Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 23, 2008

Veep Biden

NYT says so.

The guy likes to hear himself talking. Not sure others like that too.

Posted by b on August 23, 2008 at 5:25 UTC | Permalink


getting caught up in the veep hype may be premature. there's interesting chatter that HillBill may be ready to jump Nobama at the convention instead of conceding her delegates. over at ICH this article is one of two that makes an interesting case for a deft political hit by the pseudo-liberal dynamo. McPain has somehow edged ahead in the polls, if you believe august polls, but it may be the incentive HillBill is looking for to strike.

Posted by: Lizard | Aug 23 2008 5:57 utc | 1

"Mr. Obama’s selection ended a two-month search that was conducted almost entirely in secret. It reflected a critical strategic choice by Mr. Obama: To go with a running-mate who could reassure voters about gaps in his resume, rather than to pick someone who could deliver a state or reinforce Mr. Obama’s message of change."

color me reassured.

another motherfucker in a motorcade.

Posted by: ran | Aug 23 2008 6:20 utc | 2

nice hair plugs though.

Posted by: ran | Aug 23 2008 6:30 utc | 3

You can vote for GOBAMA/BIDEN, or you can vote for McCain.

Or you can NOT vote, or write in someone else, which is a vote for McCain.

I'ts not rocket science at this level . . . you either vote for dem's, or not.

And the end result will be what ever it is . . . but it's YOUR vote.

Choose wisely, folks . . . or you'll get the worse of the two choices.

We don't have other choices, only two. Which one do YOU want?

Unless yer insane, it's gotta be the Dem's.

And once in office, it's time for the masses to put feets to fires, if they don't do what we want them to do.

At THAT point, if we own the White House, and the Senate and House, and the masses are NOT being cared for, then it's time to hold their feet to fire . . .

For now, let's not be foolish . . . Kuch is out, Edwards fucked up in the WORST way.

We've got our hand. It's time to declare.

It's your vote. It's your future and life. More of the same, or hope for SOMETHING. Anything?


Posted by: larue | Aug 23 2008 7:48 utc | 4

it's suffocating to be in the US right now. these "decisions" mean less than nothing. what's even worse is how supposedly "educated people" invest themselves in this two party charade like it matters.

fuck prolonging the inevitable. as a complicit spectator offering consent through inaction, i demand this political brand of theatre at least maximize the entertainment value, because, as an amerikan, my own amusement is really the only thing that means anything to me.

Posted by: Lizard | Aug 23 2008 7:57 utc | 5

Damn Lizard, that would pack a whallop. The only thing that would win over that would truly be the new second coming of politics indeedee. It'd take the same thing that Bill used to do, to make a nice speech that kind of dispelled the bad ratings the machine was trying to generate all thru his "presidency". You speak and people imagine they grok your being, and Obama does deliver on that quality.

Biden? The endless hall of questionability. Because our congress is corrupt thru and thru, plainly before the voters, every goof from there is wearing the stain of it. I await my master CNN's views on him. Maybe he will make Obama just dirty enough to win. Will he speak in compete sentences? That would be good. You go, Joe. Time for what you really think, you dope, you turd. The history clock is ticking, say one true thing before you go, and get us 4 more years six more times, I'd like to see a whole platform I agree with before I check the show.

Posted by: aumana | Aug 23 2008 8:01 utc | 6

larue: hahahahahaha. yer funny. keep those fingers BUSY.

Posted by: Lizard | Aug 23 2008 8:04 utc | 7

Unless yer insane, it's gotta be the Dem's.

Your're just not paying attention, are you?

Posted by: DM | Aug 23 2008 8:34 utc | 8

I think larue nailed it.

Posted by: Dennis | Aug 23 2008 9:44 utc | 9

lol you know things are getting desperate in the dem camp when their shills come into MoA spruiking their anybody but bush -no wait - that was back in 04 wasn't it. Ah I remeber this time it's anybody but McCain - proving once again the main democrat function is ensuring that no credible candidate shall ever appear on the left. The dems never pick one.

However they do spend big mobs of money on lawyers trying to fuck up the democratic process they claim to care so much about. The screw the process by preventing the emergence of a third party. Or taking over the Green Party and pushing it into irrelevence. That right when the green movement was taking off world wide.

The dems do all that so they can say "anybody but a rethug" - right after they have expended so much energy and credibility on destroying genuine reform candidates, the best they can offer as an alternative to the rethugs is more hacks?

