He was, who I thought he was...

I only have three things to say about the Changeling's, long-awaited and absolutely expected (by me) - "MORE WAR SIR!" speech:

h/t to Cinie (I think) for this photo

And - seriously and reverently:

'Nite now!

Nextel firemen could teach Congress a thing or two

"A lot of paper here to tell us we need to keep the rich, rich and the poor, poor. Want it guys?" "NO!!!" At least that's how it should have gone this past week. But then again, the firemen are among the working poor now aren't they?

I won't even say I'm surprised that this no-cojones-havin', low-approval-rating gettin', pattin'-themselves-on-the-back-posturin', impotent, poor excuse of a Congress voted for this obvious and blatant sell-out of the American people - because I'm not. For the four years the Democrats have had the majority in Congress, they've continued to do the same things, expecting different results. I know Shrub & Co. are rolling on the floor laughing their asses off in Crawford, TX tonight saying, "We got 'em again boys!"

As I watched the run-up to this "rescue plan," it felt so strangely reminiscent of their "Hurry, hurry, act now or we're doomed!!" run-up to Iraq that for a minute there I thought, "Now I know The Second and Fourth Estates won't even fall for this again!" But I was wrong. I gave them all too much credit for, at the very least, having some damn common sense. It was like Groundhog Day watching the mainstream media stoke the flames with the fears fed them by Paulson and the Bush Administration! Over at Poynter Online, David Cay Johnston wrote, "Ask tough questions about the bailout." It's an interesting piece about how the media really needs to do their job and one with which I totally agree.

I'm no economist, but I don't need to be one to know that if I ran my house the way the powers-that-be have run this country, I'd be on the street or in jail! Those same financial institutions who've lied, manipulated the market and stuffed their proverbial mattresses would be poised to take EVERYTHING I had as punishment for my irresponsibility. I wouldn't be allowed the opportunity to get credit again for a long damn time - no matter what reason I gave. And the government certainly wouldn't be beating a path to my door with boatloads of other people's money to "rescue" me. Oh, I forgot. Only the common people can be labeled irresponsible for borrowing more money than they could pay back.

And don't you just love the condescending way the talking heads make it sound like we just don't understand how this all works? How they know what's best for the rest of us and we, lemmings should just shut up and get on board? And have you noticed who was pushing the hardest for this debacle of a piece of legislation? Not your everyday, average John Q. Public of the population, that's for sure.

Why is it that we, the people, continue to allow those whose hands are the least clean to make such life-changing decisions for us? Every single person in on this hijacking has a personal stake in seeing those government dollars flow into the coffers of these hat-in-hand institutions. Hell, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has intimate knowledge of how this all works! After all, having been with Goldman Sachs for more than 20 years (the last four of which he served as the Chief Operating Officer of Investment Banking), he received a $37 million compensation package in 2005 and more than $16 million in 2006! You be the judge of whose interests he sought to protect. Naked Capitalism's piece, "Mussolini-style Corporatism in Action: Treasury Conference Call on Bailout Bill to Analysts (Updated)" should give you a clue.

Let's be clear, I have no intention of voting for John McCain. But when he announced he was suspending his campaign to head back to The Hill to do the damn job he was elected to do, I said "Bravo!" Obama's sarcasm-laden, "A president has to be able to do more than one thing at a time" bullshit was just more confirmation of his hubris (You're not the damn president yet!!!) and dereliction (You are a U.S. Senator - no matter how you got there - you don't get to delegate your legislative responsibility for your own personal gain!). Sure, it was probably a campaign stunt on McCain's part, but at least it was one that said, "This is a big deal and my constituents are watching. I better act like I know why they sent me to Congress." I noticed Obama didn't suspend, but he ran his happy-ass on back to the White House for that photo-op with Shrub & Co. and later showed up to vote so as not to be bested by McCain's appearance - the effectiveness of which remains debatable.

When the Republicans voted down the first package, I thought looming elections had forced their hand (after all, election time is really the only time the people ever get a fraction of what they want, or need for that matter). But true to form, corporate greed ruled the day and they buckled. Democrats tried to make it look like Obama played a major role in turning some of their votes around and the MSM, rather than asking the tough questions, lapped it up and regurgitated that bullshit.

And once the deal was sealed, Nancy Pelosi had the nerve to say they didn't know how they got to this place! Jesus wept!! Isn't that the reason we put them in Congress? To know what the hell is going on and make laws in the best interest of the people! Then she added insult to injury by saying, "We sent a message to Wall Street -- the party is over." What??? How can the party be over when Congress just gave the "Barbarians at the Gate" not only a pass for knowingly ripping off the American people, but a reward??!! Where are those Nextel firemen when you need them???

At the end of the day, both presidential candidates, knowing on which side their bread is buttered, voted "Aye" on a bill sure to rock the poor and shrinking middle class to their core, all the while telling us they did what was "best" for us. Considering Obama and McCain have together spent over a half-billion dollars - that's BILLION with a "B" (approximately $368 million and $196 million dollars respectively) - on this joke of a presidential campaign, nobody needs to tell me whose "best" they meant. I know my girl Sugar over at Sugar N Spice will not want to hear me say this (she's told me many times before!), but I think Obama will win this thing. Sad part about that is if you close your eyes, an Obama administration will likely look and act like all those that will have preceded it. For all his crowing about McCain not mentioning the middle-class, he's no better - because for me anyway, it's not what you say, it's what you do. And based on his marionette-like actions to date, he's proven he too, is merely talking loud and saying absolutely nothing. The more I think about that sad fact, the more I'm with Maxine on this one.

