There is no question that Senator Clinton desperately needs a win in Texas and Ohio. It’s a fact that has been admitted by all sides of the Democratic race. Nor is there a question that Senator Clinton has decided to do everything possible to get those wins. But even I would never have expected a move that is as racist and underhanded as what I have just learned about.

Senator Obama is Black. Unless you are blind, and America is everything but that, it’s not a big surprise. But is he Black enough?

I’m not speaking about the cultural question that was debated when he initially began to run, asked generally by less educated African Americans. The question in this case applied to how black he actually is. Pigmentation and skin tone. Not a tan but how dark is he.

It would seem that the Clinton campaign, as has been reported so far but not confirmed thinks that Senator Obama needs to be darker. So that’s exactly what they did to his image. Darken it.

Why does that matter? Well if it’s an attempt to emphasize in the minds of White voters that Obama is just an African American, and to play on stereotypes, it’s a big deal. If it’s an attempt to make him seem more dangerous and framed in a racist visage, it matters.

None ever question how pale white a Caucasian is, but throughout American history it has been a big deal. Going back to the original Constitution and the 5/8th’s line. It’s a wedge in the Black community and a way to be hands distance from other Americans. It’s a memory of America that everyone wants to deny and avoid speaking about. And it needs only a subtle push, like the photo re-imaging, to bring it to the forefront.

America has gone no where if such a racist and vile tactic can be used and even worse if it works. And any candidate that would stoop to this level to win is despicable in my mind.

If an ad … actually there is no similar scenario for this. There is no way to correlate the racial prejudice this action implies and relies upon to being pink or ‘moon tan’ white. There just is no comparison in the daily evidence of the magnitude of the action.

I know some Whites will say, ‘I don’t get it.’ Of course not. They have never lived or observed it. They have not noticed when they do it. It’s so common as to be sub-conscious. But I think every Black American knows.

This is repugnant. I can’t express that enough. After the multiple racial attacks from 2007, when Senator Obama announced he would run, to today there has been no end of the emails that alleged untruths. And the Clinton camp helped spread them. And the attempts to stereotype Senator Obama as a drug dealer, by the Clinton campaign. And the minimalization of Dr. Martin Luther King and every Black politician by former-President Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and the Clinton campaign. After all that, still there is a need to be even more racist with this act.

Will this divide the Democratic Party? It should. What can you think of a party that condones the use of racism by its top leadership, while it talks out the other side of its face about preventing gender bias? How can any Hispanic believe that our bronze skin is seen any differently by those that would highlight that darker than white must be magnified and wrong. How much trust can you give a potential President that would throw huge portions of its own party membership under a bus, just to attain power? And what woman would feel safe with the thought that this woman would stab her partners in the back just to try to run for office.

All the warm and fuzzy tears, and appearances on television shows, like the Daily Show, will never excuse or cover this kind of racism. And if color can matter, what would make you think gender, religion, ethnicity, or economic status won’t?

As I said, this has not been confirmed. But you can see the videos as reported by Wired, and you can draw your own conclusion. Then ask this question…

Do you want a President that is willing to use race, gender, outright lies, political differences and who knows what else looking out for what your children will learn and be able to do? Would you trust that kind of person enough to invite them in your home? Or work? And would a smile, a tear, or a joke make all that change?

Vote what you think, but be sure to vote!

Labels: Black community, Daily Show, Democratic Party, election 2008, Presidential race, racism, Senator Clinton, Senator Obama

**While this post includes personal thoughts of my political views, M V Consulting, Inc and it's I Love America That's Why I Vote! campaign is not partisan. Your vote is your Constitutional Right and it matters. No matter who you chose, make a choice. Register to vote and make a difference.**

It has been over a year in the making, and while there may not be fanfare I imagine some may have been waiting for this list. It is not an endorsement yet but it is one step away.

The following candidates are all people I would not vote for and reasons why. In almost no particular order.

Ron Paul – Extremist and I do not agree with his retreat oriented, isolationist plans dealing with Iraq. I do respect his desire to get his message out and his ability to gather some 4% of vote made in Primaries so far.

Alan Keyes – Deserves even less comment than Ron Paul.

Rudy Giuliani – While he may have been America’s Mayor on 9/11 and there after, I am among many New Yorkers that recall his tenure as Mayor before that horrendous day. He was not well liked among many. His social policies were massive steps backwards, especially his encouragement and protection of police action that resulted in death and torture of African Americans. Suffice to say his one word Presidential campaign failed and I’m glad.

Fred Thompson – I actually liked his direct manner. His concerns for the nation are real. He had decent fiscal plans, and a focus on protecting America from abroad and at the borders. Sadly he didn’t get seriously involved in campaigning until far too late in the game.

Mike Huckabee – I do not agree with his mix of religion and politics. I respect his belief, but it has no place in government; least of all a refashioning of the Constitution based on his religious ideals. He has raised taxes, and under his governorship there were several bad decisions made like the pardon of a killer. It may not have been his sole decision, but as the head of that state it’s his responsibility and he needed to stand up and take the hit rather than try to deflect it. Leaders accept responsibility for all the actions that happen, good and bad.

Dennis Kucinich – I respect that he, like Ron Paul, was able to stay in the race as long as he did. I really respected that he is the only candidate to speak at a public debate and talk about an apology for slavery, and reparations. None have had the balls to even open their mouths or raise their hands on the subject. But he had no real strength of message beyond this. More importantly, since virtually all the Democrats believe the same things, he did not have the charisma t get farther than he did.

John Edwards – Where do I start. I feel that he is a hypocrite. He talks of how bad the rich are, yet he is one of them. He worked at a firm that made money taking advantage of the poor and minorities. His haircuts cost $400. His regular income neighbors hate him. He already was part of a losing equation for the Presidency. He has never once donated money to the government, yet he feels that taxes should be higher than they are for the rich. He has flipped on several issues. He is an advocate of retreat. And it just goes on and on. And his wife’s illness is a distraction were he to somehow win the election.