Since you can't push a cigarette paper between a rethug or a dem on any meaningful subject, the answer must be the destruction of the dems to create the space for a humanist pol who isn't beholden to the usual suspects to move in.

Even though Georgia has the gutless dems panicking, the odds are high that Obama will win amerikan prez 2008 except it won't be a dem win it will be a rethug loss.

That is something these hacks and their half-witted fanbois can never understand. amerikans vote for the other fella when they can't ignore the rethug stink any longer, not because the dem pol smells nearly as bad. If the dems had any balls they would offer up a candidate who hasn't been ass fucked by every old white man with a spare $billion.

And then discover that he/she had still won.
not because amerikans liked the candidate, but because they didn't dislike him/her as much as they disliked and mistrusted the rethug.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Aug 23 2008 10:38 utc | 10

That does it. I am switching to Pepsi!

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 23 2008 10:57 utc | 11

Feigned action or fictitious clarity ....

youtube: Joe Biden Endorses John McCain

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 23 2008 11:33 utc | 12

Biden endorses
a fusion ticket:

a bird with two right wings pushing supermarket beliefs

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 23 2008 11:38 utc | 13

As expected by some, Obama will bring in some smart establishment figures who are capable of articulating a counter-context when one is needed. Obama needs a few of these types to craft & push "the message" and to also absorb scrutiny that would otherwise be over-focused on Obama himself. Biden is a very good example especially wrt foreign-policy. Biden would likely have been SecState under Kerry or Gore. And he's not easy to intimidate. Very very good at creating narratives & deconstruction. As long as he stays within the game-plan, he should be a tremendous team-player.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Aug 23 2008 12:17 utc | 14

he shoots off at the mouth. should spice up the campaign.

Posted by: annie | Aug 23 2008 13:54 utc | 15

Well, at least it seems neither of the guys on the Dem ticket are gung-ho to nuke Iran. Not that it's much reassuring, but you gotta go with what you get, I suppose...

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Aug 23 2008 13:58 utc | 16

Among Serbs, however, Joe Biden is best known as the man who sponsored the March 23, 1999 Senate resolution authorizing Clinton to bomb Serbia and will remain permanently ingrained in our collective memory for characterizing Serbian nation as “...a bunch of illiterates, degenerates, baby killers, butchers and rapists” — a hateful outburst and a fascist tirade on CNN’s Larry King Live that was left without a comment, reprimand or any semblance of apology, to date.

“Biden, a new-found champion of peace through strength, total victory, and bombing people to the negotiating table made this case for winning at all costs:
…“[W]e should announce there’s going to be American casualties. We should go to Belgrade and we should have a Japanese-German style occupation of that country.”

Posted by: vbo | Aug 23 2008 14:28 utc | 17

Just my two cents. Biden was a pusher of the bankruptsy bill. More like the enslavement to credit card company act. What a fuck. Now he does bring some balls to the ticket and hes an insider who assures K Street that the Obama team will start out stable. But in the end, this is more of the same. The nobles ruling the masses. Having said that, I still think Obama will be more liberal economically.

I have very good instincts after dealing with the public for 13years in my jobs, being on several state wide boards etc. I still believe Obama will be more liberal on economic issues than he's showing. He has some Hamilton Project folks on his team, but having Robert Reich and Jered Bernstein makes me feel a little better. They know the last eight years have been a pure disaster and the natives are getting restless.

The agenda has completely changed in DC. Its already been pre-ordained. The mini recession right now is just the deck chairs being re-arranged for a democratic admin. So is foreign policy with the timeline just arranged for troop withdrawal from Iraq.

It has been decided in elite circles the US cannot afford to keep up the wars, and relief for the lower classes is a must. We are falling behind in every category of any economic indicator except for the rich getting richer.

So what to look for in 2009? Much more money flowing to the states. More investment in infrastructure. Tax cuts for the middle class and tax hikes for the wealthy including SS hikes on the rich. Re-regulation of some industries, but just enough to make it look good. Less corporations sucking from the public trough. Commodity prices falling and oil eventually falling below $50 per barrel. Some type of universal health care will pass, but it will rely on the private sector. The presidential ticket will trickle down to local and statewide races and more dem legislator will be voted in. The only thing holding dems back in the last election was the jurymandered districts after the 2000 census.
Grass roots progressives will have some power in the Obama admin. If not for grass roots fund raising and young voters he wouldn't be where he is. He will have to at least throw some bones. The Thomas Franks and David Sorotas of the world have a voice now and have received plenty of attention. And the old conservative memes have lost there impact. Tax cuts and the conservative agenda has been a complete failure. The only ones who still don't realize it is Fox News, the Republicans and the 30 %ters. All other have abandoned ship.