Mr. Obama Comes to Florida

I just love Maxine!!!! She's probably who I'll be whenever I decide to grow the hell up! On second thought, we're already "more alike than we are different!" This speaks volumes, not only to that similarity, but to my feelings about the senator from Illinois coming here glad-handing, skinnin' and grinnin' and asking not only for more money - but for our support. I find this the worst of his "audacities." But I'm not surprised. Hubris is his second skin. Blocking our 1.7 million votes because the majority weren't cast for him may be a great political strategy in the eyes of those to whom strategy matters. But strategy doesn't matter to me -democracy does. I think primaries are the one, real chance for citizens to have their say about whom they want to represent them in the general election. As far as he's concerned, our say doesn't matter. This Herculean effort by him and his "crew" has been, and continues to be, nothing more than giving this Pied Piper time to hoodwink and bamboozle his way to a tainted nomination (I have got to find that blog I read the other day with the 48-star Old Glory and see if I can borrow it for my sidebar!) Magnanimously seating our delegates at the convention once the DNC gives him the nomination (yes I said it!) is no consolation for not counting our votes - as they stand. As a Black woman, there's surely nothing there of which to be proud. I expected better. Anyway. I'm sitting at the computer, listening to the news and they cut to a rally at which Sir Lie-A-Lot is scheduled to appear. I wasn't really paying attention at first, so I can't give you the exact location of this particular stop on his whirlwind, "Give Me More Money" tour of South Florida this weekend. I know the Cuban American National Foundation invited him to speak at the Independence Day celebration being held at the Intercontinental Hotel in Miami. I'm sure the "I stand with you against Castro and the Bush embargo" speech is fired up and ready to go. When I did look up, I saw the reporter, outside in the sweltering heat with a microphone in the face of one of the supporters who'd dutifully shown up - sign in hand. Confused that the senator was not there, she said, "I tried to call around to get more information about tickets to this and nobody knew much about it!" As it turns out, instead of his usual "present" or not at all votes, he'd flown back to D.C. to vote "Aye" on Senator Webb's bill (gotta keep the armed forces at least thinking he has their best interest at heart). He was late getting back so the town hall meeting at the B'nai Torah Congregation in Boca Raton, was rescheduled for a later time.

When the town hall meeting finally did happen, as much as I'm worn out listening to his bullshit - I did. Rather than rehash it point-by-point, here's a video I found sans the Q & A portion:

What do I say about this? PAN-DER-ER! Was that enough? No? Then, DAMN PAN-DER-ER!!

Now I know that's politics and all, so don't get your panties in a knot. They all have to play to the emotions of the crowd to whom they are speaking. Each of them has to make promises of both domestic and international policy changes - most of which they have no way of keeping without the legislative branch being fully on board. For the most part, every one of them must be adept at shining up shit and calling it gold. I get that. But really, this is something!

It was apparent the professor had reviewed his lesson plan before class. After all, he had a great reference in his AIPAC speech from March of 2007 (some of this is plucked right from it!). There is a slight, but very noticeable change in this one, however. He added how it pains him "to see the strains between the African-American community and the Jewish community." I guess back then, he needed to get that money with no distractions whatsoever. But he writes a good speech. Just don't ask him to debate because he's really not good on the fly - too ill-prepared, defensive and petulant when he doesn't get the material before class.

In any event, he said everything a Jewish person might want to hear. But in my humble opinion, his delivery was somewhat stiff and very tentative. Kind of like a young comic testing his material out on an unfamiliar audience hoping not to bomb. Actually, it was quite entertaining to watch him give his lecture on Jewish History to Jewish people who know their history far better than most of us. It just seemed like a, "See, I know all about y'all!" moment." And what was that, "I know how much Israelis crave freedom, uh, crave peace" about? A Freudian slip?

And somebody please explain again why Sen. Clinton's statement, "Dr King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It took a president to get it done," sent almost everybody into such a hissy fit? Why did so many take that truth, blow it way the hell out of proportion, splash it all across the mainstream media and twist it into the most racist thing ever? Because she's white? Does that negate the truth? Reread Joe Califano Jr.'s, "It Took a Partnership" - he was there.

Now comes the "Repairer of the Breach" (hey, he referenced the Prophet Isaiah not me) with, "...because I know, Dr. King could not have done everything that he did, were it not for the support of the Jewish community." Somebody please tell me why no one, not a single person Black or white, took umbrage to this truth? Is it because he's Black? Is it because his audience, no doubt had the cash to fill his coffers? This hypocrisy is not only daunting, it's laughable.

After dedicating 15 minutes of his speech to:

1. The Jewish History lesson
2. Assurances he'd be the one to recognize the Jewish state of Israel
3. Promising to "defend Israel from any attack whether it's from as close as Gaza or as far as Tehran (remember that tiny country he said posed a major threat during his AIPAC speech, then didn't pose a serious threat during his Portland speech last Sunday, but again poses a major threat during his B'nai Torah Congregation speech?),"

Almost as an afterthought, he devoted the last two minutes and 37 seconds to those pesky little domestic issues that are in "violation of the spirit of justice" he'd found in the Jewish faith and for which he expressed his deep affinity. You know those issues - substandard schools, underpaid teachers, college that's not affordable and Oh! Health care. Two minutes and 37 seconds! Somebody please give this man a damned napkin so he can wipe his mouth!

UPDATE: I read this very interesting post from Glenn Greenwald at Salon and since the senator from Illinois was waxing so philosophical about what "Israelis need" and sharing his "fundmental difference with former President Carter" about meeting with Hamas, I thought I'd share: "Majority of Israelis want to negotiate with Hamas"