Most of the Democratic and Republican field not mentioned – Never had a chance, and never had any real plans worthy of considering. Their weaknesses are multiple and would take far too long to discuss.

That whittles the field down to 4.

Mitt Romney – Because he also raised taxes. He has made the most flips of virtually all the candidates. Because while he barely discusses his faith (that few understand and many negative are rumored about) he has mentioned that it would be part of his decision making process. Because he has pandered to the ultra-religious. Because he is a Mormon and that makes him unelectable in a nation that is almost as obsessed about religion as it is race. Because he has been so negative in so many ads. He is no Ronald Regan, though he tries to portray himself as such.

Hilary Clinton – The worst for last. She is the worst candidate of all the choices. I would gladly vote for and elect anyone except for her. It has nothing to do with her gender, which she has used as a weapon and shield. There are several women I would be happy to vote for, they just haven’t run. But Hillary has massive issues.

I have followed her tenure as a Senator, and found no action that has improved the lives of New Yorkers – her adopted state – though she made many campaign promises that have not been completed. I have looked at her votes and seen a pattern of her flipping her votes, both in favor and against virtually the same issue. I have listened to her speak for years, speaking polispeak on the most popular buzz issues and then moving on to the next. Remember her anger over the Grand Theft Auto “Hot Coffee” issue? What about the negative portrayal of Blacks, and degradation of women in that game and the series? Not a word. And ultimately what did she do about it? Nothing except grab headlines and let it go.

Hillary Clinton has actively avoided providing the public with her real thoughts. She polispoke her was through the issue of illegal aliens on national television resulting in her saying yes, no and maybe in all of 2 minutes. Then she proceeded to take multiple sides on the issue for 2 weeks until it no longer was an issue. That’s an example of hiding from the public.

She has lied in saying she has 35 years of political experience. She does not having first served the public as a Senator for New York. She has little if any business experience. She shares a position with John Edwards in that she thinks the rich should pay more taxes, and has never voluntarily paid a dime more than what was required.

She has actively engaged in smear campaigns, using fear and racism in place of serious political debate. And she wasn’t honest enough to say this herself, using staff and virtual staff members to make the comments for her. And do not forget that she was among a handful of those in Congress to vote in favor of MoveOn.org when it viciously attacked our military.

She cannot campaign on her own, using former President Bill Clinton as a shield and weapon. He is no mere spouse; he is a former President and can generate attention beyond anything any of the spouses of other candidates could ever do. And many believe that his policies are hers, which is unknown. They assume that he will be involved in running the nation, which is not possible depending on the degree. And they forget that it was President Bill Clinton that allowed Osama Bin Laden to become the instigator of the worst attack of American citizens, on or off American soil, ever.

She has offered bribes, in the form of potential campaign promises, to buy votes. Do you recall the ill formed and ineffective plan to give every child in America $5,000 for college? I do and I recall that all the questions about this ‘plan’ went unanswered before she dropped the idea and moved onto the next attention grabbing comment.

As I mentioned her gender is a shield. When it’s useful she had ‘nearly’ cried to engender the women’s vote. She has calculated when a laugh may make her seem more humane, and avoid actual answers. She has claimed that the men in the race are unfair due to her gender, and then turned around and campaigned on the fact she is a woman. She has made false claims of her record at Wal-Mart.

She has taken money from active fugitives of the law, and actively tried not to return that money. She has denied money from Wal-Mart, who she now decries as a terrible business, but she takes 4x as much money from its executives and related personnel quietly.

She has multiple scandals and rumors of improprieties that follow her and her former-President husband. She self-aggrandizes her importance during her husband’s tenure, and assumes some of his few achievements as her own. She has refused to allow proof of her political activities to be released to the public until 2013.

There is no candidate neither less Presidential, nor more power hungry than Senator Hillary Clinton. Anyone who so wishes to rise to the highest office in the nation, but refuses to reveal their motivations and intentions is dangerous to the nation. Every candidate is more worthy of the office than her. Every candidate will benefit women, African Americans, minorities, illegal aliens, homeland defense, and the war on terror more than Senator Hillary Clinton. Anything I can do to prevent her from winning is worthwhile.

I have documented many of the actions that I mention above in multiple posts [at www.mvass.com and www.presidentialraceblog.com] since 2005. I’ve not made up anything; these are facts of what she has done. My interpretation of the reasons why could be debated, but I cannot see how anyone looking at the facts could claim she deserves to serve in any public office.

But who is left?

Senators Obama and McCain. I believe this will also be the choice in the election in November. Honestly both are good choices and may be very good for the nation. At this moment I endorse neither. But I will endorse one of them soon.

Labels: Bill Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, election 2008, Fred Thompson, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Presidential race, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, Senator Clinton, Senator McCain, Senator Obama

Astounding. Senator Barack Obama has been called the winner of the South Carolina Primary. He has resoundingly beaten all the other Democratic candidates. The numbers are roughly 58% of those identified as Democrats, 25% of Whites, and 50% of those under 30 years old. I’m sure those numbers will change at time passes.

So what does this mean? Well there is good and bad in these numbers. 78% of African Americans voted for Senator Obama, 17% for Senator Clinton. But Senator Clinton has been targeting the poor, uneducated, White and Hispanic/Latino vote. South Carolina has been used as a stepping stone for the Super Tuesday national votes.

There is no question that former-President Bill Clinton has introduced race in a manner that was obvious and calculated more than anything in 2007. That is not so much a surprise but a signal. The Clinton campaign has consistently been seeding the racial divide in the nation, with subordinates making comments and passing emails that attack Senator Obama, for months. But it was Bill Clinton that brought this to a new level.

As Senator Clinton disappeared from the major news coverage, Bill to front stage. Being a former President, there is no competition anyone can give him for media coverage of anything he chooses to say. And he said exactly the things that would emphasize to White voters that Obama is Black.

Now why does that matter? Besides the fact that the majority of voters are White, it’s the fact that race still does matter in America. It affects our perceptions and is evident in our daily lives. Look at virtually any television show, cable or broadcast, and count the number of minorities on that program. You will virtually always see 1 supporting cast member that is Black, 1 will be Hispanic/Latino, 1 or 2 women, and maybe 1 in 5 shows have an Asian. Race matters.

