Yes We Can…by Michael Davis

Michael Davis

Master Of The Universe, Lord Of All Media, Most Interesting Black Man In the World, Sexiest Man on Earth, Mentor, Writer, Artist, Producer & Uppity.

You may also like...

18 Responses

  1. Vinnie Bartilucci says:

    If Hillary Clinton wants to raise money to pay off her campaign debt, I would pay good money for a vial of her tears.I expect they'll be available in great quantities after her press conference.Salty…with just a hint of bile.AFAIC, the question "Is American ready for a black president?" was answered after Obama won his first primary. Whether or not he wins against McCain I don't know, and I don't quite think it changes the answer to the question. If America wasn't willing to have a black president, he'd have never made it out of the gate, vote-wise. But state after state he won, or at least did well, and didn't end up listed as "other" in the results. So he's already made the history books. They're writing new ones right now, hastily updating that last chapter that covers everything that's happened in the last 30 years or so. They're just trying to decide if they go with "first black nominee" now, and potentially sell another new edition next year, or hold off and just do one edition next year.It's going to be a very interesting campaign. Pundits will comment on everything the Republicans say, and more interestingly , comment on what that don't say, or just imply, or completely forget to mention. Everything will be passed through the "is it because he's?" filter. Everything will be declared to be a "code word" by the eager-to-stir-things up media. Meant or not meant, implied or merely inferred, people will apologize for things left and right all for fear of upsetting the voters. Who probably weren't listening anyway.There will be no comedy. We will see no wit, nothing that could concievably offend anyone. You think statements and speeches were over-prepared in previous campaigns…this one's gonna be filled with more disclaimers and codicils that Donald Trump's pre-nup.It's going to be the most self-conscious campaigns in the history of man. Unable to resort to any standard tactics for fear of being "too hard" on their opponent, they may just have to try talking about the issues.Boy, THAT'S gonna be uncomfortable.

    • Michael Davis says:

      'They may just try talking about the issues" I WISH Vinnie, but I think this is going to go negative and go there fast. I'm sure there are people on the Republican side editing Jeremiah Wright’s comments into 15,30 and 60 second Ads as we speak. Not since Lincoln has the GOP dealt with the issues. No, not when fear and lies will win an election or get us in a war.

  2. Russ Rogers says:

    Last year, my family and I attended the Delano, Minnesota 4th of July Parade. It's a small town parade, but it's the oldest 4th of July Parade in Minnesota and one of the oldest in the nation. Delano is very proud of that. The July 4th fireworks display in Delano is the most amazing I've ever seen. Marvelously excessive.The parade is excessive too; it's gloriously amateur and tediously long, like two and a half hours! The number of parade entries is around 200. It's LONG! Many political candidates ride in convertibles and wave. Some candidates, who can't make the event, just have supporters that walk the route, handing out stickers and leaflets, waving signs and tossing candy to the kids in the crowd. Barack Obama was the ONLY Presidential Candidate to have a noteworthy contingent marching for him in the parade. At the time I joked, "Well I guess we all have to vote for Barack Obama, because he's the only candidate with the courage to take a stand on the issue that REALLY matters: The Delano, 4th of July Parade!"Seriously, I was very impressed. This was more than a year before the general election and Barack Obama's campaign found it important enough to show their presence at a small town parade. Not only that, they found a large group of volunteers to march in 90 plus degree heat for more than two hours and still look enthused by the end of the route! That's AMAZING! It showed a level of commitment to grass roots organizing and a level of grass roots support that NO other candidate could drum up, not in Delano, Minnesota.While Hilary was trying to get maximum donations from a minimum number of supporters, her web site informed the public that each of us could legally give her $2300, Barack Obama was busy raising gazillions by asking many people for just a few dollars. This said a lot about the candidates differing strategies and their respect for the Masses. It seemed like Clinton expected to win easily with momentum, name recognition and the influence of a few big donors and Big Machine Politics. Obama's volunteers marched in the Delano Parade.

