I’m Tired, Too

For two years of the presidential campaign, from 2007-2008, I lived and breathed politics.  Though I didn’t begin Spreading the Word until early 2008, I was reading and talking about the candidates long before then (think 2004 Democratic National Convention’s keynote speech).  With the election of Barack Obama, it seemed that I’d be able to go back to my day job, teaching, and be able to leave the day-to-day political awareness and direction of the nation to my elected representatives.

I was wrong.

The election of Barack Obama angered many Republicans, scared some people who are “bitter, clinging to their guns and religion”, gave birth to the Tea Party movement, and generally ginned up even more opposition than I believed possible.  I’m not sure why I thought his opponents would understand they LOST THE ELECTION and be a little quieter.  But John Boehner and Eric Cantor continue to lie and scream about the president; Lindsey Graham is sitting on Meet The Press complimenting the President on his parenting style while blasting a series of untruths that the President is “governing as an American liberal in a center-right nation” and that the President hasn’t done any “heavy lifting” on legislation; Mitch McConnell is saying that Republicans are going to run in November on “Repeal and Replace”; and Sarah Palin is helping John McCain run further and further into the weeds on the right side of the political spectrum.

While I know politics isn’t flag football, I don’t expect it to be Celebrity Death Match, either.  It seems, though, that implementing an agenda which speaks to the best in the American ideals and meets the goals stated in the Constitution is going to be a continuous engagement, because the opponents are galvanized.

We have to continue to participate – to write, to speak, to think, to act, to vote.

I know.  I’m tired, too.  But if not us, then who?

Give Us the Whole Enchilada

I tuned in expectantly to the 6:30pm ABC World News this Thursday evening September 11 to meet Governor Sarah Palin. An auspicious date to say the least. The program was billed as the first non-scripted interview with the Vice Presidential nominee. Newsman Charlie Gibson was to have a “wide ranging, exclusive” interview with her so that we, the American public, could get our first view of this potential vice president. To say I am disappointed is an understatement. The interview appeared to be a mandated “be nice to the lady” discussion. How insulting, both to her and to us. First, it was segmented in dribbles, 10-12 minutes at the beginning of the show, and another three minutes at the end, with the mandatory commercials and Hurricane Ike and 9/11 coverage in between. Then we were told to “tune in at 11:30pm for ABC Nightline tonight, to see more. Or, time permitting, tune in to the ABC 6:30pm news on Friday.”

What is this about? Don’t we deserve to have one cohesive and coherent conversation that would allow us to form an opinion of the Governor’s suitability to lead this nation? After all, she is just one heartbeat away from the presidency, isn’t she? Are we to take this as a serious journalistic effort to let us see who she is? Is this ABC’s effort to get the viewer ratings up? Three shows to deliver one interview? Is this the new definition of “news scoop?” Or has the Republican Party simply dictated the terms of not only the interview but when and how the news media will cover their candidate? When did the media become the handmaidens of the political spin? Oh, that’s right, when they bought the logic of becoming “imbedded” with the troops to cover the war.

The questions began with his very serious and pointed question of whether she can look the country in the eye and tells us that she is ready to be vice president. What was she to say except, “yes, I’m ready.”

He then moved on to a discussion of Gov. Palin’s national security credentials. The gist of the precursor was a question about whether the proximity of Alaska and Russia gave her any particular insight into Russian politics and the invasion of Georgia. To which she answered that indeed Russia is Alaska’s a neighbor and that Russia is a bad nation for invading a small, sovereign and democratic country. Simple question, simple answer. Even though her presidential running mate, Gov. John McCain, used this bit about the proximity of Alaska and Russia as part of her credentials on national security, I would not have expected a serious journalist to give it air time. Now the question about whether the US should or would use Afghanistan as a base to launch an offensive into Pakistan in pursuit of terrorist with or without Pakistan’s approval was far more interesting. Not because it was very complex but rather because of Gov. Palin’s refusal to answer “yes” or “no” as Gibson desired. You know, just straight talk from a straight talking person. She actually gave one of her more circuitous answers which in essence was, “we will use the full array of alternatives at our disposal,” I think she meant the “full array of weapons in our arsenal,” to secure our safety.

