No comments yet.
No trackbacks yet.
Link Share for My Peeps
March 22, 2008 - 2:26 am
Tags: Democratic primary 2008, democrats, Hillary Clinton, obama, politics
Posted in Mama's Politics, What's Happening? | No comments
Politics and Basketball. . . My Two Favorite Sports
March 5, 2008 - 5:01 am
Tags: Basketball, obama, politics
Posted in Basketball, Mama's Politics | No comments
We gather around the tv tonight to watch primary returns and college basketball.
8:00PM I’m doing my post-workout stretches and watching the primary returns. Obama’s got Vermont and winning in Texas; Clinton’s leading in Ohio.
8:32PM I’m just out of the shower and back in front of the tv. Primary off and basketball on. [...]
I’ve Got Your Back, Michelle O.
February 21, 2008 - 3:59 am
Tags: commentary, democrats, michelle o., obama, opinion, politics
Posted in Mama's Politics | No comments
Just the other day, I was remarking that Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain were both presenting as a couple of classy candidates for first lady.
I revised my opinion yesterday.
Michelle Obama was blasted from all sides after telling supporters at a Milwaukee rally that “Hope is making a comeback, and, let me tell you, for the [...]
This Mama Loves Obama
February 6, 2008 - 6:44 am
Tags: obama, politics
Posted in Family Diary, Mama Knows Best, Mama's Politics | No comments
Who Invited Nader to the Party?!?
Eyes rolled across America when Ralph Nader announced his fourth (or fifth, if you count the 1992 write-in campaign) run at the U.S. Presidency. And, while the spectacle is about as pathetic as Don Quixote tilting at windmills, it’s not nearly as endearing.
Only the most reality-challenged, die-hard of his supporters are still able to get on board with Nader’s assertions that there is essentially no difference between the Democratic and Republican candidates. This is a puzzling position he staked out long ago in order to differentiate himself as a candidate, particularly from the Democrats. However, after Nader effectively cost Al Gore the presidential election in 2000, he has been compelled to maintain this ludicrous stance in order to insulate himself from the widely-held belief that his candidacy allowed Bush to sneak into the White House through Florida’s back door. But I say let’s give credit where credit is due and attach some of the glory of the Bush/Cheney regime and all that’s followed to Ralph Nader. This is truly an infamous political achievement, and one that may well overshadow the potential legacy of his work as a consumer advocate.
Even if Mr. Nader has chosen not to accept the reality of his role as spoiler to the Democrats in the 2000 election, American voters (wisely) weren’t nearly as quick to trust him with their votes in 2004. While Nader got 2,882,955 votes (2.74%) in 2000, he only got 465,650 votes (.38%) in 2004. I imagine his effect on this year’s election will be equally negligible. Yet, he’s back once more, like the uninvited guest who barges into the party, drinks the beer he didn’t pay for, and hits on chicks who are already sitting in other guys’ laps.
What Nader offers an annoyed political public in 2008 is the minor spectacle of an egomaniac who seems increasingly unable to come to terms with his own political irrelevance. With his latest presidential bid, he’s created a just momentary buzz in this political season. But, even as I write this, we’re all already on our way back to the real show as Barack Obama rolls ever closer to the Democratic nomination and his showdown with John McCain in November.