, but it’s not up to the government to rescue someone who makes a bad financial decision, especially if it’s a big company. People shouldn’t borrow money they can’t pay back, they said. People who got mortgages with balloon payments made a mistake. There should be consequences for bad decisions.

Also they said I should look up Davy Crockett and “not yours to give”. The “Davy Crockett” speech, which apparently he never gave, is basically a rehash of the Libertarian position that the government is not authorized by the Constitution to tax. Of course it’s not true.  The 16th amendment settled that one, if there ever was any doubt, and the Constitution also says the federal government can provide for the “general welfare”. So those highway appropriations will just keep on coming. And Libertarians don’t really mean all that stuff about taxes anyhow.  Libertarians like Ron Paul manage to inserted earmarks into bills they know are going to pass, even if they maintain political “purity” by later voting against those bills.

But taxation isn’t my biggest beef with the Libertarians.  It their dogma-based approach to government.  Libertarians start with a premise about how the world should be–and based on what?–then work backwards to how the government actions should be in accordance with the premise.  I’m a bit more pragmatic.  Instead of trying to decide who should be punished in this economic mess, and how many innocent people have to suffer in order to punish the ones who violated a certain political code that no one explained in advance, I prefer to look ahead to what results might be achieved and the steps to make those results happen.  As soon as I figure out what that is, be sure that I will post it right here first thing.

A few months ago someone named GeekLove08 left a message on this blog asking me to post a link to their new video. I don’t consider this to be a political blog as such, but when I saw the video, I had to write a post about it.  The video is of Hillary Clinton clad in a demure pastel pink outfit that I wouldn’t be caught dead in, giving a speech to a women’s rights convention in China, with a Dvorak string instrumental in the background. As the violins soothe and Hillary’s voice intones words of healing

“…there is far more that unites us than divides us…we share a common future and we are here to find common ground…”

a montage of gender-based hate speech images from the current presidential campaign marches across the screen in stark ugliness. If you haven’t seen it yet you might go over and favorite it.

Today I found out that Geeklove’s Come a Long Way blog on blogspot.com, along with several pro-Hillary blogs listed on Just Say no Deal, had been forced out of the blogosphere in a rather ugly episode so typical of this campaign cycle. The blog has since been moved to WordPress.

While Hillary had already suspended her campaign at the time of the attack, the blogs in question had buttons with links to help Hillary pay down her campaign debt.  Now who would want to prevent Hillary’s campaign debt from being paid?

I may have had a close call myself. A few days before the attacks on the other blogs, a pro-Obama website linked to this website and tried make some kind of claim they knew who I was and what my political views were. كَلْب  Why they consider me to be so noteworthy I do not know. I discuss it further |here|.

For those who thought McCain’s nomination of Sarah Palin for VP was all about picking up any of Hillary’s old supporters still on the loose, maybe it is more about picking up the religious right.

Obama’s recent shift to the right on FISA, abortion, and offshore drilling was about trying to pick up this group of evangelicals.  The more that comes out about Palin, the more she seems to fit the far right mold of those in the Republican party who are ticked off at McCain’s lack of ideological purity.

The guy on Red State Update , after ogling her photo, may be putting it more accurately than he thought when he says.”You know you can’t vote for her without voting for McCain too,” and his friend answers, “There’s always a catch.”

Don’t talk about fairness, Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin advises Hillary.

“…when I hear a statement like that coming from any woman candidate with any kind of a perceived whine about that excess criticism or a sharper microscope put on her that doesn’t do us any good.

Women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country. I don’t think it bodes well for her because a statement like that, again fair or unfair it is a reality, and I think it’s a given.”

In other words, says Palin, don’t mention the double standard, don’t point out misogyny, don’t rock the boat, don’t try to set healthy boundaries. Just work harder and be a good sheep.

Bull.

