The party's over, Edwards supporters. It's time to switch your allegiance to Obama, fast and furious.
I know Edwards says he's still in it, but it's clear that at this point he's not in it to win. He's in it to "make a difference" and to have delegates to broker at a convention. That's nice for Edwards, but it's a 1960 strategy in a 2008 election.
Listen, the 2 and a half people who read this blog know that I've been all out for Edwards. Heck, I even seriously considered driving to Reno to canvass for him in the Nevada caucuses. If that ain't commitment, I don't know what is.
John Edwards has already made a big difference in this election. If it weren't for Edwards' candidacy, there's no question that neither Obama nor Clinton would be talking as much as about poverty, the need for health care reform, or many meat and potato issues of concern to working class Americans. In particular, Obama seems to have adopted a muted version of Edwards' critique of money in politics. Granted, Obama focuses on lobbyists rather than corporations, but it's the same meme.
I supported Edwards because I thought he was the Democratic candidate for president who was the most progressive person with the best chance of winning in the general election. Now that it's clear that Edwards won't win the primary, his "electability" in the general is a moot point.
The race has narrowed to two people: Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Of the two, the one who can and should win is Obama. Obama's voting record in Congress (and the Illinois state legislature) is pretty consistently progressive and effective. While not in Congress at the beginning, he was against the war from the start. More and more I hear Republicans and other swing voters who wouldn't be caught dead voting for Hillary being inspired by Obama.
Obama is inspiring. He's his own man. Inspite of and because of his unique background, he has the ability to appeal to broad cross sections of the American public. He is the best man for the job and the only Democrat poised to win in November.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Friday, January 25, 2008
Bill Magavern's 2008 California Ballot Rx
Well, they're here! The long-awaited Bill Magavern ballot recommendations. With so many people absentee voting, we get requests for these LONG before the election. Hold your horses, people!!! Unless you are leaving for Europe or a tour of duty, what is the friggin' hurry on voting? I still walk to the neighborhood precinct on voting day, but if I voted two or three or four weeks out I would often regret it. New info really crystalizes in the final weeks of a campaign.
So without further ado:
THE BILL MAGAVERN BALLOT RECOMMENDATIONS, FEBRUARY 2008
PROPOSITIONS
91 – NO
Even its authors have disowned this one. Its effect would be to expand the
circumstances under which all of the sales tax on gasoline – not the gas tax,
but the sales tax – could be spent only on transportation, which would bind the
hands of the governor and legislature during times of fiscal crisis.
92 – NO
91 and 92 share one of the worst features of ballot-box budgeting, because they
both would carve out slices of the budget pie without doing anything to enlarge
the pie. In this case, the cause is a worthy one – community colleges. But 92
wouldn’t raise any revenue, it would just direct existing revenues toward
community colleges, meaning other programs, like health, K-12 education, parks,
etc – would be cut. And capping community college fees is not as progressive as
it may sound. A much more equitable policy would be to raise fees on those who
can afford to pay and use the money to provide more financial aid for low-income
students.
93 – YES
CA’s legislative term limits are just about the tightest in the country, and
still would be even if 93 passes. The difference would be that a legislator
could serve up to 12 years in one house, which would greatly increase the
continuity and institutional memory in the Assembly. Currently, the lower house
looks like a revolving door, as freshmen arrive in Sacramento already eyeing
their next move, usually to the Senate. The situation means that fundraising –
almost all of it from special interests – never stops.
To me, this measure is not about who happens to be in office now, but about what
is the best policy for the long run. Allowing a legislator to make a 12-year
career in one house would definitely improve the quality of deliberation in the
Capitol – and I say that as someone who spends many of my working hours in that
particular sausage factory.
94-97 – NO
I’m certainly not thrilled that so much of California’s ballot space and
political advertising goes into gambling issues, when so many more important matters go neglected. In this expensive battle I side
with the labor and tribal interests who are trying to overturn 4 casinos’
agreements with the state. These agreements do not protect the rights of casino
employees.
DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY – OBAMA
He opposed the Iraq war from the start, unlike his opponents. As a legislator,
he’s managed to pass tough bills by working with unlikely allies. My informed
source in Illinois politics has spoken highly of him for years. Obama’s theme of
participatory democracy – government by and for the people, not the corporate
lobbyists – could actually have a transformative effect. With Kucinich out of
the race, and Edwards’ campaign faltering, Obama is the progressive choice – and
also the one with the best chance of winning the White House.
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY – PAUL
His domestic platform is straight out of the 19th century, but he’s the only
Reep candidate opposed to the war, so if you’re in the GOP this is your chance to send a message.
I’m Bill Magavern, and I approve of this message.
So without further ado:
THE BILL MAGAVERN BALLOT RECOMMENDATIONS, FEBRUARY 2008
PROPOSITIONS
91 – NO
Even its authors have disowned this one. Its effect would be to expand the
circumstances under which all of the sales tax on gasoline – not the gas tax,
but the sales tax – could be spent only on transportation, which would bind the
hands of the governor and legislature during times of fiscal crisis.