Most alarmingly, as part of this discussion, Gibson asked her if she believed in the “Bush doctrine.” She bought herself some time by using the old ploy of answering a question by asking for clarification. As a formally trained debater, I recognized the technique. She rambled a bit and said there had been a few mistakes in President Bush’s execution of the doctrine but that basically it is sound. Then, Gibson told her that the “Bush doctrine is the right of the US to participate in anticipatory self-defense without being attacked.” At this point, she went into a discussion about weapons of mass destruction being kept out of the hands of terrorists. She also said that Israel has the right to do whatever it needs to do to defend itself, with or without being violated.

The real national security issues according to Palin are energy independence and the need to reform government in Washington. That is what she said. She also said that she has travelled out side the United States to Mexico and Canada (I’m not certain if these trips were for pleasure or work), as well as an official trip to Kuwait that was eye opening and transforming.

To give him credit, Gibson did try to get her to answer an interesting question on statements she made about God and the war in Iraq. To give her credit, she stuck to her script and didn’t give him any sound bites that could be easily edited. She reinterpreted a statement she made at her former church in which she said, “American troops fighting in Iraq are performing a task from God.” She said she was actually using a statement made by Abraham Lincoln which was a much more nuanced statement about God and right and wrong. She didn’t use the word “nuance,” I did.

But, she is definitely a straight talking candidate who knows nuance when it’s needed. I was actually surprised that she back peddled so far. Wonder how her fundamentalist base felt about that? Gibson actually preceded the question with a clip of her speaking from the pulpit in which her statement was quite clear the first time. Seems to me she actually did a flipflop on the issue.

The interview itself may be o.k. when viewed in its entirety. I don’t know, yet. I would have preferred the whole enchilada at one time so that I could tell whether or not I liked the taste. We can tune in later Thursday night, Friday evening or whenever. I suspect the sauce will be the same.

Check out this website - Women Against Sarah Palin

Who’s Got More Energy?

A friend of a friend keeps trying to call me out for supporting Senator Obama, because his primary focus is the high gas prices, and he believes that somehow opening up the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge and the remainder of the coastlines along the United States will immediately impact what’s happening at the pump. I wrote him a nice email, pointing out the error of his perspective, but here’s a longer, more thorough disagreement published today in The Huffington Post (The Audacity of Contempt) and a post on the Bruce Blog about Senator McCain’s words and actions on energy in general.  Since I disagree with the whole “let’s drill more now, because it will help us” perspective, I decided to get the facts of what both candidates are proposing on the issue.  Check out this summary article by CNN’s Ed Hornick and Alan Silverleib:

(CNN) – Presidential candidates Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain are detailing their plans for solving the country’s energy crisis and criticizing each other’s proposals this week as they campaign in battleground states.

     

Both Sens. McCain and Obama are touting solar energy, harnessed through solar panels like these found on Al Gore’s home.

Here’s a look at the candidates’ energy proposals:

Overall strategy

McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee, has proposed a national energy strategy that would rely on the technological prowess of American industry and science.

McCain has said he would work to reduce carbon emissions 60 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. He has said he would commit $2 billion annually for 15 years to advance clean coal technology.

He also has pledged to oppose a windfall profits tax on oil companies that, according to his campaign Web site, “will ultimately result in increasing our dependence on foreign oil and hinder investment in domestic exploration.”

Meanwhile, Obama laid out his comprehensive energy plan Monday in Lansing, Michigan.

“If I am president, I will immediately direct the full resources of the federal government and the full energy of the private sector to a single, overarching goal — in 10 years, we will eliminate the need for oil from the entire Middle East and Venezuela,” the presumptive Democratic nominee told a crowd.