When Martin Luther King gave his “I have a dream” speech, did he worry about a “perceived whine”? When a certain radio personality referred to a women’s basketball team as prostitutes did Marc Morial of the National Urban League worry about a “perceived whine” when he responded, “It’s important that we stand with the women of Rutgers who are deeply hurt by the highly insensitive comments of Don Imus.” Would we have ever had an Emancipation proclamation if Abraham Lincoln had said, “whether slavery is fair or unfair, it’s a reality, it’s a given.”

Governor Palin is out of touch.

Maybe being governmor has given Sarah Palin a different perspective on things. Maybe living in a governor’s mansion, she doesn’t get dissed a lot. Or maybe she is just so cute, with winning beauty contests and all, that she can just bat her eyelashes and guys forget to be crude to her. Not every woman is lucky enough to be born beautiful or rich or even smart, and time and age can take away all of those advantages.

Hillary Clinton is not out of touch. True, she is richer than most of us, and lives a privileged life compared to most of us, but that doesn’t stop her from staying in touch with what American women are thinking and experiencing. Before Hillary decided to make an issue about the way her campaign was being represented, she did something I bet Sarah Palin never thought of. She asked ordinary women what they thought. And when the democratic leadership was writing a platform that was supposed to include a statement condemning hate speech against women, she got in touch with her mailing list again and asked them what they thought.

So when Hillary stands up and speaks out against the hatred, the gender-based attacks, and the just plain vulgar and crude anatomical remarks that have been the hallmark of the campaign against her, she is not just speaking for herself. She is speaking for all of us.

The character and integrity Hillary Clinton has shown in speaking out is something that can never be taken away from her.

Free Speech.

Does free speech means you can say whatever you want as long as it’s away from anyone who might be disturbed by the content of the message? I don’t think so. The whole idea of free speech is to have your message out where people can hear it.

Here’s where today’s march for Hillary supporters was shunted to.

This is what a marching permit gives you in Denver this week–at least for Hillary supporters. Down an alley and into this bit of sidewalk. A huge parking lot separates the marchers from anyone who might inadvertently catch a glimpse of a Hillary rally sign.

This is what Democracy looks like.

If you bumped into a presidential candidate in the hallway, what would you want to ask?

I can think of a dozen possibly unanswerable questions for a third party candidate like Cynthia McKinney.

• First of all, is the political process even meaningful any more? It’s getting harder and harder to tell the parties apart. And isn’t the selection process largely determined by the corporations that make the large contributions and the media pundits that decide which film clips to use–and which ones, both good or embarrassing, to bury?
• Does a third party do anything more than act as a spoiler, taking votes away from a more viable candidate with a similar platform?
• Do third parties shift the priorities of the major parties, if so how, and is it a Good Thing?
• Why would someone want to work with a group like the Greens, as opposed trying to inject their political views into a more mainstream group?
• Are the Greens just a bunch of crackpots? Greens are all over the world now, but are there just crackpots all over the world?
• The Green party was rumored today to be in financial trouble. Are they serious about their political views or are they just playing? How will they get their message across without money?

I pondered all of this while walking around the city of Chicago today as the Green Party was wrapping up its 2008 presidential nominating convention over at the Palmer House. Yesterday they nominated Cynthia McKinney as their candidate, but I was at work during all the official news conferences and when all the speeches were being given.

I have seen other presidential candidates speak, why not this one? Maybe if I wandered around the hotel I would accidentally bump into her. The concierge had no information, but a hot rumor sent me to this room, with a sign on the door saying “do not enter, taping in progress”. Aha! Taping what? And through a crack in the door I could see cameras on tripods. Sure enough, eventually someone walked out of the room who looked a whole lot like McKinney. Was it her? A guy walking next to her introduced her to me as the next president of the United States. Eureka! So I asked if I could take her picture.

Then I asked what she wanted to accomplish by running for president…with the camera running:

“I would like to build a movement…

one, an outreach party

…we have been failed terribly by the two corporate parties…

And I’d like to build a movement

for justice

and of course

respect for this planet.

Yeah.”

It was all a hoax, but the Arab world keeps talking about it all the same.