On the negative, more spying on citizens and more locals getting in on the act for traffic ticket and drugs. A less adventurous foreign policy, but only because of money constraints. Covert operations and limited strikes will be the modis operandi of an Obama admin. With falling commodity prices many commodity driven nations like Russia and the Middle eastern countries will again have a hard time producing results for their citizens. Unrest will rise. That is some of the reason Russia is becoming aggressive again. Commodity prices always fall under Dems. The Russians want to control the flow and keep revenues high. I tracked it clear back to 1970. Under every rethug oil rises. Under Dems oil falls except for 1979.

Thats my predictions. I could be very wrong, but some are just a given.

Posted by: jdp | Aug 23 2008 14:47 utc | 18

So Biden brings what, exactly, to the Obama ticket? Sure he's been the #!@!$ chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee...BFD! He supported the Iraq war resolution and has subsequently used his clout on the committee to do exactly nothing about exposing the lies and manipulation used to justify attacking Iraq, and to this day does not seem to have any major regrets about it. I don't recall him using his clout on the committee to hold sessions on why the U.S. is establishing Africom, what are our real foreign policy aims vs. a vs. Venezuela, or Columbia, or even Mexico. No revisiting or questioning of the ancient Cuba policy that grows more counterproductive and nonsensical each year. No concern about Haiti. No review of the major emerging world powers, e.g., China, Russia, India, Brazil...etc. etc. So what has he done except run his mouth and grandstand in front of the cameras? And then of course, as already noted upthread, he sponsored the "return of the poorhouse" bill, a/k/a the bankruptcy bill. So this is constructive how, exactly? This is the change we can believe in?

Posted by: Maxcrat | Aug 23 2008 16:10 utc | 19

The American electoral system suffers irreversibly from two deeply corrupt institutions: the political media and campaign finance. A candidate for president must come to terms with these two, or suffer political oblivion.

By picking Joe Lieberman in 2000, Gore semaphored the Washington nomenklatura (finance and media) that he was "safe" on foreign policy; Obama, by picking Joe Biden, is doing exactly the same. Hence the widespread judgement of the media nomenklatura that Biden possesses foreign policy "experience", experience exemplified by vrb's quote in @17, and Iraq.

The question remains whether Biden will do Obama much good in the long run. Gore was judged insufficiently reliable by the media, in spite of Lieberman. My hunch is that the Biden choice will lose its lustre once the phony campaign ends, after the conventions.

McCain will be president in January, Biden or no Biden. The nomenklatura likes a sure thing.

Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Aug 23 2008 16:39 utc | 20

I just saw a short piece about Biden on the BBC, the correspondent there believes that Obama will use Biden to challenge McCain on his supposed Senate credentials. Biden has been in government for some 35 years and can go toe to toe with McCain on any issue he wants. I believe a good case could be made for this.

the bonus is, while Biden is mixing it up in the mud with the republicans, Obama can continue holding the high ground and continually call for unity. Might work.

ah Maxcrat, were you still holding out for a Kucinich style veep? it is time for you to join the bitter old cynics club.

Posted by: dan of steele | Aug 23 2008 16:46 utc | 21


vbo's quote @17, not vrb's. My apologies.

Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Aug 23 2008 16:59 utc | 22

@ larue #4 "Or you can NOT vote, or write in someone else, which is a vote for McCain." pardon my french but what the fuck does that mean? i am really getting tired of this! people voted in 2000 for nader and folks call that voting for bush. finally someone decided that they had enough of the two party system and voted for an alternative. granted it's not much of one but it is one. so should i continue to vote for the "fuck me in the ass with a courtesy of a reach around" party or "just fuck me in the ass and get it over with" party? please explain to me why should i continue in this tradition.

Posted by: charmicarmicat | Aug 23 2008 17:12 utc | 23>Saddama Obama bin Laden has made a very good pick. We in the Indian Community are very, very happy.

Posted by: Muhammad Yunus | Aug 23 2008 17:19 utc | 24


Just out of interest, which party is offering the reach-around?

