Friday night's presidential debate marked a fairly underreported milestone. On Oct. 1, 1962, James Meredith became the first Black student to enter the University of Mississippi, after a legal battle that escalated all the way to the Fifth Judicial Circuit Court.
The drama had just begun, however. Mississipi Gov. Ross Barnett opposed Meredith's admission with a violent standoff that erupted in riots and ended with two people dead. The federal government intervened when Attorney General Robert Kennedy dispatched marshalls to prevent Meredith from being lynched. Meredith stayed for two years under federal guard and eventually graduated in 1964.
A generation later another Black man entered the University of Mississippi under federal protection...this time as a presidential nominee. We can argue whether having that evolution take half a century is a good or bad thing, but it happened. The University of Mississippi and Gov. Haley Barbour opened their arms to welcome a Black man, not as a student but potentially as the next president of the United States.
On CBS' Face the Nation, Bob Schieffer remembered it in more personal terms. It's a milestone we should all pause to acknowledge.
Watch CBS Videos Online
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Friday, September 26, 2008
Some unsolicited advice to Palin's PR people
I'm not in the habit of giving Republican operatives advice, but after watching Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric I just have to say:
STOP LETTING HER DO NATIONAL INTERVIEWS. STOP IT!!!
I know you needed to get her out there eventually. It was getting to be embarrassing the way you were shielding her. You introduced her as someone who was ready to be president but not do interviews. The embarrassment was not that she couldn't do interveiws, it was that YOU didn't think she could do interviews. If you don't have confidence in her, why should we?
After watching the debacles with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, it seems your lack of confidence was well founded. After four weeks of being sequestered for cram sessions, she still doesn't have a coherent answer to ANY question. I can't think of a single answer that inspired my confidence.
Now...it's not that Palin's people have asked for my advice nor would they, but here it is...
Let Sarah Palin only do local interviews with small time news outlets. Let her do one in every small town you visit. You gain three things:
1) You have the illusion that she is out there talking to the press. Then you can make a legitimate claim that she is doing interviews with the real people...the people who matter. You do a couple of these local interviews each week, and the national outlets will carry them. They will mutter with jealousy, but they'll carry them. You don't have to talk to Wolf to get on CNN.
2) You are bound to get better treatment. The reporters in Po Dunk, Idaho, aren't going to ask you about the Bush Doctrine. They want to know how you will help Potato farmers. It's far easier to bridge to your Alaska story and connect as one of them.
Even better, most local reporters would be thrilled at the chance to interview a VP candidate. They will be so hungry to have a VP candidate you'd be able to demand more concessions.
Palin hack: We want the pimply face intern to do the interview, and he will use the governor's questions.
Pimply faced intern: Yaay!
3) You get practice, so you are ready for the big guns. You don't do your first big interviews with the top anchors of the big three networks, silly. Do I really need to tell you that? You can't learn on that scale. You haven't had an opportunity to feel your way around, learn your style. Worse yet, EVERY BODY is watching. Fifteen to twenty interviews under your belt (that are picked up nationally), you might have the confidence you need to stare down Katie with bubbly defiance. As an added bonus, nobody would care. Nobody is Tivoing, rushing home to see you or YouTubing your 20th interview. By the time Charlie peers over his spectacles, it would be part of the noise.
Of course, I'm sure they won't listen. They will lock her in her cage until it's time to parade her in front of the next conservative crowd....while the wolves and the spotlight wait. Just my $.02
STOP LETTING HER DO NATIONAL INTERVIEWS. STOP IT!!!
I know you needed to get her out there eventually. It was getting to be embarrassing the way you were shielding her. You introduced her as someone who was ready to be president but not do interviews. The embarrassment was not that she couldn't do interveiws, it was that YOU didn't think she could do interviews. If you don't have confidence in her, why should we?
After watching the debacles with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, it seems your lack of confidence was well founded. After four weeks of being sequestered for cram sessions, she still doesn't have a coherent answer to ANY question. I can't think of a single answer that inspired my confidence.
Now...it's not that Palin's people have asked for my advice nor would they, but here it is...