92 – NO
91 and 92 share one of the worst features of ballot-box budgeting, because they
both would carve out slices of the budget pie without doing anything to enlarge
the pie. In this case, the cause is a worthy one – community colleges. But 92
wouldn’t raise any revenue, it would just direct existing revenues toward
community colleges, meaning other programs, like health, K-12 education, parks,
etc – would be cut. And capping community college fees is not as progressive as
it may sound. A much more equitable policy would be to raise fees on those who
can afford to pay and use the money to provide more financial aid for low-income
students.
93 – YES
CA’s legislative term limits are just about the tightest in the country, and
still would be even if 93 passes. The difference would be that a legislator
could serve up to 12 years in one house, which would greatly increase the
continuity and institutional memory in the Assembly. Currently, the lower house
looks like a revolving door, as freshmen arrive in Sacramento already eyeing
their next move, usually to the Senate. The situation means that fundraising –
almost all of it from special interests – never stops.
To me, this measure is not about who happens to be in office now, but about what
is the best policy for the long run. Allowing a legislator to make a 12-year
career in one house would definitely improve the quality of deliberation in the
Capitol – and I say that as someone who spends many of my working hours in that
particular sausage factory.
94-97 – NO
I’m certainly not thrilled that so much of California’s ballot space and
political advertising goes into gambling issues, when so many more important matters go neglected. In this expensive battle I side
with the labor and tribal interests who are trying to overturn 4 casinos’
agreements with the state. These agreements do not protect the rights of casino
employees.
DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY – OBAMA
He opposed the Iraq war from the start, unlike his opponents. As a legislator,
he’s managed to pass tough bills by working with unlikely allies. My informed
source in Illinois politics has spoken highly of him for years. Obama’s theme of
participatory democracy – government by and for the people, not the corporate
lobbyists – could actually have a transformative effect. With Kucinich out of
the race, and Edwards’ campaign faltering, Obama is the progressive choice – and
also the one with the best chance of winning the White House.
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY – PAUL
His domestic platform is straight out of the 19th century, but he’s the only
Reep candidate opposed to the war, so if you’re in the GOP this is your chance to send a message.
I’m Bill Magavern, and I approve of this message.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Watch Obama's New Hampshire Primary Speech
Listen, I haven't weighed in lately on the Presidential campaign, or anything. Frankly, I've been preoccupied by a health crisis in our son. When he's really sick, I have trouble doing anything extra. So I've kept, up, but not in my thoughts to you.
It's okay that I'm behind because I'd rather not tell you, in the few days before the South Carolina primary, how I'm feeling about my man John Edwards' chances. I'd rather not tell you that on Sunday my son, now well, used some of his newfound energy to paste an Obama bumpersticker over the Edwards one on our family car and I let him do it.
Instead, I'll ask you to watch Obama's speech after the New Hampshire primary, if you haven't already and tell me what you think/thought.
Sara
It's okay that I'm behind because I'd rather not tell you, in the few days before the South Carolina primary, how I'm feeling about my man John Edwards' chances. I'd rather not tell you that on Sunday my son, now well, used some of his newfound energy to paste an Obama bumpersticker over the Edwards one on our family car and I let him do it.
Instead, I'll ask you to watch Obama's speech after the New Hampshire primary, if you haven't already and tell me what you think/thought.
Sara
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
What My Family is Doing to Eliminate Fascism
While I was emailing a friend threatening to risk a Giuliani presidency rather than vote for Hillary Clinton, my husband was working a little harder to identify and contain fascism. Here's his excellent letter published in today's Sacramento Bee.
Top cop's unshining moment
Re "Departure bittersweet for top cop," Jan. 2: What columnist Marcos Bretón describes as Police Chief Al Nájera's "shining moment" – the militaristic crackdown on peaceful protesters during the June 2003 Bush administration agricultural summit – actually amounted to an outrageous assault on the constitutional rights of free speech and assembly; the worst that I have seen during my decade in Sacramento.
What I saw when I emerged from the Capitol on that day shocked me. Hundreds of police officers in full Robocop gear had corralled a diverse group of Americans, including moms pushing babies in strollers, and refused to let them move freely in Capitol Park, despite the fact that they were doing nothing more threatening than chanting slogans about fair trade.
Why is Bretón, who makes his living from the constitutionally protected printed word, so thrilled that Nájera raised a red banner belonging to protesters and boomed, "We got their flag!"? Would the columnist be as exultant if the police had confiscated The Bee off of local newsstands because Nájera had decided one of the day's columns was politically incorrect? And is our police department so afraid of free speech that its biggest victory comes from confiscating a banner, instead of removing violent criminals from our streets?
- Bill Magavern, Sacramento
Top cop's unshining moment
Re "Departure bittersweet for top cop," Jan. 2: What columnist Marcos Bretón describes as Police Chief Al Nájera's "shining moment" – the militaristic crackdown on peaceful protesters during the June 2003 Bush administration agricultural summit – actually amounted to an outrageous assault on the constitutional rights of free speech and assembly; the worst that I have seen during my decade in Sacramento.