  3. R. Maheras says:

    You know, I’m tired of hearing Democrats say, “Oh, the Republican attack machine is ready to pounce,” and the Republicans say “The Democratic attack machine is gearing up.”It’s all a load of bull. There may be plenty of bias out there, and there may be plenty of people with power working their ass off to discredit “the other guy,” but there’s no “machine” on either side.And it cracks me up when Democrats rail about how Republicans use “fear,” not issues, to get elected. Talk about hypocritical! I don’t know how many times I’ve read or heard Democrats warn anyone who will listen that “Republicans will strip you of your civil liberties;” or “Republicans will take away your right to choose;” or “Republicans want to create a fascist state;” or “Republicans eat barbequed homeless people in smoke-filled rooms while plotting to steal elections, destroy the environment and take over the world.”Give me a break!As an independent voter, I guess the machinations by both sides seem more transparent to me than it does to strong adherents of one extreme or the other. Frankly, I think both sides are corrupt, ineffectual and will use any dirty trick they can so their candidates will win.And while I like Obama, thought he was more qualified to represent Illinois in the U.S. Senate than his carpetbagger Republican opponent, and voted for him in 2004, there’s no way in hell I think he’s qualified enough to run this country at this point in time. Sure, he’s got charisma and confidence. Sure, he’s smart. Sure he’s doing a great job motivating people with his calls for change. And sure he’s building his platform around the fact that he’s a “Washington outsider” who is not beholden to special interest groups. But dammit, in that regards, except for the fact he is black, he’s a mirror image of Jimmy Carter in 1976. I voted for Carter, yet after four years in office, I thought Carter was one of the most ineffectual presidents of the 20th Century. No, all things considered, I was extremely disappointed when Obama was arm-twisted into a premature run for the presidential.Despite all the “McCain means four more years of Bush” crap already being spouted by Democrats (even Obama), McCain is probably the most centrist presidential candidate (who actually has a chance of winning) that this country has seen in my lifetime. Yeah, he’s old (So what?). Yeah, he gets mad (Who doesn’t?). Yeah he makes verbal gaffes (As anyone from Chicago knows, when it comes to political leaders, this is certainly no vice). But he also has tons more experience than Obama, he works extremely well under pressure, he’s more independent than most politicians affiliated with one party or the other (ultra-conservatives can’t stand him), he is both respected and feared by his political peers, and, best of all, he has both humanity and humility.There’s still plenty of election to go, but Obama is going to need to do an awful lot to convince this independent voter that he will make a better president than McCain.

    • Michael Davis says:

      Some VERY good points to be sure and truth be told I like McCain as far as Republicans go. But from my point of view I want to be as far away from ANY conservative they just scare me. Anyone who thinks that you can regulate morals, to govern what I do in the bedroom or decide who I marry or tell me what to watch or listen to. You get my point.

    • Dan says:

      “Republicans will strip you of your civil liberties;” or “Republicans will take away your right to choose;” or “Republicans want to create a fascist state;” Granted since 9/11 the effort has been aided and abetted by the Dems, but the Republicans were the party controlling Congress when the Patriot Act (a big step down the path towards fascism) was enacted and it was signed by the Republican President. If McCain is elected, he will nominate Supreme Court Justices and a woman's right to choose could be eliminated, too. I don't see the hypocrisy of taking the Republicans to task for these things.

      • Vinnie Bartilucci says:

        "the Republicans were the party controlling Congress when the Patriot Act (a big step down the path towards fascism) was enacted and it was signed by the Republican President. "…and ALL Republicans voted for it, and ONLY Republicans, because the Democrats staged a walkout of the vote to make sure the country knew exactly how against they were for it, right? Sorry, not a fair argument in my book. I can't think of any legislation which split 100% down party lines without exception."a woman's right to choose could be eliminated, too"…okay, just for a minute…Abortion is one of those topics that will be talked about, possibly forever, but never acted on. It's easy to talk about since everyone has an opinion on it, but to actually do anything even NEAR it is political suicide. Bush had eight years, and never tried anything even close, save for little footnote-like nibbles like stem-cell research and the tailor-made-for controversy Partial-Birth Abortion.Plus, in order for the Supreme Court to rule on abortion, a case ABOUT abortion would have to be presented. They don't just pass rulings on random things. So for the same reason as above, I forsee the Court using the same rules for avoidance of said cases as one would use for avoidance of fissionable materials. Whch, in a way, is exactly what the topic is.I do not see any chance of any laws being passed by either party that come even close to any of the wild accusations the opposing party has ever made. For all the years that the Republicans have been in power, how many laws have been presented, drafted, put up for (presumably landslide) vote and signed into law that would diminsh the abortion laws in any way? How much have welfare and Social Security benefits been reduced? How many Jim Crow Laws been put back in place?Exactly NONE of the extreme nightmare scenarios will actually be done. Democrats will not outlaw cars and require we hug everyone, and the Republicans will not advocate the shooting of crack babies in the street.The actual amount of work done by either party will be very similar in both volume and vector, which is to say, very little and in no particular direction. The only reason both are fighting for the right to do them is because THEY want to be the ones percieved as doing it.