Posted by: Tantalus | Aug 23 2008 17:39 utc | 25

I keep on saying Obama will lose.

It is the McC VP that is important.

The whole contest is a silly, clowning, circus, designed to keep ppl and the media frothing.

The media hype Obama to make it look like there is novelty, movement forward, dare I say it, *Change*, the US is progressive, modern, moving on, entering a new era, even willing to consider some slightly more liberal ideas (but don’t count on Obama for that), in the ‘old stereotypes no longer apply’ and ‘multi culti, young, savvy, is good’, ‘community counts’ line, racial prejudice overcome, etc. etc.

This is the stuff, as I said before, of Teledrama for bored housewives, the epitome of popular culture. The script can’t work without a Hero figure - special, different, young, slim, smiling, well dressed, stigmatized in a trivial way (blackness) and triumphing nonetheless, proof of probity, PCness, moral rectitude, etc. He is the Young Doctor who correctly diagnoses the dying appealing child, or the older lady with charm: and goes head to head with the Big Boss of the Hospital.

Problems, all well known:

Around Obama there is a miasma of Islamism, Anti-semitism, Communism, Gvmt. corruption + bribery, and ties to Saddam! What on earth could be worse?

Well, maybe killing Christians or being in tune with the PLO!

see here for example (this is a more or less serious post):>investigate B. O.

The site of Raila Odinga, world politics: (Obama’s “cousin”, Kenya): “The people’s President” ..”Your Agent for Change” ...”Vote for change” too funny.. -warning: loud speech, music>rail o7

The link to Saddam is of course indirect. They share a name, obviously (and it is indeed Arabic, as is Barak).. Tony Rezco’s funder, Nadhmi Auchi, Iraqi, London, on the list of the world’s 300 richest men, was Saddam’s cousin.

Obama is being used as a patsy, willingly or not, in any case it would be in his interests, he probably expects to lose but having played his part, etc. etc.

Biden is just the standard choice expected. Change? Not.

Posted by: Tangerine | Aug 23 2008 17:44 utc | 26

You vote for whomever you believe will do the least amount of harm. Period. It's the only real choice our vote allows us.

If anyone feels their vote for the American Presidency will lead to the actual realization of a dream of a more ideal democracy, fairer distribution of wealth, and peace -- any of which would mean a change in the actual structure of power ... I don't believe that's a very accurate perception of how things work in the world.

Nothing short of a revolution would realize even part of that kind of change, and it's not going to happen.

Posted by: Jemand von Niemand | Aug 23 2008 18:53 utc | 27

veep Biden - a lot depends on what the role of the veep is. Cheney was never veep but always pres. He ran the shop fast, furious, even successful until the elders stepped in.

The traditional veep is more the guy who does the honeurs. Visiting here and there, silent relations with the Senate, the usual eulogy. Biden for sure can do that. He even would have fun with it as it would give him a lot of occasions to listen to Joe Biden.

I understand the Obama choice from the campaign perspective. Biden may gaffe here and there but he can zing at anybody in the rightwing cap and hit on target. Obama and Biden is good cop, bad cop play. Obama clean 'change', Biden for the dirty mudfights.

That could well be successful.

What that brings in the end is unpredictable. If Obama wins he can hold Biden down and let him do the safe stuff or he can let him be another Cheney.

I'd doubt that the second version is likely.

Posted by: b | Aug 23 2008 19:39 utc | 28

i'm with tangerine for different reasons - the empire does not want a humanised face as much as the soviet union could not afford dubcek - the empire wants to show us it more terrible face - mcain will win in a 'landslide' decided elsewhere than a ballot box

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 23 2008 19:46 utc | 29

Definitely plan on voting for Bob Barr. He's no Ron Paul, but at least he's anti war, pro civil liberties (although in congress, he did vote for war and patriot act.)

WRT foreign policy, the only difference between Obama/McCain is I think Obama will pursue a Brzezinski inspired policy of winning over Iran to help in future confrontation with Russia. McCain will be an enemy of everyone all at once. Obama will do a better job of keeping Europe friendly, McCain will annoy them a bit more, but Europe will likely swallow it and do what it's told anyway.

Oddly, as much as I can't stand McCain, I'm kind of hoping he'll win. The empire unmasked will breed more opposition. And it's better that the public associate economic collapse with militarism.