Let Sarah Palin only do local interviews with small time news outlets. Let her do one in every small town you visit. You gain three things:
1) You have the illusion that she is out there talking to the press. Then you can make a legitimate claim that she is doing interviews with the real people...the people who matter. You do a couple of these local interviews each week, and the national outlets will carry them. They will mutter with jealousy, but they'll carry them. You don't have to talk to Wolf to get on CNN.
2) You are bound to get better treatment. The reporters in Po Dunk, Idaho, aren't going to ask you about the Bush Doctrine. They want to know how you will help Potato farmers. It's far easier to bridge to your Alaska story and connect as one of them.
Even better, most local reporters would be thrilled at the chance to interview a VP candidate. They will be so hungry to have a VP candidate you'd be able to demand more concessions.
Palin hack: We want the pimply face intern to do the interview, and he will use the governor's questions.
Pimply faced intern: Yaay!
3) You get practice, so you are ready for the big guns. You don't do your first big interviews with the top anchors of the big three networks, silly. Do I really need to tell you that? You can't learn on that scale. You haven't had an opportunity to feel your way around, learn your style. Worse yet, EVERY BODY is watching. Fifteen to twenty interviews under your belt (that are picked up nationally), you might have the confidence you need to stare down Katie with bubbly defiance. As an added bonus, nobody would care. Nobody is Tivoing, rushing home to see you or YouTubing your 20th interview. By the time Charlie peers over his spectacles, it would be part of the noise.
Of course, I'm sure they won't listen. They will lock her in her cage until it's time to parade her in front of the next conservative crowd....while the wolves and the spotlight wait. Just my $.02
Country First: McCain last
Here's an idea of how McCain could put Country First -- instead of suspending his campaign he should terminate his candidacy.
McCain's erratic behavior over these past few weeks shows that he is almost as unfit for the presidency as his neophyte running mate. It was forseeable that his last stunt would fail. McCain claimed he would suspend his campaign, swoop into Washington to save the bailout deal, and cancel his debate if he couldn't. Later he decided to attend the debate even though he hadn't saved the deal.
He should have known better than to wager his debate performance on his ability to make a deal with 534 people he couldn't control....especially if he couldn't control those of his own party. Now, without the deal, he must pretend that he made progress while he backpeddles on his own promise. Nice.
Today we saw images of McCain scuttling around the halls of Congress trying to talk members into a going along with the latest proposal. How unpresidential. How often do you see a president running around the halls of congress trying to talk members into a deal? If he wanted to look presidential he would summon them to his own meeting. Oh that's right, they wouldn't come. If you can't be in control of the meeting, you don't look like the president.
McCain seems to be more comfortable trying to work deals in the halls of congress. He should stay there.
McCain's erratic behavior over these past few weeks shows that he is almost as unfit for the presidency as his neophyte running mate. It was forseeable that his last stunt would fail. McCain claimed he would suspend his campaign, swoop into Washington to save the bailout deal, and cancel his debate if he couldn't. Later he decided to attend the debate even though he hadn't saved the deal.
He should have known better than to wager his debate performance on his ability to make a deal with 534 people he couldn't control....especially if he couldn't control those of his own party. Now, without the deal, he must pretend that he made progress while he backpeddles on his own promise. Nice.
Today we saw images of McCain scuttling around the halls of Congress trying to talk members into a going along with the latest proposal. How unpresidential. How often do you see a president running around the halls of congress trying to talk members into a deal? If he wanted to look presidential he would summon them to his own meeting. Oh that's right, they wouldn't come. If you can't be in control of the meeting, you don't look like the president.
McCain seems to be more comfortable trying to work deals in the halls of congress. He should stay there.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Stumped the candidate
We all knew it, but finally a Republican said it. Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel is questioning whether Palin has enough foreign-policy experience to serve as the country’s second-in-command.
“She doesn’t have any foreign policy credentials,” Hagel told the Omaha World-Herald. “You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don’t know what you can say. You can’t say anything.
“I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, ‘I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia,” he added. “That kind of thing is insulting to the American people.”
Of course, her followers will argue that comments like that are unfair to Palin by being so critical. That's what one supporter at a town hall meeting thought when she lobbed this softball to Palin.