        • Dan says:

          I thought I made it clear that the effort was assisted by the Dems. The point was supposed to be that the Patriot Act is a step towards relieving us of our rights and moving us closer to a fascist state, and that the Republicans were in charge of two of the branches of government responsible for its enactment, hence the lack of hypocrisy if these claims are thrown in the lap of the GOP. I appreciate the glibness of the remark about the Dems walking out (which if they had any balls they would have). I agree with you that abortion won't be ruled upon by the courts anytime soon, but the possibility, though not the probability, is there if more Republican-nominated justices are placed on the court. You know an asshole like Scalia would love to have the opportunity.

      • Martha Thomases says:

        Republicans do want to take away my right to choose. Some of them want to outlaw birth control. They do want to strip me of my civil liberties, including my right to control my own body, or choose those with whom I form a family.I know nothing about their dietary habits, nor do I throw the word "fascist" around casually.

      • R. Maheras says:

        The Patriot Act has its problems, but, in my opinion, it's far less intrusive and scary than some other things, like: 1.) The Internet2.) Scanners anyone can buy that can monitor your phone conversations3.) GPS devices in cell phones or cars that can pinpoint your location 24/74.) RFID devices which are in many products you buy (and soon will be in many more) — devices that can be scanned and data gleaned without you even knowing it5.) WiFi and other wireless interface systems that can be covertly penetrated6.) Police and traffic camera systems (some with audio pickup capability)

    • Alan Coil says:

      But there IS a huge right-wing machine led by the people at Faux Noise, and supported by all the other big media. 90% of all radio talk shows are right wing. They own all the major stations, so they control the content.

  4. Russ Rogers says:

    Here was a bit from the HuffPo on John McCain, Seth Grahame-Smith writes:Cowardice – No one can ever take away the heroic truth that John McCain sat in a cell for five torturous years on behalf his country. He was a brave young man. But somewhere between Hanoi and Washington, that brave young man became an old pandering coward. For eight years, we've watched McCain suckle the teat of his political idol, George W. Bush. Especially sickening, given the fact that Bush is the same man who tried to destroy McCain's family in the 2000 primaries. The same man who went after his daughter. And yet, because it was politically convenient to do so, John McCain threw his arms around Bush and never let go. Threw his arms around a man he didn't even vote for. A man he secretly hated with a passion he scarcely knew he was capable of. To some, that merely makes John McCain a ruthless opportunist or a terrible father. In my eyes, it makes him a coward. How can a man who won't even stand up for his family stand up for our country? How can a man who was too afraid to stand his ground against a joke like Bush stand his ground against brutal dictators? My fellow Americans…That's not change we can believe in.…This bit of wisdom references the South Carolina push polls of 2000. Here's SourceWatch:Bush's campaign strategists, including Karl Rove, devised a push poll against John McCain. South Carolina voters were asked "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?". They had no interest in the actual percentages in the poll, the goal was to suggest that he had. This was particularly vicious since McCain was campaigning with his adopted Bangladeshi daughter. The sight of the little dark skinned girl made the seed planted earlier grow and John McCain lost South Carolina, effectively ending his run for the presidency.…In other words, Bush and his cronies used RACISM against John McCain in 2000. They used LIES, INNUENDO and blatant RACISM to win the South Carolina Primary in 2000. And McCain was able to snuggle up to Bush for SEVEN years after this attack on himself and his family, an attack that used his own daughter. I find that unfathomable.McCain is a good man. The best out of the field of Republicans who ran this year. He doesn't deserve to be President.

    • R. Maheras says:

      The Democrats are no different at using such smear tactics, from what I've seen. Do you really believe Geraldine Ferraro is a racist? Or Hillary Clinton? Or Bill Clinton?Since I was first eligible to vote in 1972, at times I've found members of both parties equally disgusting and disingenuous. Keep in mind I'm from Chicago, Illinois, a city and a state famous for political sleaze on both sides of the aisle.Your party has no moral high ground in my opinion, so don't try and con me into believing it does. I've seen what the Democratic Party can do to its political enemies — particularly those expatriates who fall out of favor.