Posted by: Lysander | Aug 23 2008 20:31 utc | 30

though I won't vote for McCain I do expect him to win and think it will ultimately be helpful. There is a good chance that more democrats will pick up seats in Congress and should be able to counteract most of the really bad things McCain will try to pull.

If Obama is selected then we will have a repeat of the first 6 years of Bush with a single party controlling the government. I no more trust the democrats than I do the republicans and look for split governments to constantly squabble and fight each other. as long as they are fighting amongst themselves they can't concentrate on screwing me is the way I see it.

Posted by: dan of steele | Aug 23 2008 20:40 utc | 31

@ tantalus # 25: it could go both ways. pun not intended :)
@ jemand von niemand #27: "You vote for whomever you believe will do the least amount of harm. Period. It's the only real choice our vote allows us." well, that's not much of a choice, is it? as i said, the courtesy of a reach around. so tired of it. continuing in the tradition of my parents and grandparents and so forth. everyone of them always said the same thing: "this is a crucial election. we can't let the other side win." and many cycles later they're singing the same mantra as american politics move slowly but steadily to the far right. the american democratic party's agenda would be called and extreme right agenda in europe me thinks. something's gotta give. i never "believed" in the second amendment until i realized that "the forefathers" knew they were signing a document, the constitution, that was far from being perfect and that the 2nd amendment would make sure that an armed uprising would take care of that and restore things the "right" way. were they right but boy they didn't have the vision. marx on the other hand...

Posted by: | Aug 24 2008 2:40 utc | 32

me @ #32

Posted by: charmicarmicat | Aug 24 2008 2:41 utc | 33

(from Lew Rockwell's blog)

Obama's VP pick gives his views on Shalom TV about Israel and the US as allies, why he is a Zionist, leniency for Jonathan Pollard, and why Israel had nothing to do with the US war on Iraq.
Biden: "I am a Zionist"

He sounds like just another AIPAC ass-kisser.

Posted by: Ensley | Aug 24 2008 3:18 utc | 34

Andrew J. Bacevich - The next president will disappoint you

Will the next president actually bring about Big Change? Don't get your hopes up.

Regardless of who wins Nov. 4, we should temper our expectations of what George W. Bush's successor will accomplish, especially on foreign policy.

In reality, presidents don't make policy; administrations do. To judge by the cadre of advisors they've recruited, neither candidate holds much affinity for outside-the-box thinkers.
The very structure of American politics imposes its own constraints. For all the clout that presidents have accrued since World War II, their prerogatives remain limited. A President McCain will almost certainly face a Congress controlled by a Democratic and therefore obstreperous majority. A President Obama, even if his own party runs the Senate and House, won't enjoy all that much more latitude, especially when it comes to three areas in which the dead hand of the past weighs most heavily: defense policy, energy policy and the Arab-Israeli peace process. The military-industrial complex will inhibit efforts to curb the Pentagon's penchant for waste. Detroit and Big Oil will conspire to prolong the age of gas guzzling. And the Israel lobby will oppose attempts to chart a new course in the Middle East. If the past provides any indication, advocates of the status quo will mount a tenacious defense.

Then there is the growing gap between American power and the demands of exercising global leadership.

worth your time ...

Posted by: b | Aug 24 2008 9:42 utc | 35

Good catch annie...


Memorable quotes from Joe "MBNA" Biden:

"The bottom line here is, if regime change is the operative element of this administration's policy [in Iran], you are never going to get to the point where you end up with a diplomatic solution. There may be no diplomatic solution, in the end. That's possible. We may have crossed the line, or they may have crossed the line...while we fool around with this, you're going to see Japan go nuclear, and you're going to see China react to Japan going nuclear, and you're going to see a chain of events set in motion that are going to be significantly damaging to the next generation of Americans. And so, it seems to me we should get off this wicket of suggesting that we won't talk. I mean, what are we afraid of in talking?" (FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace, October 22, 2006)

"The Democrats' support for Israel comes from our gut, moves through our heart, and ends up in our head. It's almost genetic." (October 5, 2006)

"There has never been progress in the Middle East without the United States acting as a catalyst. The fact of the matter is that our good offices are important. The fact as the matter is that I would not do anything that I did not coordinate with the Israeli government. I would not pretend to be anything other than we are. Arabs know where we are and all they want to know is that we are going to, in fact, be blanced and fair about it. I think we can still establish that...My point is that we should have some very important person on the ground there, ready to explore all the initiatives, any serious person in the government thinks it might be worth considering. We should be a catalyst here." (October 5, 2006)