A report that an aide to presidential candidate John McCain wants to turn Jordan into a Palestinian state is apparently a hoax. It was reported widely in the Arab world that Robert Kagan had given a speech at a New York university that advocated turning Jordan into a Palestinian state. But Kagan denies making the statement or even that such a speech took place. The university in question can find no record of any such event where such a speech might have been given.

The speech was reported by news tabloid service Ammonnews, but it was later revealed the information came from the Israeli site Filkka Israel.

In case there is any question about the agenda of the above Arab-language blog, they list (in English) one of their goals as “Destroying the kingdom of Jordan peacefully and bringing back its land to its normal situation as a part of great Palestine.” They have also been known to write dubious stories about such topics as “Saudi Ambassador Saves 3 Mossad Agents but a 4th is still in Beirut [6/15/2008] as well as stories about Israeli intelligence borrowing cars from the wives of Hizbullah members”. Hee, hee, hee.

The above Arab language blog post is translated, rather laboriously, as might be expected with machine translation, with the FoxLingo toolbar as follows:

John McCain Adviser for Foreign Affairs: John built a solid option Jordanian final solution for the Palestinians. نيويورك - جاين بيتيفت New York - Jane Ketevan

خلال محاضرة ترويجية لأفكار المرشح الجمهوري للرئاسة الأميركية جون ماكين في قاعة ألمرت هولمز بوبست في جامعة نيويورك . During the lecture promotional ideas for the Republican presidential candidate John McCain at the American Chamber salary Holmes Stopes at the University of New York. وأمام الآلاف من الطلاب والأكاديميين أعلن الخبير في شؤون الجغرافيا السياسية والسياسات الدولية روبرت كاغان وهو يشكل مع ويليام كريستول الفريق المكلف بتقدم تصور مفصل لإستراتيجية السياسة الخارجية في الشرق الأوسط للمرشح الجمهوري . Faced with thousands of students and academics announced expert in the affairs of political geography and international policies Robert Flanagan It is with William Kristol team progress to imagine a detailed strategy for foreign policy in the Middle East for the Republican candidate.
أعلن روبرت كاغان أن المرشح الرئاسي عن الجمهوريين قد تبنى بالفعل إستراتيجية الخيار الأردني للتخلص من العبء الذي تشكله قضية النزاع الفلسطيني الإسرائيلي حول الأراضي في الضفة الغربية على السياسة العامة للولايات المتحدة في الشرق الأوسط. Robert Flanagan announced that the presidential candidate of the Republican strategy has already built the Jordanian option to get rid of the burden posed by the issue of Palestinian-Israeli dispute over land in the West Bank on the public policy of the United States in the Middle East. الخبير المعروف في الشؤون الدولية والمحسوب على الصقور المسماة ” نيو كون ” قال بأن السياسة الأميركية الخارجية مع جون ماكين ستأخذ منحى مباشرا للتعامل مع القضية بشكل يريح المنطقة ودولها للتفرغ بمعاونة الأميركيين لنشر الديمقراطية ومحاربة إرهاب الإسلام الفاشي. Known expert in international affairs and calculated the hawks, called “New fact”, he said that U.S. foreign policy with John McCain will take direct action to deal with the issue and its comfort zone for full-time help of the Americans to spread democracy and fight terrorism fascist Islam. وفي شرحه للإستراتيجية الجديدة قال: In his explanation of the new strategy, he said:
الأردن هو الوطن الطبيعي لملايين الفلسطينيين من سكانه وكذلك هو الحل الأمثل لقضية اللاجئين الذين ذاب أغلبهم في المجتمعات التي يقيمون فيها ولكن البقية ممن تعيش في المخيمات سيكون عليها الإختيار بين البقاء في أماكنها أو الإستيطان في الأراضي الفلسطينية شرق الأردن . Jordan is the natural home for millions of Palestinians of the population and also is the best solution to the issue of refugees who have mostly melted away in the communities in which they reside, but the rest of those who live in the camps will have to choose between staying in place or settle in the Palestinian territories east of Jordan. وقد أثار إ‘ستخدام روبرت كاغان لتعبير ” الأراضي الفلسطينية شرق الأردن ” وهو الخبير الأميركي المعروف بأنه كاتب إستراتيجيات عدة بخصوص الدول العربية إستفادت منها الإدارة الأميركية برئاسة جورج بوش وهو مقرب منها، أثار إستغراب الأكادميين الحاضرين فوجه أحدهم سؤال لكاغان فور إتاحة الفرصة له وقال: The effects of a ‘Khaddam Robert Flanagan of the term “Palestinian land east of Jordan” which is known to be an American expert writer strategies regarding several Arab countries benefited from the American administration headed by George W. Bush is close, the effects of amazement academic attendees drew one of them asked Flanagan soon allow him and said:
هل يعني ذلك أن الضفة وغزة لن تكونا مكانا لدولة فلسطينية مستقبلية وفقا لإعلان جورج بوش العام 2003؟ Does this mean that the West Bank and Gaza will not be a place for a future Palestinian state, according to George Bush declared the year 2003? فأجاب كاغان: Agha replied:
الأردن يضم أغلبية فلسطينية ومن الطبيعي حين نتحدث عن الدمقراطية أن تحكم الأغلبية في بلدها، وبالتالي لن يكون هناك حاجة لدولة أخرى لأنها بالفعل موجودة وهي قائمة ويمكن للعائلة الهاشمية أن تبقى في الملك إن أراد الشعب الفلسطيني ذلك، أما عن الضفة الغربية فمشكلتها بسيطة، التجمعات السكانية الإسرائيلية تبقى جزءا من دولة إسرائيل والتجمعات السكانية الفلسطينية يتم تبادل الأراضي فيما بينها وبين إسرائيل حيث هي غير قابلة للتواصل مع الدولة الفلسطينية شرق الأردن والباقي يصبح جزءا من فلسطين التي تمتد من حدود العراق إلى حدود إسرائيل. Jordan has a majority Palestinian Of course when we talk about Damaqratih that govern the majority in the country, and therefore there will be no need for another country because it already exists a list of the family can remain in the Hashemite king that he wanted the Palestinian people, either from the West Bank problem is simple, residential areas Israel remains part of the State of Israel and the Palestinian population centres are exchanging land between them and Israel, where they are not continue with a Palestinian state east of Jordan and the rest become part of Palestine which extends from Iraq’s borders to the borders of Israel.
سؤال آخر وجه لكاغان عن غزة فقال: هاواي تبعد الاف الأميال عن الأراضي الأميركية ورغم ذلك هي جزء من هذه البلاد . Another question to face Flanagan said from Gaza: Hawaii thousands of miles away from U.S. territory, although it is part of this country. طالب أردني إعترض على كاغان وقال له بأنه من أصل فلسطيني ولا يوافقه الرأي فأجابه : Jordanian student objected to the songs and told him that, of Palestinian origin does not share his opinion replied:
وأنا لا أوافقك الرأي ايضا …لقد أصبحنا متعادلين ويمكننا أن نكون أصدقاء ما أثار الضحك في القاعة . I do not share his ideas … We are also equivalent and we can be friends as the effects of laughter in the hall.

Here are the two photographs that appear on the blog with the hoax:

And who might Robert Kagan be? He is one of the neoconservatives (as opposed to “pragmatists”) currently vying for McCain’s favor, although he claims he is not a Straussian. That appears to be his photo on the right. Here is a podcast of him speaking about his book The Return of History, and the video of an interview with Charlie Rose here.

And who might be the other photo? Is it “Jane Ketevan”, the purported author of the piece? No Google hits on that name. What about spelling it more like the Arabic spelling–”Jane Beteft”? Still no hits. if you click on the photo in the original blog and check the properties, it gives the information “pitfieldmain.jpg”. Could this be a photo of Canadian politician Jane Pitfield, who once ran for mayor of Toronto? Could be. Maybe a really old photo of her. This “destroy Jordan” thing doesn’t sound like the type of thing she would be interested in though.