      • Russ Rogers says:

        Hilary Clinton's remarks about "hardworking, white Americans," were ill conceived. It's hard to talk about the demographic that is giving you the lead in certain primaries when that demographic is, "The White People who are still scared of having a Black President." Ferrarro's comments about Obama being lucky he is black were silly arguments and blown out of proportion. Sure, Obama was a novelty (as the first Black LEADING presidential candidate of a major party), but novelty only gets a candidate so far. He wouldn't have gotten the nomination if he couldn't back up the novelty with Intelligence, Charisma and real Substance. Clinton had the novelty of being the first woman LEADING presidential candidate. She had the novelty of being the first First Lady to run for president. She ran a great campaign and would have made a good candidate. But, she ignored the importance of smaller primary and caucus states, putting too much focus on winning the bigger states like California. It was one of the strategic errors that cost her the nomination. Plus, Obama just ended up being the better and more inspiring candidate.I don't think either Ferraro or Clinton are racist. Both of their statements were made out in the open, people took the credit and blame for their comments. There was no attempt at hiding behind some anonymous pollster. Neither statement compares anywhere close to the evil locked inside the phrase, "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?"And I'm not saying Democrats are blameless. But, even the circulation of the picture of Obama wearing a turban, or the lies that he's a Muslim or was schooled in a Madrassa (even though those are also RACIST lies and fear mongering) don't sink the level of using an innocent CHILD to foster your racist lie. The South Carolina push polls of 2000 were egregious and super-slimy. It makes my skin crawl. It marked LOW point in politicking over the last 20 years. This tactic of Rove's, smearing your opponent no matter what the cost, are indicative of stuff like the outing of Valerie Plame. Hell, the treason involved with the Valerie Plame case doesn't turn my stomach half as much as the South Carolina push polls. For push polls to work you have to assume the absolute WORST about the public, that we are dupes and closet racists. The fact that it WORKED makes me even more angry. And now, McCain's campaign has consulted with Rove, the man who called McCain's daughter a bastard! How much of his pride is McCain willing to choke down? How much of his soul is McCain willing to sell in order to be president? I'm not saying that the Democratic Party holds any bastions on the moral high ground. I am saying that Karl Rove is a fear mongering gutter-weasel. (Yeah, my anger has reduced my arguments to name calling!) I am saying that it's not hard holding the moral high ground on that.

  5. mike weber says:

    I have no problems with Barack Obama as a man, as a politician, or whatever.I do have a nasty premonition that we're heading for, essentally, a replay of Jimmy Carter.And i don't know what Reagan-equivalent is slouching toward Bethlehem, but i'm sure i'll find out.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Russ, you raise a lot of valid points and no one in this forum is going to convince anyone else to change their mind about who to vote for. But I love when Republicans run the old "Well, they do the same thing" argument. As if the Dems do this with anywhere near the ruthless efficiency and organization of the Republicans. Exactly how many times has this worked for the Dems in the Presidential elections of the past 28 years? I guaran-damn-tee you that with all the grave, life and death issues facing this country right now–the war, the crumbling economy, out of control oil, the rise in unemployment that will surely get bigger by November, etc.–this election will quickly turn into a referendum on religion, patriotism, and gay marriage before it is becomes a national debate on encroaching civil liberties or a woman's right to choose. We know which party will raise that agenda, because they successfully ran that playbook four years ago. And now they can also add a portion of the equally successful 1988 campaign, throwing the "Willie Hortoning" of Obama into the mix. Hell, it already began with the insatiable media hysteria and obsession (lead by Fox News, of course) with Rev. Wright. Had aliens visited our planet during that time, they might not have realized that our nation was having any of the problems I listed earlier, but was rather being torn asunder by some extremely powerful, scary black man. And that was just the teaser trailer for the actual campaign ahead.

    • R. Maheras says:

      I'm not aligned with any party, so maybe it's easier for me to see the problems of one or the other. In the case of the Democrats – a party which I know very, very well – it’s not the party it once was. Their leadership claims they are the tolerant ones who want this inclusive coalition of the many, when in reality they are as intolerant and exclusionary as the neocons they despise. For example, JFK is revered almost universally as the patron saint of Democrats, with Bobby close behind. Yet both were Catholics, and both no doubt would have some reservations about, say, abortion or gay marriage. So in today’s Democratic Party, if they were up-and-coming politicians, they would be unwelcome and marginalized if they still had such traditional conservative Democrat views. Democrats today are expected to agree lock-step with the most “progressive” views (or secular, depending on one’s semantics), or they are not considered “true” Democrats. This causes much turmoil among traditional Democrats who may strongly embrace the stricter doctrines of their particular church. A good example of such a Democrat who is held at arm’s length by many of his own party is former Congressman Harold Ford Jr. of Tennessee. Because he is a moderate or conservative on some issues, some of his own party members speak of him with disdain or derision. In other words, in the Democratic Party, when it comes to certain pet progressive issues, it’s all or nothing these days.The Republican Party, of course, has the same problem with intolerance. One of the reasons McCain is absolutely abhorred by the far right is because he is a moderate on some issues.In my opinion, it is this intolerance by both parties of a dissenting middle ground that is why there is so much polarization in Washington today, and why virtually nothing visionary or meaningful is getting done.