In addition is the fact that the attacks against Senator Obama, by a former-President minimize the importance of Senator Obama. Not because of his qualifications, but because he is JUST a Black candidate. It presumes that he is just a flash in the pan and not a serious option.

And lastly because Bill Clinton is so revered by Democrats, his disapproval implies that there is something wrong with Senator Obama. In a nation that was built upon the thought that A White male is always right versus a Black slave, it makes an impact. And for those that say we have grown beyond that, just look at the numbers of African Americans that are still being proven innocent of crimes they have spent decades in prison for, solely on the basis that a witness said that they thought this was the perpetrator of a crime. Often that misidentification, by a White witness, is more than enough to convict a Black defendant.

So now Senator Obama has been officially labeled the Black candidate. He is perhaps finally Black enough. Or too Black if you go by some small minds and the suggestions of people like BET founder Bob Johnson.

So what will be the outcome? Obviously Senator Obama will continue forward, as will Senator Clinton and John Edwards. Edwards has no real chance of winning the nomination. So I expect he will drop out after the Super Tuesday primaries on February 4th. Without question I expect he will shift his support to Hillary.

Major emphasis will be made that Senator Obama only is getting 25% of the White vote, ignoring his Iowa dominance and cross the racial lines popularity. And for those that thing Obama will get the Vice-President nod, I don’t think so. It’s not even an option.

Obama is too popular, and a ticket that has 2 ‘minorities’ [White women are not a minority to me] is too likely to be beaten by a Republican ticket. Especially if Senator John McCain is the Presidential candidate.

Overall I am upset by the numbers we are seeing. Because there is such a racial divide, caused by the calculations of the Clinton campaign, the Democratic nomination is now virtually assured of going to Clinton. And it means that it was won not because of qualifications, or the belief of the nation of who is the best candidate for the Presidency, but because of the lingering racism that is the backbone of this nation.

I had hoped America was better than that. But the Clinton campaign has bet big on this, and I expect they have won that bet.

At least Senator Obama will have made credible and real in-roads for the next qualified candidate. Perhaps then America will be ready. Though I would love to see that I am wrong, and race drops out of this nomination process. But like Pandora’s Box, once it’s been opened it’s too late.

Labels: Bill Clinton, Democratic Party, election 2008, John Edwards, presidential election, Presidential race, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Clinton

Due to several direct comments, and a couple found on DIGG, I see that the intent of my posts Excerpt of President Obama - a what if press release and President Obama - a what if press release - 1.25.2008.3 were not understood for what I was intending. To that end I am providing the following clarification of what I intended.

Wow, the responses are really amazing. So far I’m noticing that few are getting the point of my fictional future press release.

I’ve been told I’m fear mongering, and that it was completely inappropriate. And a few other comments as well. Well let me be more direct since that seems the only way to get the point out to more people.

I’m not advocating the death of Senator Obama. Far from it. I would never suggest such an act on any Presidential candidate or President. But such an act is a potential reality, and I feel the reactions I’ve received so far prove it. I think that it’s a fear that all African Americans have for whoever becomes the first Black President.

The post was intended to highlight that there are deep and real racial divisions in America today. That Senator Obama is not only fighting against Senator Clinton, but the perceptions and prejudices in America that have endured for centuries.

My fictional President was a man that was principled. He helped America achieve several breakthroughs that we all wish to have happen in America. He resolved the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that currently divide much of the country. He resolved the economic crisis that currently, and in the near future, is a reality and a problem for the nation. He minimized the threat to our lives from fanatical individuals that wish the death of every American for no reason other than the way they wish to observe their faith.

And in trying to further unify a nation, that previously was divided on issues of injustice in the legal system, sexual orientation and bias of gender religion and color, he was killed by a couple of small minds that refused to see America beyond a limited black and white.

It’s a sad tale, and tragedy often tells some of the best stores of mankind. It’s a morality post. A point that while we can resolve many of the transcendental and even serious issues that face America, the underlying issues at our core are not being addressed. And the cost of ignoring those issues can be devastating.

I went on to suggest that the loss of a great leader could have an impact that covers the globe, potentially affecting everyone on the planet. That even out most determined enemies would not wish to take on the wrath of a nation that would then be in the throes of a social upheaval that was caused by people closing their eyes to an issue for centuries.

Of course African Americans would be in riots. No less so than at the loss of Martin Luther King. Or after the Rodney King riots. The shock of injustice and the festering pain of centuries of inequality often lead to bouts of rage and anger. Especially if those emotions are bottled up generation after generation.

I’m highlighting that it’s the same kind of small-mindedness that is being employed by the Clinton campaign against Senator Obama. And that tactic is working, which it could not unless such racial divisions still festered under the surface of modern day America. That we are seeing race used as a tool to provide a means of segregating Democrats, and the nation.

I fully intended to shock people with the post. But I also wanted to show that even in the worst of outcomes, there are moments of greatness. The greatness in this case being the legacy and achievements of what my fictional President Obama did with the Presidency. Not hollow platitudes, not campaign promises but real action that benefits tens of millions of Americans.

I further went on to ask question that I thought would further provoke thoughts. Because there are many who fear the thought of a Black President. Because there are those that assume that a Black President will inevitably be killed. Because there are those that fear a Black President will change everything in America. And yes that a Black President might mean that the racial tensions that have always existed in this nation, and the war for equality suggested for decades by multiple organizations for multiple reasons, could come to pass.

I asked if America would be better off if each event happened. By that I meant

“…winning of the nearly decade long Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the virtual elimination of the terrorist organization Al Quida, … his quick actions to restore normalcy in the earthquake ravaged suburbs of San Diego, the recovery from the 2 year economic recession of 2008, his work on balancing the American legal systems’ enforcement and punishment and rights of gays, women and minorities.”