"The single most important thing we could do for Israel right now is to get a political settlement in Iraq. That changes the dynamic, frees up resources for us, frees up our capability and changes the whole game, but we don't seem to have anyone in this administration that can connect the dots." (October 5, 2006)

"It seems to me what we have to do is continue to push to see if we can hold this coalition together to increase gradual sanctions [on Iran]. Without that, we don't have a whole lot of options here...This is a test for the diplomacy. This is a test for the United Nations. If it fails, then what we're going to have to do is begin to come up with a serious containment policy, here." (August 27, 2006)

"Because of our lack of a prevention strategy, we're left with no option here, in my view, but to support Israel in what is a totally legitimate self-defense effort." (Washington, July 16, 2006)

"The outcome [of the Palestinian elections] reflects Palestinian anger and frustration at the Palestinian Authority and Fatah for their corruption, mismanagement, and failure to provide law and order." (January 2006)

"Israel cannot be expected to negotiate with a party that calls for its destruction, engages in terrorism and maintains an armed militia. Hamas must choose: bullets or ballots." (January 2006)

"What we need isn't the death of internationalism or the denial of our stark national interest. What I want to talk about today is a more enlightened nationalism that understands the value of international institutions but supports the use of military force--without apology or hesitation--when we must. An enlightened nationalism that does not allow us to be so blinded by our overwhelming military power that we fail to see the benefit, indeed the need, of working with others. To begin moving this nation in the right direction I believe we need to embrace a foreign policy of enlightened nationalism. First, we need to correct the imbalance between projecting power and staying power. America's military is second to none. It must and will remain second to none."

- Biden quote in support of Bush's request for $87 billion supplemental

"Terror, terror, terror, terror, terror. I would say to John, 'Let me put it to you this way. The Lord Almighty, or Allah, whoever, if he came to every kitchen table in America and said, "Look, I have a Faustian bargain for you, you choose. I will guarantee to you that I will end all terror threats against the United States within the year, but in return for that there will be no help for education, no help for Social Security, no help for health care." What do you do?' My answer is that seventy-five per cent of the American people would buy that bargain."

—Joe Biden, in The New Yorker, on what he would say to John Kerry

As someone else said, "Biden is a Catholic. He goes to Mass at least once a week, and he carries a rosary. He says that time in church is his favorite time, the only time he gets real quiet time."

And the one I can't get over, is Some OF THE DEMS thought Biden a possible running mate for presidential candidate John Kerry, but Biden urged Kerry to select Republican Senator John McCain instead.

Osama Bin Laden
Obama Bi den


Read that real fast, and ask your self how it looks in text, & how you or others will remember it...

Hey, I'm just saying

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 26 2008 1:06 utc | 36

did you think his AIPAC fellating running mate would have chosen anyone who wasn't Ensley?

all must genuflect before our murderous little apartheid BFF or forget about getting elected dog-catcher.

Posted by: ran | Aug 26 2008 1:29 utc | 37

Why is it Presidents have to be flying mummies
in dying trajectories who never could make it
at the Fillmore Auditorium or Zen Mountain Center
I'm not ready to join you daddy with your honorary
membership in the FBI Oh the vast sad camp which
is Washington

--Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Tyrannus Nix?

The cultural perceptions about Obama which Tangerine seems to dismiss are much more powerful than she reckons for America. So I don't agree that McCain will win this. John McCain is a cultural and political relic. He is a throwback: volatile, uncool, uptight, deep-down misanthropic, a computer illiterate, and under a thin veneer a nasty-tempered bastard. If these two candidates were birds; Obama would be a robin redbreast and McCain a pterodactyl.

Don't dismiss style or underestimate grace. I caught the last of the convention first night in Denver, and saw Michelle Obama's speech. It was magnificent and moving, even powerful. Public service was the theme, a virtue that the republicans and their filth have made mock of for almost 8 years. Both the Obama's come from humble beginnings, as McCain and his wife do not.

I know that Biden the VP Select is Dem machine through and through. But consider that Americans are looking for a fresh start; and I know many here think it's all bunk. But this brings me back to the lines of Ferlinghetti. Americans (I believe) are hungering, longing for a president who is, for once, not just another of those "flying mummies in dying trajectories".

Posted by: Copeland | Aug 26 2008 6:03 utc | 38

The comments to this entry are closed.