Search This Blog

Friday, April 25, 2008

Obama Rah Rah Rah --- Mark Crispin Miller: I'm now a tacit Bush supporter.

I've been a huge fan of Mark's and have attended 3 of his shows in NYC. I also invited him to speak at Hunter College of Social Work which he did and my FIRST KGB reading way back when, which was a wonderful presentation. So now, I think probably he's blocked me from receiving his newsletter because he's bought the OBAMA-PROGRESSIVE CHANGE hype I don't buy. And not because I'm a fan of Clinton's. I've told everyone: I'm not a fan of H R Clinton's. For awhile, I said I was opting for her, as I couldn't tolerate (and still can't tolerate) the misogynistic remarks by the Press and others. Then, I said NO. I can't believe in either "Democrat" as someone I'd be content to support. But that's no good. According to Miller, who's now (apparently) gone WOW WOW OBAMA, I'm a tacit Bush supporter.

Here's the exchange. In response to his dissemation of:
"I believe you might enjoy my article Clintons' Blind Eye to Voters at OpEdNews:

"Even Hillary's endorser, Bobby Kennedy, Jr., knows there's something funny
about the pattern of her wins."

Barbara Bellows-TerraNova"

I responded:

Ho Hum. Whenever Clinton wins, there's even more "Hillary" bashing. Well not really. Whenever she loses, everyone wants to shoo her out of the race, so Obama the alleged progressive (whose mentor was hawk Lieberman & who voted for the Patriot Act, and who has a plenty of corporate ties) will be the only candidate. Crap. Btw, why don't people call Obama by his first name? I'm tearing my hairs out, as I don't like any of the candidates and i'm well aware of Machiavellian Repugnican maneuvers, but I'm so so tired of the "Hillary" bashings. And both "Democratic" candidates have run negative campaigns. So get off your lame horses already! What else is new in Ameerica? Where's the leadership of the D party? What's Dean doing? Get over it!

And here was Mark's reply:

You're for Clinton--in fact, you think you are Clinton--so anything
her campaign does is okay.

Between you and a fervent Bush supporter there's no difference.


So then, I responded but got no answer, and I've received no posts from the group or a personal reply from Mark. So what am I to think? Here was my answer:

You're misreading me, Mark, and I don't know why. I'm not for Clinton. I said that. And I'm certainly NOT Clinton. That's a strange accusation.. At one point, I decided to back her, reluctantly, due to all the misogynistic attacks. Then I just couldn't. She's way too conservative for my tastes. I think C and O both play dirty and I hate her campaign. And I've said that. I just don't like the fact that Obama's hoodwinked lots of people into thinking he's progressive when he's not. If he gets in (and I'll vote for him if he's the nominee), I'm afraid he's going to disappoint lots of people. What's wrong with questioning people's assumptions? You do that. But when I say anything negative about Obama, I get skewered. What's going on?


Where are we at? I'm very much an admirer of Mark and I definitely believe that the last two elections were stolen. But I don't know what to do with Obama bandwagon stereotyping. Face it, friends. Neither candidate is progressive. Neither is what we need: an intense, heart/mind driven, ideologically/philosophically driven candidate who's going to MAKE A DIFFERENCE and even do whatever s/he can to ensure that global warming is (if possible) reversed. I AM SO SO TIRED OF OBAMA SUPPORTERS WHO LABEL ME A BUSHkike CONSERVATIVE or otherwise dismiss me totally FOR QUESTIONING HIS VERACITY.


Michael Andre said...

It seems sad at the moment that the cheerful possibility of the election of a woman or a black man has now succumbed to bleak and nasty identity politics. Yet all may right itself. The dice are still rolling.

David Novack said...

I have strong positive feelings and strong negatives for both Democrats. If we use climate change as one platform to put under a microscope, we see that coal and utility interests are in the pockets of all three candidates (including Obama) and none have put forth the only real policy for change - a moratorium on new coal plants and gradual reduction in existing plants, replaced by renewables and efficiency. The CNN presidential debates are sponsored by the "clean coal" lobby (just go to the debate page of CNN's website). They (American's for Balanced Energy Choices) have launched a $35 Million campaign to convince Washington and the public that burning coal is clean. This couldn't be further from the truth. None of the candidates are speaking out about it, and none of the candidates are challenging CNN for effectively omitting a climate change discussion from the debates.

I love many things about Obama. He is certainly "more" of an outsider, but not as outside as his campaign makes him out to be. Frankly, all bets are off as to what that will mean in Washington. The problem is, CHANGE COMES FROM BELOW. If we progressives believe that getting him in office means we've succeeded, we have another thing coming to us. Whoever gets in will have to pushed and prodded every step of the way to bring change. This election is only the first battle in a much longer and harder war for change and I'm not convinced the American people have it in them to fight that war. We can't just pick up the phone and order "take-out" and expect Obama or Clinton to deliver.