Don’t we all want the wars to end and America win if at all possible? Don’t we all want a government that can react to natural disasters and ensure or ability to return to normalcy? Don’t we all want a stable and growing economy that allows us and our children to live the American dream of better lives? Should we all not live by the same laws, enforced equally with fairness and justice? Shouldn’t we all have no fear of persecution based on our color of skin, our religion gender and sexual orientation?

In truth there are some that don’t want these things. But I feel the majority do. Yet it is that minority that must be guarded against.

Perhaps my post was too realistic. Perhaps the fears we all don’t speak about came to life for a brief moment. If so that is good. Because it is in discussing those fears and their causes that make us grow and become stronger.

And in truth I don’t care if a woman, a Republican or Democrat, Black White or Hispanic are President. Not if they have the best intention of America at heart. Right now some of our candidates do. Some are just seeking power for their own personal gain. And some are just looking to extend the political power and partisanship that has existed and weakened America for decades.

I truly believe that America is a great nation. I know from experience in traveling part of the world that it is unique. Our freedoms and unity, such as they are, are unseen in the scope and depth they attain here.

And I believe without reservation that if all America votes we will gain the best President we can, and eventually the best President period. That in voting we will gain a better stronger and more unified nation. Because this still is a nation of the people.

Sometimes a shock can remind us of how fragile these rights and freedoms are. Sometimes we forget what happens if we aren’t open and honest about our past and present. Because everything can change if we let a few closed minds take control and make decisions for us all. But we need to be involved.

If you are angry by my mock post, good. You should be. It wasn’t meant to be a nice thing, but it was meant to provoke shock and thought, and discussion. If it causes you to act, to vote, to be involved with the Presidential election and the things happening around you then it is worth the anger being directed at me.

But don’t just read it on the surface and let it pass. Don’t assume I have anger in my heart. If you’ve read my 1000+ posts, you will understand that I am passionate in my views. Perhaps I could have worded this better. But sometimes a blunt weapon is better than the finest point.

I hope not to lose readers because of this fictional post. It was not made lightly, or in jest. There was no humor in its creation. Nor is there any attempt to generate fear. That was not its point.

I suppose I could have made this part of the original post, but I did not think that was necessary. I was wrong. But I stand by the post, and its original intent.

Hopefully now it is more clear on why I created it. Hopefully all my readers can understand that and respect me for it.

Labels: 2008 election, democrat, DIGG, fiction post, morality, Polispeak, Presidential race, race in America, Reparations for Slavery, republican, Senator Barack Obama, That's why I vote

**A fictional press release**

Major City in America – A date some time between 2009 - 2012 -- America still reeling 3 days after the shocking assassination of its leader.

On the 1st day after the assassination of President Barack Obama, by at least 3 men from a fringe radical group, America is still in turmoil. Across the nation riots continue to encompass most of the major cities. New York, Los Angeles, and D.C. are all in states of emergency as huge crowds of African Americans continue to express rage at the murder of the nations first Black President.

The riots started shortly after President Obama was shot while addressing the nation, offering an official apology from the United States Government to all the descendants of Africans enslaved in America from 1619 to 1865. The apology was a huge political hotbed of debate prior to the speech, with dozens of legislators and governors of both political parties publicly disagreeing with the President’s intent to issue the apology. Several hate groups had been actively suggesting that if the apology were made that it was the final straw and that action would need to be taken against President Obama.

While President Obama had encountered consistent death threats since his election win in 2008, and 2 prior attempts on his life, he had stated that he would go through with the speech. Even pressure from within his own political party was not enough to sway his determination.

“There has been too much time that has passed without acknowledging the contributions and sacrifice these founding Americans made for this nation. While they were taken from their homes and families against their will, they helped to create the nation we have today and their progeny stand side by side with Americans from every race, religion and country in equality and peace. It’s time we say that America made a mistake then, and that we can now look forward to a future no longer marred by the past we so long refused to speak about.”

Shortly after beginning his speech to the nation, at least 3 men fired on the President. Two of the men were in the large crowd that had gathered for the speech, armed with 9mm pistols, and another was inside an office building with a rifle, of unknown power and make at this time. The President was struck at least 5 times.

The 2 men in the crowd were apprehended quickly after being shot in an exchange of fire with police and Secret Service agents. One died on the scene, the other is in critical condition under guard in an undisclosed hospital in the area. The third suspect was caught in the resulting dragnet of the city 4 hours later. It is unknown if there were any other individuals involved in the assassination.

Within minutes of the senseless murder of the leader of the nation, several racist hate groups denied involvement in the attack. Also videotaped denials were released by the current leader of Al Quida, refuting early claims that the assassination was retribution for the successful end of the Iraq war and the death of Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden was killed in the waning months of the Iraq War, trying to re-enter Pakistan in a firefight with U.S. forces that attempted to capture him and his small entourage of terrorist supporters.

Riots broke out around the nation within minutes of the announcement that President Obama had died while doctors were operating on him to save his life. The President had been undergoing emergency surgery for 2 hours after being shot, and the doctors performing the surgery stated that the damage inflicted was just to severe to counter.

The worst of the riots are in the renovated sections of New Orleans and Chicago where the President previously called home prior to his election, and where he served as an Illinois Senator.

World leaders continue to issue statements of remorse, and call for peace in this distressing time in America. Several nations have voiced concern over the control of the U.S. nuclear arsenal, and the military which has also reported several events of fighting and disturbances at bases across the world. While there has been no sigh of a breakdown of nuclear control, or fractioning of the military, international tensions have increased significantly.

Religious leaders of all faiths, particularly Civil Rights leaders Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton and even the controversial Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, have all called for calm. So far these calls have gone unheeded.

It is unclear how long this unrest will last. Few imagined that the possibility of an apology for slavery could cause such chaos. But the whole world is paying attention to what the former Vice-President and now President will do.

President Obama will be known for his winning of the nearly decade long Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the virtual elimination of the terrorist organization Al Quida, the continuing fight against the ‘Gods Arm’ terrorist organization that replaced Al Quida, his quick actions to restore normalcy in the earthquake ravaged suburbs of San Diego, the recovery from the 2 year economic recession of 2008, his work on balancing the American legal systems’ enforcement and punishment and rights of gays, women and minorities.