Don’t Miss

• Obama says offshore drilling stance nothing new
• Obama calls for tapping into strategic oil reserves
• McCain challenges Obama to call for vote on energy
• Election Center 2008

Obama’s plan also would invest $150 billion over the next 10 years and leverage billions more in private capital to build a new energy economy that he said would harness American energy and create 5 million new jobs.

He also called on businesses, government and the American people to meet the goal of reducing U.S. demand for electricity by 15 percent by the end of the next decade and said he would modernize the national utility grid.

Another prominent feature in the plan: Immediately give every working family in America a $1,000 energy rebate and pay for it from oil company profits.

Offshore drilling

In June, McCain proposed lifting the ban on offshore drilling as part of his plan to reduce dependence on foreign oil and help combat rising gas prices.

His plan would let individual states decide whether to explore drilling possibilities. The proposal could put McCain at odds with environmentalists, who said it is incongruous with his plans to combat global warning. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a McCain ally, opposes offshore drilling.

The senator from Arizona opposes drilling in some wilderness areas — including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge — and said those places must be left undisturbed.

Obama has opposed new offshore drilling, but he said last week that he would consider it if it were part of a larger strategy to lower energy costs.

On Friday, Obama praised a bipartisan energy plan from the Senate that combines alternative energy innovation, financial, nuclear energy and drilling proposals.

He released a statement supporting an effort by five Democrats and five Republicans to break Congress’energy impasse with legislation that would allow expanded offshore oil exploration and embrace ambitious energy efficiency and efforts to develop alternative fuels.

Obama also has said he believes oil companies should drill on the 68 million acres they have access to but haven’t touched and would require oil companies that will not drill to give up their leases to someone who will.

Strategic oil reserves

McCain advocates suspending the purchase of foreign oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve during periods of high prices to reduce demand.

Obama called for tapping into strategic oil reserves as part of his plan to provide relief from high gas prices. (He previously said he was opposed to using the strategic reserves, but on Monday he proposed selling 70 million barrels of oil from the reserves to lower gas prices).

Cars and driving

McCain has proposed a $300 million award for “the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars.”

He also called for the suspension of the 18.4-cent-a-gallon federal gas tax and 24.4-cent-a-gallon diesel tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day. The McCain campaign has said the lost revenue would be paid for by money from the general fund.

Obama’s energy plan would provide $4 billion in loans and tax credits to American auto plants and manufacturers so that they can retool their factories and build fuel-efficient cars, would put 1 million 150-mph, plug-in hybrids on U.S. roads within six years and would give consumers a $7,000 tax credit to buy fuel-efficient cars.

Nuclear energy

McCain has called for building new nuclear reactors, saying barriers to nuclear energy are political, not technological.

He also would provide for safe storage of spent nuclear fuel and give host states or localities a proprietary interest so when advanced recycling technologies turn used fuel into a valuable commodity, the public would share in the economic benefits.

Obama said he’ll find safer ways to use nuclear power and store nuclear waste.

In a Democratic primary debate this year, he said, “We should explore nuclear power as part of the energy mix.”

Renewable energy

McCain’s plan would commit $2 billion annually to advance clean coal technologies.

He also has called on a permanent tax credit, which he has said will “simplify the tax code, reward activity in the U.S., and make us more competitive with other countries,” according to his campaign Web site.

McCain also has encouraged development of low carbon fuels — wind, hydro and solar power.

Meanwhile, Obama’s plan would require that 10 percent of U.S. energy comes from renewable sources by the end of his first presidential term. The plan would extend the Production Tax Credit for five years to encourage the production of renewable energy.

Obama has set the goal of creating five first-of-a-kind, coal-fired demonstration plants that would capture and store carbon dioxide emissions. He would also invest in technology that will allow for more coal use.

Climate change

McCain has proposed what he calls a bipartisan plan to address the problem of climate change and stimulate the development and use of advanced technologies. It is a market-based approach that would set caps on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions and provide industries with tradable credits.

Obama has called for a reduction of carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050 by using a market-based cap-and-trade system. He would create what his campaign calls a “Global Energy Forum” and re-engage with the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.