"Please respond to that criticism and give us specific skills that you think you have, to bring to the White House, to rebut that or mitigate that concern," asked the sympathetic questioner.
But Palin did not list specific skills, instead she gave a broad, incomprehensible response:
"I think, because I am a Washington outsider, that opponents are going to be looking for a whole lot of things that they can criticize, and they can kind of beat the candidate here who chose me as his partner to kinda tear down the ticket," Palin responded. "But as for foreign policy, you know, I think I am prepared and I know that on Jan. 20, if we are so blessed as to be sworn into office as your president and vice president, certainly we'll be ready. I'll be ready. I have that confidence. I have that readiness, and if you want specifics with specific policy or countries, go ahead. You can ask, you can play 'stump the candidate' if you want to. But we are ready to serve."
“She doesn’t have any foreign policy credentials,” Hagel told the Omaha World-Herald. “You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don’t know what you can say. You can’t say anything.
“I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, ‘I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia,” he added. “That kind of thing is insulting to the American people.”
Of course, her followers will argue that comments like that are unfair to Palin by being so critical. That's what one supporter at a town hall meeting thought when she lobbed this softball to Palin.
"Please respond to that criticism and give us specific skills that you think you have, to bring to the White House, to rebut that or mitigate that concern," asked the sympathetic questioner.
But Palin did not list specific skills, instead she gave a broad, incomprehensible response:
"I think, because I am a Washington outsider, that opponents are going to be looking for a whole lot of things that they can criticize, and they can kind of beat the candidate here who chose me as his partner to kinda tear down the ticket," Palin responded. "But as for foreign policy, you know, I think I am prepared and I know that on Jan. 20, if we are so blessed as to be sworn into office as your president and vice president, certainly we'll be ready. I'll be ready. I have that confidence. I have that readiness, and if you want specifics with specific policy or countries, go ahead. You can ask, you can play 'stump the candidate' if you want to. But we are ready to serve."
Play stump the candidate? We don't need to play that game. She's already stumped.
She who knows not and knows not that she knows not is a fool. Shun her. - Unknown.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
This Palin thing is ridiculous
It is ridiculous. It is flipping ridiculous.
Two weeks after an unqualified "hockey mom" air head is nominated to be vice president, and we are still taking her seriously. Her only claim to national security experience had been that she lived close to Russia. You can see it on a clear day, she says. That's like saying I can surf because I lived near Hawaii. Ridiculous.
On her interview with Charlie Gibson she took air head to a whole new stratosphere. This slogan queen didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was... Could only recite that we 'shouldn't second guess Israel' to every question about Middle East policy. Didnt' get the effect of letting Georgia into NATO while Russia is invading them. She thinks energy policy is an answer to foreign policy expertise. Ridiculous.
Her only trips outside the country were to Canada and Mexico...the only two countries that didn't require passports or documentation. Coincidence? No. It's ridiculous. Even worse, her trip to Germany was a trip of a lifetime. You know where I'm going with this. Ridicoulous. Flippin ridicoulous.
See for yourself.
It's not over. See part two.
Ridiculous.
Two weeks after an unqualified "hockey mom" air head is nominated to be vice president, and we are still taking her seriously. Her only claim to national security experience had been that she lived close to Russia. You can see it on a clear day, she says. That's like saying I can surf because I lived near Hawaii. Ridiculous.
On her interview with Charlie Gibson she took air head to a whole new stratosphere. This slogan queen didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was... Could only recite that we 'shouldn't second guess Israel' to every question about Middle East policy. Didnt' get the effect of letting Georgia into NATO while Russia is invading them. She thinks energy policy is an answer to foreign policy expertise. Ridiculous.
Her only trips outside the country were to Canada and Mexico...the only two countries that didn't require passports or documentation. Coincidence? No. It's ridiculous. Even worse, her trip to Germany was a trip of a lifetime. You know where I'm going with this. Ridicoulous. Flippin ridicoulous.
See for yourself.
It's not over. See part two.
Ridiculous.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Charge it to my head but not to my heart
Two weeks and two conventions later, this much is clear — Democrats love with their heads and Republicans love with their hearts.