Oh, but what does it mean? By now everyone in the Arab world has figured out the whole thing was a fake, but they keep talking about it just the same. Does anything happen by accident over there?

Maybe it’s an attempt to discredit Kagan and the neocons ahead of the U.S. elections–after all, Kagan’s brother is the architect of the Iraqi “surge”. Or maybe it is a another push towards Palestinian statehood, as the clock keeps ticking on the American political window of opportunity for George W. Bush. Bush could set it up for McCain, so McCain can ride the euphoria of an apparent Middle East resolution into the November elections without incurring blame or displeasure from the conservative Jewish vote.

What IS the Bush administration doing about Palestinian statehood???

The blogosphere is all atwitter about the latest Obama book just released yesterday, Jerome Corsi’s Obama Nation.  Supposedly, snarky Obamabot bookstore employees are intentionally keeping the thing hidden away, while wildfire rumors had it as number one on the New York Times bestseller list before it was even released.  Spare me the drama.  A quick glance at the NYT shows it’s not even in the top 20 non-fiction hardcovers, although it’s currently in Amazon’s number 5 position, in a list that’s updated hourly.

No, I’m not going to read it, and here’s why.  First of all the title should tell you everything you need to know about the author’s viewpoint.  Obama Nation=”Abomination”.  Hardly original and not funny.  No one is perfect, especially politicians,  but no one deserves to be demonized either, and this is clearly meant to be a demonizing book.

A little quick googling shows me Corsi was also the author of the Swift Boat attack book against John Kerry back in 2004–or rather co-author. The accuracy of that book was disputed, and this one seems to be full of factual errors, particularly about Obama’s positions, as well.  Not that Obama people don’t do the same thing–last weekend I was approached by an Obama supporter registering voters who used the “McCain wants 100 years of war” talking point.  I have read McCain’s exact words and that’s not what he said at all–he was talking about military bases.

A little more digging yields the following Corsi quotations:

• Corsi on Islam: “a worthless, dangerous Satanic religion”

• Corsi on Catholicism: “Boy buggering in both Islam and Catholicism is okay with the Pope as long as it isn’t reported by the liberal press”

• Corsi on Muslims: “RAGHEADS are Boy-Bumpers as clearly as they are Women-Haters — it all goes together”

• Corsi on “John F*ing Commie Kerry”: “After he married TerRAHsa, didn’t John Kerry begin practicing Judiasm? He also has paternal grandparents that were Jewish. What religion is John Kerry?”

• Corsi on Senator “FAT HOG” Clinton: “Anybody ask why HELLary couldn’t keep BJ Bill satisfied? Not lesbo or anything, is she?”

If that isn’t hate speech, I don’t know what is.

To top it off, Corsi is a leading fearmonger of the North American Union conspiracy theory as well as the Amero conspiracy theory.  That’s just too tin foil hat for me.

For anyone who prefers something a little more factual, I recommend the Chicago Trib’s biography of Obama.  It doesn’t sugarcoat anything, and it’s free. Or read Obama’s own books.  I would check them out of the library though, instead of giving the money to Obama.

As a disclosure, I have to say Obama is my senator, quite a good one, and I have voted for him more than once. That doesn’t mean there aren’t serious concerns about him now.  For instance, (1) voting for the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 and voting to cut off debate on the bill, when he promised very publicly to vote against it and support Senator Dodd’s filibuster, (2) changing his position on reproductive rights and women’s health, (3) changing his position on off-shore oil drilling, and (4) statements that Jerusalem should be the undivided capitol of Israel.  If anyone is running for “Bush’s third term”, it isn’t McCain.  It’s Obama.

But Obama’s most serious problem is still his acquiescence in some of the worst misogyny ever seen in American politics.  And he hasn’t learned, either.  Listen to him speak.  In Berlin, or in the more recent speeches, whenever he starts his familiar refrain about ending divisiveness between this group and that group and the other group, one group is always glaringly left out.  Yes, gender.  Obama never talks about healing the nation’s divisions by gender.   I wonder why that is.