***The previous is a fictional news release that could happen. There are those in America that fear this becoming a possibility. Many refuse to acknowledge this fear, or even the consideration of several of the events I have described.

I hope to never see such a news release. But it is a real possibility. Yet if this were to happen, and the events I’ve detailed came to pass, what would happen next?

Would America be better for each of these things to happen? And what if the assassination or even attempts never happened? What if these events, enacted by my fictitious President Obama, were done by a Republican candidate, or Hillary Clinton?

The real question here is that there are real issues before America, and the next President will need to address them. Many of the problems are deeper than the mere surface questions debated about currently.

We all have the right to vote. That vote implies many things, and directly determines the direction this nation will take. Don’t squander that vote. Don’t sell it cheaply because of the race, gender, political party, or 30 second polispeak answer of a candidate.

If we all vote, I believe we will select the best person (whomever that may be), and direction, for all of America. The President should have no less in mind, and we should elect that President for no less of a reason.

Labels: Al Sharpton, American Slavery, Chicago, democrat, election 2008, Jesse Jackson, New Orleans, Polispeak, Presidential race, Reparations for Slavery, republican, That's why I vote

Another one bites the dust. The list of former Presidential candidates increased today with they loss of Dennis Kucinich from the Democratic Party. Such is the toll of the debates, Primaries, and Caucuses. But I have to give the man credit, he garnered about 4% in most of the votes, he had Viggo Mortensen as his celebrity support and he is not giving any of the remaining candidates his support at this point.

I especially liked the fact he was the only candidate to speak about, in a nationally televised debate, the issue of an apology for slavery and reparations. When every Democratic candidate on the stage with him that night, there were 7 others, was asked if they would comment they all went dead silent. They wouldn’t even raise their hands on the issues. Cowardly. But Kucinich stated that he favored an apology, and reparations. And he made a quick but thoughtful answer as to why.

He may be out of the race, and little is known about his positions, but I gained a lot of respect for him in that moment. Far more than the leading Democratic candidates that are campaigning in South Carolina, and using race as both a weapon and tool. The leading Democratic candidates that made wonderful speeches on Monday while celebrating the Martin Luther King holiday, yet could not address, in any manner, a basic question that has been in the floating in the background of American politics since 1869,

But Democrats, of all races, should never doubt that the remaining candidates will be willing to take the lead in supporting their issues. Just as long as the popular opinion is in favor of the idea, it doesn’t cost much, and the Government does not have to admit any fault. Just as long as it won’t interfere with their ability to raise cash from special interest groups. Just as long as making platitudes of a certain theme on specific holidays will ensure that you go to that voting booth and give them your support.

So the choices have whittled down just a bit more. With it the choices and diversity of opinion available to the American public. Such is the race for the Presidency of 2008.

Labels: Democratic Party, Dennis Kucinich, Presidential race, South Carolina, Viggo Mortensen

The pressure in the Democratic Presidential race is definitely moving up. And it’s hitting Senator Clinton right between the eyes.

Over the weekend, Senator Clinton seemed to get quite upset when, while discussing healthcare, John Edwards mentioned that he and Senator Obama are agents of change and that Senator Clinton was not. Her response was that

“there are 7,000 kids in New Hampshire that have healthcare because I helped to create the children’s health insurance program.”

Now I’m not sure how many people watched Fox News on Sunday when Dick Morris, who used to work for President Bill Clinton, refuted her comment. According to his live comments, Senator Clinton had nothing to do with what she claimed. He stated that it was in fact his efforts and discussions with President Bill Clinton that helped the kids in New Hampshire. Mr. Morris further stated that at the time, First Lady Clinton was overseas and had no involvement in the matter.

It’s a strong accusation, and I have seen nothing that refutes or even acknowledges his comments. If it is accurate, then it is another case of Senator Clinton taking credit for the work of her husband as her own experience. It would be an example of desperation, as is her anger, as her hopes for the Presidency crumbles.

And then on Monday we see this



I believe this is a bad sign. Given that the Presidential race is stressful, and that losing in Iowa was a huge blow to her campaign. But the reality is what happens when U.S. military forces are killed overseas, while the economy is crashing, diplomatic efforts with North Korea are failing, oil prices are through the roof, and a tornado has just decimated a big city in the mid-west? Which sounds more stressful?

And if this emotional moment is not real, which I am not assuming, it is a blatant attempt to cash in on being a woman in the worst way.

Looking at it in several different ways, the outlook is not good for the “presumed nominee” (as claimed in polispeak by multiple pundits for most of 2007) of the Democratic party.

Labels: Democratic Party, Dick Morris, election 2008, John Edwards, New Hampshire, Polispeak, Presidential race, Senator Clinton

Taking a moment to reflect on the Presidential race, all of the comments debate and punditry that has gone on since the beginning of the year, I was sitting back and remembered something. The television show, The West Wing, had probably the best debates and political competition I have ever experienced in 40 years of my life.

Taking a scene from that show, I want to share a thought that I think is very important in the division among conservatives, liberals, democrats, republicans and everyone else in the nation right now.

Let me know your thoughts.

Labels: Arnie Vinick, political debate, Presidential race, Santos, West Wing

For days now I have heard discussion and arguments about Oprah Winfrey. Is it a good thing that she is backing a politician, does it matter that the politician is Black, does it violate regulations and restrictions in the media? They go on with, can Oprah affect politics like she can book sales, does this help or hurt Senator Obama and the Democratic party, how much effect will women and African Americans really have in this next election, and on and on.

But I have to wonder.

Ms. Winfrey is a noted entertainment figure, of that there is no doubt. And there is no question that her fans are legion. To question the impact of her ability to lend credibility to anything she advocates is to have blinders on to the recent past. Ms Winfrey is unique among virtually all her entertainment peers, past and present, in that she moves mountains.

There is no coincidence that because of Ms Winfrey, an 18,000 seat arena was sold-out in virtually no time, in Columbia, South Carolina. The fact is that she wields power. And at the match of that is Senator Obama.