How else do you explain Democrats working themselves up into a lather by repeating a litany of facts and stats to point out all the failures of the Right? Or the Republicans who gather to worship at the altar of 9/11, claim America as their exclusive own, and celebrate an anti-abortion neophyte as their next best hope? It's clearly a head vs heart phenomenon.
I admit that I'm biased. I do my political thinking with my head. I enjoy a little heart on the side, but I vote based primarily on what my head thinks. That's why I was completely miffed that a major party nominee could give an acceptance speech that paints no vision of the future, that offers no specific prescriptions for the nation's ills, or that looks longingly backwards while trying to convince us that they are the party of the future.
We can cede the hero argument to John McCain. John, 40 years ago, you were the man. You were a bad ass's bad ass. Lord knows not many of us could continue flipping the bird for five years at people who were treating us like a doggie chew toy. For me that would get old quickly. You win that argument hands down.
Forty years later however, you run under a theme called "Country First" that only talks about you the individual. Republicans are frothing and crying, and I'm scratching my head. You pick a running mate whose primary qualification seems to be that she is a spunky hockey mom of five kids with quirky monosyllabic names.
Speaking of running mates, how do you nominate someone and keep them from granting a single interview for a full 10 days now? How are you going to stare down Vladimir Putin when you can't even do a soft shoe with Wolf Blitzer?
How? Because she is an anti-abortionist. It seems a Republican could nominate an axe murderer as long as he/she was committed to overturning Roe v Wade. Speaking of the he/she story, how do you do you nominate a woman and laud it as a giant step forward for women and then have conventioneers wearing buttons that say "I'm voting for the hot chick from the cool state?" Isn't that one step forward and three steps back? That's like saying "I'm voting for the night-Black guy from the sunny state." Doesn't strike me as flattery.
Finally, if fighting your own party is such a great thing, why are you with them in the first place? What's wrong with a guy agreeing with the party he has chosen. Isn't that the point?
Of course these are all head arguments that only prove that when it comes to the Republicans, my heart just isn't in it.
How else do you explain Democrats working themselves up into a lather by repeating a litany of facts and stats to point out all the failures of the Right? Or the Republicans who gather to worship at the altar of 9/11, claim America as their exclusive own, and celebrate an anti-abortion neophyte as their next best hope? It's clearly a head vs heart phenomenon.
I admit that I'm biased. I do my political thinking with my head. I enjoy a little heart on the side, but I vote based primarily on what my head thinks. That's why I was completely miffed that a major party nominee could give an acceptance speech that paints no vision of the future, that offers no specific prescriptions for the nation's ills, or that looks longingly backwards while trying to convince us that they are the party of the future.
We can cede the hero argument to John McCain. John, 40 years ago, you were the man. You were a bad ass's bad ass. Lord knows not many of us could continue flipping the bird for five years at people who were treating us like a doggie chew toy. For me that would get old quickly. You win that argument hands down.
Forty years later however, you run under a theme called "Country First" that only talks about you the individual. Republicans are frothing and crying, and I'm scratching my head. You pick a running mate whose primary qualification seems to be that she is a spunky hockey mom of five kids with quirky monosyllabic names.
Speaking of running mates, how do you nominate someone and keep them from granting a single interview for a full 10 days now? How are you going to stare down Vladimir Putin when you can't even do a soft shoe with Wolf Blitzer?
How? Because she is an anti-abortionist. It seems a Republican could nominate an axe murderer as long as he/she was committed to overturning Roe v Wade. Speaking of the he/she story, how do you do you nominate a woman and laud it as a giant step forward for women and then have conventioneers wearing buttons that say "I'm voting for the hot chick from the cool state?" Isn't that one step forward and three steps back? That's like saying "I'm voting for the night-Black guy from the sunny state." Doesn't strike me as flattery.
Finally, if fighting your own party is such a great thing, why are you with them in the first place? What's wrong with a guy agreeing with the party he has chosen. Isn't that the point?
Of course these are all head arguments that only prove that when it comes to the Republicans, my heart just isn't in it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)