What I saw when I emerged from the Capitol on that day shocked me. Hundreds of police officers in full Robocop gear had corralled a diverse group of Americans, including moms pushing babies in strollers, and refused to let them move freely in Capitol Park, despite the fact that they were doing nothing more threatening than chanting slogans about fair trade.
Why is Bretón, who makes his living from the constitutionally protected printed word, so thrilled that Nájera raised a red banner belonging to protesters and boomed, "We got their flag!"? Would the columnist be as exultant if the police had confiscated The Bee off of local newsstands because Nájera had decided one of the day's columns was politically incorrect? And is our police department so afraid of free speech that its biggest victory comes from confiscating a banner, instead of removing violent criminals from our streets?
- Bill Magavern, Sacramento
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
California Dreaming in the New Hampshire Primary
Not knowing (but suspecting) what may happen in the New Hampshire primary today, here are my musings on the way things are shaping up:
Despite my support for Edwards, it is hard not to get swept up in Obama fever. I suspect that if this is true for someone like me who has followed the elections closely, and educates herself about the candidates, it is doubly true of the average voter.
Watching Obama's victory speech last Thursday in Iowa (Obama, not I, was in Iowa--I try to keep as far away from Dubuque, Des Moines, Davenport, Marshalltown, Mason City, Keokuk, Ames, and Clearlake as possible), I had this strange feeling: pride and a lump in my throat. If I had ever known, I had forgotten what it was like to be truly inspired by a presidential candidate (I was born while JFK was in office and was 7 when Bobby was shot).
That feeling of remembering a forgotten dream is very powerful. I want to be part of history. I want to stand on my feet and vote for change. I want to forget that Obama's sweeping rhetoric seems to mask a haziness about policy details. I want to forget that he has repeatedly voted to fund a war he says he doesn't support. I want to forget that I really know almost nothing about him. That part of his growing appeal is that corporate America is comfortable with him. That he wants the health insurance industry to play a role in ending the health care crisis....whaaaaa?
So I suspect that the people of New Hampshire will do the same. I suspect that Obama fever will/has spread to California. And I wonder what the dream of a new America will bring?
Despite my support for Edwards, it is hard not to get swept up in Obama fever. I suspect that if this is true for someone like me who has followed the elections closely, and educates herself about the candidates, it is doubly true of the average voter.
Watching Obama's victory speech last Thursday in Iowa (Obama, not I, was in Iowa--I try to keep as far away from Dubuque, Des Moines, Davenport, Marshalltown, Mason City, Keokuk, Ames, and Clearlake as possible), I had this strange feeling: pride and a lump in my throat. If I had ever known, I had forgotten what it was like to be truly inspired by a presidential candidate (I was born while JFK was in office and was 7 when Bobby was shot).
That feeling of remembering a forgotten dream is very powerful. I want to be part of history. I want to stand on my feet and vote for change. I want to forget that Obama's sweeping rhetoric seems to mask a haziness about policy details. I want to forget that he has repeatedly voted to fund a war he says he doesn't support. I want to forget that I really know almost nothing about him. That part of his growing appeal is that corporate America is comfortable with him. That he wants the health insurance industry to play a role in ending the health care crisis....whaaaaa?
So I suspect that the people of New Hampshire will do the same. I suspect that Obama fever will/has spread to California. And I wonder what the dream of a new America will bring?
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Juno is Mandatory Viewing
(:)(:)(:)(:) for Juno the sleeper comedy in movie theaters now. I'm a sucker for sweet little films. This movie proves that there are plenty of stories yet to be told and that they are worth telling. It's fresh, it's unpredictable, it's witty and fast-paced. It's funny, it's even sort of romantic without being anything you traditionally associate with a romantic comedy.
Actress Ellen Page is a screen gem: cute, ironic and watchable--impossible, however, for me to separate her from the character she played Juno MacGuff. Note: if you're an over-aged adolescent male like the character played so ably in this film by Jason Bateman, be aware that there are no Juno MacGuff's out there.
Juno is like Rory Gilmore on crack. In the real world of 2008, there are no 16 year old girls that are drop dead gorgeous, brilliant, wise-cracking with cultural references exclusively from the late 70's (15 years before they were born). This does not exist, we only wish it would.
We also wish director Jason Reitman (Thank you for Smoking) and his ilk would get more sweet smart little films like this made.
Actress Ellen Page is a screen gem: cute, ironic and watchable--impossible, however, for me to separate her from the character she played Juno MacGuff. Note: if you're an over-aged adolescent male like the character played so ably in this film by Jason Bateman, be aware that there are no Juno MacGuff's out there.
Juno is like Rory Gilmore on crack. In the real world of 2008, there are no 16 year old girls that are drop dead gorgeous, brilliant, wise-cracking with cultural references exclusively from the late 70's (15 years before they were born). This does not exist, we only wish it would.
We also wish director Jason Reitman (Thank you for Smoking) and his ilk would get more sweet smart little films like this made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)