In the beginning of the year, when the average citizen was ignoring the early start of the Presidential race, Senator Obama was called a ‘young Senator without a chance.’ That he would ‘make an interesting distraction until real candidates got involved.’ That was the opinion of the pundits across the major media outlets. How wrong they were.

Suffice to say that Senator Obama is a real candidate, with appeal to all Americans, and his own goals for the country. He is no cookie-cutter politician, nor is he flustered by the Clinton political machine that has ground many other opponents to dirt.

So given the high credentials of both these figures, the fact they have spoken and discussed issues in the past that are mutually aligned, and that they have a media presence individually that is impressive, why are there questions?

When Don Cheadle, George Clooney, and others have spoken about Darfur, the media did not blink. When Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie made efforts to help millions in Louisiana and Africa there was barely any attention. When Hanoi Jane Fonda, and Tim Robbins protested the war in Iraq, few centrists (where I think most of the nation is) cared.

But in this one instance we get something different. We get a real media powerhouse backing a real candidate. That is not to say that Barbara Streisand, Bon Jovi, or Sir Bono, among others, are (were) not powerful in a manner, but they are not powerhouses. Moreso they are not minorities. And I think that scares more than a few.

I think the huge media argument has been very simple and well disguised. Some fear that 2 Black figures at the top of their respective fields can make things change. No one questioned Oprah while she avoided politics. No one worried about how Senator Obama campaigned or who backed him. But the second both were linked there was frenzy.

Why?

Because they both are articulate individuals, and in a manner that does anything but evoke the stereotypes and back-handed compliments usually attached to that phrase. Because millions agree with their views and most of those are citizens that have not historically used the power of their vote. Women, African Americans, and the youth. None of these groups have been noted for actually voting in high numbers or in a block. And some are terrified if they do.

If these 3 groups come out in force and vote, the traditional political power lines will fail and things will change. It doesn’t matter if they vote for Senator Obama or not. The result will be a shift, and many in America are terrified by such a change. Its implications could end the control some have had for centuries.

This is the reason why some pundits try to belittle the “Oprah effect”, knowing that said effects reach and power is known and unmatched. It is the reason why some pundits state it will not help Senator Obama. It is why 18,000 rushed to hear these 2 people in the middle of the South, a point that has not been duplicated in the past or present and cannot be underestimated.

In everything I have heard I come back each time to one thought. Some are afraid of having 2 Black powerhouses, saying the same thing together, signaling the real end to the ‘White Old Boys Club’ in the most significant way. If my supposition is correct, then I herald that chance. I look forward to that change. I am not endorsing Senator Obama, but I am recognizing the impact.

I once wrote if celebrity endorsements affect how some vote. Perhaps I should have asked and discussed if a triumvirate of minorities coming out to vote in force can improve America. That is the real question behind Oprah and Senator Obama. That is the real fear. For some.

Labels: Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, Columbia, Don Cheadle, George Clooney, Oprah effect, Oprah Winfrey, Presidential race, Senator Obama, South Carolina

Well now that everyone has finished the turkey (minus a few leftover sandwiches), let it digest, and worked off the extra weight running around shopping at every store with a discount sale it’s time of me to get back to work. There has been a lot worth writing about, but let me start with a simple thought. The economy.

The economy is perhaps not the simple part of the thought. It has far too many factors involved, and minds far greater than mine have debated endlessly about what will and does make it move up and down. But as a man who pays attention to the events and has a decent hold on current events I’ll throw my 2 cents in.

I had a friend recently ask me what I thought would be happening to the economy, and my answer was it’s going to get bad. Perhaps recession bad. And I added that the current group of Democratic candidates may only make it worse.

I say this because of several factors. Not the least of which are, the housing crisis, the financial sector, the cost of oil, and potential tax ramifications based on the current plans announced by candidates.

Let’s look at the housing crisis. While there are estimates that state the maximum reach of the crisis is on 5% of homes, I think it fails to take a couple of things into account. While only 5% of home mortgages have failed now, I would expect these are the early defaulters. I would guess that there are another 10-15% of homes in danger of default. Given that the Fed has lowered rates, these homes on the edge have gotten a bit of extra time, but that does not fix their problem.

This leads us to the financial sector. Already several major banks are claiming huge losses due to the bad loans they have made. In order to recoup their losses and in hopes of preventing more credit is being crunched. This means that large- and mid-sized corporations will have less capital available to them, and some short-term loans may be called or canceled. That does nothing to stimulate growth. Plus variable loans to the riskier ventures will invariably go up to offset the losses in the home sector. Thus the purchase of houses must slow, the real estate markets will cease top be a haven for a while and money will have to flow into new areas for investment.

Now when you consider that the corporations are getting higher cost for loans, or being denied, this is happening at the same time that costs for fuel are going up. A lot. That hits profit centers fast. Thus profit margins shrink at the same time that retail is hitting its greatest need for the annual shopping rush of the holidays.

Keep in mind that small companies will be cut off from loans by banks since their credit and assets are too weak in a tight credit market. Add the higher cost of transportation and several small companies will fail to make it thru the end of the year, I expect. That will hit all the businesses that supply and help them operate.

Also keep in mind that as I recall the market virtually never rises, or even maintains its level without the positive performance of the financial sector. As I mentioned that sector is already failing. As the dominoes fall I expect them to perform worse near term. Thus that is direct downward pressure on the market. And while the holiday sales will help retailers absorb the cost of higher fuel, the consumer will likely spend less (or buy items with greater discounts) because the cost of heating their homes and electricity and mortgages are all up.

What’s the last piece of this puzzle? The Presidential race. We have a critical election where several nation defining events will occur. Already several Democratic candidates have expressed expanding entitlement programs. Those programs, like nationalized healthcare, must be paid for via taxes. Those taxes will come from companies making less profit and citizens with less discretionary income. (And a bailout of the mortgage crisis costs even more that needs to me recouped from taxes) This is beyond the fact that when Democratic candidates are elected (which could happen in 2008 – which is a bad thought) the markets normally react poorly initially, when looked at historically.

Add all that up and you have a stagnating market, with reduced sales, higher costs, shrinking profit margins, higher taxes, horrible bond rates, and depressed real estate values. I call that a real problem. Especially if the tight credit, higher fuel costs, and higher taxes cause more home mortgages to fail than just the 15% low-end estimate I posed earlier.

What’s the best plan? Well I used to tell my clients (back when I was a broker, years ago) that we can assume these events as facts and plan for the worse. Set up a plan to sit and wait for a couple of the trends to reverse, and take advantage of market overreactions where possible (the market is more emotional than fact driven even in the best of markets). Is that the best plan for you? I have no idea.

Discuss this with your financial professionals, read what better minds than I say, and make up your own mind. Just remember, it’s all connected, and there is never a perfect answer.

** This can also be seen at Economist Blog where I am an occassional contributing author.**

Labels: credit market, Democratic Party, election 2008, financial sector, heating oil, holiday retail sales, mortgage loans, Presidential race, real estate, stock market

**This can also be seen at Presidential Race Blog, where I am a contributing author.**

As we approach of the primaries and then enter the Presidential race of 2008 in earnest, more Americans are beginning to pay real attention to who the candidates are. It’s given that there have been multiple debates on each political side, and many organizations have made standpoints on issues they believe are essential in their potential nominee. Yet, most Americans have yet to pay any attention.

That will soon change as we approach December and the early primaries of 2008 loom on the horizon. If you thought Christmas, Hanukah, or Kwanza were about religion, gifts and family cheer you will be sadly proven incorrect. This year that time will be about immigration, taxes, and the Iraq war.

This can be said with some authority when the advertising numbers are viewed.

“National cable networks sold 301 ad units between January and Sept. 2, 2007. That compares with a mere 19 units sold over a 15-month period during the last presidential cycle, January 2003 to March 2004.”

There is no end in sight. But what do these numbers really mean?

Estimates state that up to, or far more than, $2.7 billion will be spent on political advertising by Election Day in November 2008. That’s a huge number. That’s just swamping television, broadcast radio, and the internet with political ads. I would presume that at 30 seconds a piece the total number of ads, placed back to back, could equate to roughly a week or more of nothing but ads.

That’s a lot of time to say as little as possible and yet gain as many votes as possible. In all honesty, it’s an attempt to blur the facts and coerce the votes on the cheap. Because there is not a scholar on the planet that can summarize the Iraq war, and its ramifications into a 30 second sound bite. Hell, the debate by President Lincoln took hours and that was over 100 years ago, without a war, terrorism, nuclear weapons, illegal immigration, or taxes. If the Presidency was so complicated then that it took hours to justify the worthiness of who is to be elected, how long should it take now?

I realize that the immediacy of the world today does not lend itself to long debates fill with facts and details. I realize that superficial items like the clothing and colors the candidates wear are more easily digested. Still one has to ask, with so much time being devoted to pick candidate A, why is it being split up into multiple 30 second ads. My thought is that we the people are being misled to a degree and the candidates know it.

If any candidate was seriously interested in letting the nation know what they think, they would buy a half-hour block of time, and run that once a month on cable and broadcast television. They would send out transcripts of that discussion with the people, and post it on the internet. They would give definite answers and stand on a platform everyone can understand. And poll numbers would not sway their beliefs.

Think about it. I will use Senator Clinton as an example, but the same actions can be found with all the candidates. We have seen Senator Clinton strongly demand that the nation go to war with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, coincidentally while polls were favoring such action. Not all agreed with the information available for the war, but Sen. Clinton was a staunch advocate. As polls went against the war Senator Clinton came out against the war, at the same time plans were made that she would run for the Presidency. Now in the middle of her campaign, after defending organizations like MoveOn.org and questioning President Bush’s comments on Iran, Senator Clinton has begun to state that she may not take all the troops out of Iraq during her first term and that military strikes against Iran are feasible answers to their nuclear ambitions.

If you only follow the 30 second soundbites of the ads, you will miss these comments and turns in policy. They are minimized and drowned out by her regional and targeted messages. The Senator has distracted attention with ‘thoughts’ about college funds for all the children and denouncement of the plans of her peers. I am not saying her actions are correct or incorrect. I am highlighting the fact that the political ads obscure the actual platform that Senator Clinton, and to varying degrees the other candidates, hold.

We deserve better. We need to pay more attention. The 2008 election is not a MTV video. The lives of all Americans will be changed by the next President. I strongly believe that. So as the attention increases, and the ads fill the airwaves I suggest taking a bit of time to look back and learn the history of these candidates. Compare what they have said in the past with what they say today. Check how and when they changed their positions. It’s one thing to come to a better understanding on an idea, it’s another to just go with the popular opinion for the sake of gaining political power on the emotional cheap.

IF we don’t, you may not like what happens after the election when it’s too late.

Labels: election 2008, Iran, Iraq War, political ads, Presidential race, Senator Clinton

The world has changed greatly in the last 20 years. In one generation the internet has become an integrated part of daily life, and the speed and ease of connecting with each other has increased exponentially. Unlike the generations before, the youth of America today are drawn to instantaneous communication and feedback. It’s all they have known.

Recognizing these facts are MTV and Myspace. Both are dedicated to feeding the need of the youth of today, the need to be able to email a thought and respond with a text message where older Americans might just wait. But when it comes to the election of the next President of the United States, a year may as well be a decade to some of the first-time voters. Thus MTV and Myspace have figured out, perhaps the best I have ever seen, how to involve these voters in the most crucial part of being an American, voicing their opinion in a free election.

In a format that is as integrated with technology, just like the youth of today would expect, a series of questions will be given by young Americans to the various Presidential candidates, and a real-time online poll will record the impression of the answers given. This is not the over crowded, soundbite laden debates that have been going on since before the summer; rather they are individual candidates answering live questions.

I must admit my surprise and pleasure with the format and involvement of the youth. Their voices are constantly called the key unknown factor of every Presidential race that I have been alive for. And each time the actual turnout is underwhelming. If this proves to be effective in motivating young Americans to vote, then that is a great accomplishment.

I’m also interested in the questions that will be asked, and how each candidate will react since they will not be able to prepare beforehand. I wonder what are the issues that younger Americans will find most important, and what degree of emphasis is give within that issue. Are many of the younger voters concerned about winning in Iraq, getting out, or just not having to face the possibility of fighting themselves? Are they fearful of a terrorist attack in the near future or do they see the current and proposed efforts as over-the-top? Are their concerns about the economy based on getting a job after high school or college, or is it more focused on longer term issues? Is national healthcare an issue they understand completely, including the costs and manner of service provided, or just something that they have heard about?

It’s as vital to understand what the newer voters are thinking as what the candidates are saying. They will be the new leaders of the nation one day. They will be voting on issues that will affect all Americans for decades. They can and will be the critical vote deciding many of these things, with more emphasis over time. This format is not only a motivation for them, but an eye-opening event for us.

We should not miss the opportunity, any of us.

Labels: election 2008, political debate, political issues, Presidential candidates, Presidential race

This is a copy of the exact letter sent to Republican and Democratic Parties on March 30, 2007. This is part of my ongoing efforts to increase the number of voters and to have the best person possible elected as President of the United States in 2008.

March 30, 2007

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am contacting your organization today in the hope of being able to speak to a
representative on several issues. The reason for this request is that I am the author of several blogs and owner of a website that discusses and features commentary and insights on politics and the up-coming 2008 Presidential election.

In my discussions with both visitors of my websites, and various people in daily life, I have come to find that many are unfamiliar with the basic tenants of the major political parties. Many, in my experiences, find politics to be confusing and the various bits of information from televised news programs, whether found on broadcast or cable networks, to be to brief to be informative. As politicians and the various parties represent varying degrees, from ultra-conservative to ultra-liberal, of their respective political viewpoints, many are unsure of what a Democrat or Republican is, or what the respective ideologies involve.

To that end, as an aid to my readers and to help promote involvement in the Presidential election in 2008, I seek to have an interview with a representative of your party. I will also be seeking to have an identical interview with a representative of the [Democratic or Republican ]party. I will publish each interview, without alteration or editing of content, separately and fairly. I have not taken a position in favor of any party or candidate at this time. I have critiqued members of both parties in the past, on the blogs, for various issues. I have also written letters to Presidential candidates of both political parties, which are similar in content and balanced in tone. All of the letters I have
written can be found at my website, www.vassconsult.com/politics/election2008.html ,
which is a neutral site. Each letter is unaltered copies of what has been sent to each candidate, and any response will be posted unaltered as well.

My belief is that the 2008 election is critical to the future of the nation. The
candidate that provides the best outlook for the nation is the only criteria that I feel is important. The letters I have sent to the various candidates of both parties reflect that viewpoint. While there has been no response from any candidate at this time I feel that providing my readers with these questions helps them better evaluate their choice for President. To further that involvement in the election process and to help better the understanding of the political parties I request an interview with a representative of your party.

The interview can be done via email, which may be easiest for all involved. I will
provide a copy of the content to be posted, and the location of the posts, prior to their being posted to the internet. I am not seeking any funds, nor have I donated any funds to either party. If it is important, I will add that my sites currently reach in excess of 20,000 visitors a month and are growing in popularity, and it is verifiable that the blogs can be readily found on all major search engines. The website, mentioned above, is new and was started in March 2007.

The sites that the interview would be found on are the following:

www.blackentertainmentblog.com
www.mvass.com
www.vassconsult.com

I look forward to your response in this matter and thank you for your attention.

Sincerely,

Michael Vass
President - M V Consulting, Inc.
Author - Black Entertainment USA, VASS
718-344-6921
info@vassconsult.com

Labels: Democratic Party, presidential candidate, presidential election, Presidential race, Republican Party

Continued from Senator John Kerry 'jokes' about the military - 11.1.2006.1 ...

Considering how I feel on this matter I asked several people their thoughts. An older taxi driver thought Sen. Kerry should learn to ‘shut up if he can’t figure out what to say’ especially since there isn’t a Presidential race for another 2 years. Not too far from what many election-motivated politicians are saying. But as I received a haircut I saw a major revelation.

The barbershop is African American owned and run. Everyone in the shop was younger than myself, beyond that I can’t say more as I don’t know. When I brought up this subject, not one person out of the 9 there knew anything about the issue. I found this surprising as I do know the barbershop has a cable fed television. When I mentioned the comments, the response from President Bush, and the follow-up by Senator Kerry I asked what were their thoughts.

Virtually no one had a thought. One man did say that he though that Kerry was wrong, but he disagreed with President Bush. When he was asked about why he felt like that he said he wasn’t sure. So I pressed on. I asked if there was a draft would he serve, his reply was I wouldn’t have a choice. I corrected that he could refuse or run away like some did during Viet Nam. Given that option he thought about it and said yes he would. 2 other younger men (I’m guessing 18 -23ish in age) said no. Their reason to not do it was that they disagreed with President Bush. These young men felt that the war was about oil and that President Bush failed to protect the nation, as opposed to President Clinton. Then they asked me if I thought Senator Clinton could win an election for President.

I mentioned a couple of choice comments on her, and I mention that while we were not attacked in America there were many things happening during the Clinton Administration. This was confirmed by another man.

In an effort to be more consice I’ll summarize the rest of the conversation that basically only dealt with the two 20-somethings. We discussed Senator Clinton (and her voting record as well as announcements on popular subjects), North Korea and its nuclear weapons, the future oil needs of America (and the untapped reserves in Alaska) and the world, the media’s manner in providing information, and the full comments of the 2nd stripper in the Duke rape case (some of my comments can be seen at Duke allegations part 1). In each case and on every subject these men had no idea about the background of the subject.

To be concluded in Barbershop thoughts part 2 ...

Labels: African American, President Bush, Presidential race, Senator John Kerry