barry white

back in the pot-smoking, beer drinking, coke- snorting days of barry, a sense of character emerged (as detailed in today's new york times).

barry white? barry manilow? steve & barry's? nope. barack. obama. yes, that is he was known in school - barry - a very vanilla name indeed. now there are all of these emails floating around (thanks, dear republicans) insinuating the evil that lurks just beneath the surface of this brother ... is it racism? no, most definitely not. is the country 'ready' for an african-american (and this guy really IS part kenyan) or woman president? give me a break - more republican fear-mongering. the fact that the two front-runners in the democratic race are black and female is a total non-issue - and yes, it plays well in peoria too. let's face it, seven years of a dufus white guy educated at yale has NOT advanced the ball so much (more like set us back a few yards!) ...

of course, the other scare tactic i hear about (wildfire!) is that mr. obama grew up in indonesia - he's (gasp!) a muslim! or his pastor in chicago is louis farrakhan's protegé! or he's going to be 'bad' for israel.

well, last i looked, israel isn't in the greatest of positions ... surrounded on both sides by warring factions, and in a larger zone by fundamentalists bent on it's destruction, israel could use a little intervention. it took seven years for george w. bush, the 'greatest friend that israel ever had' (who spawned THAT one?!?) to make an official state visit - instead of searching for peace, he's making war (and hopefully not making love - yuchhhh! blehhh!).

it has always been official u.s. policy to bolster israel in a very troubled region, so we have no reason to suspect that that would change. and if by some chance barack obama gave israel and the palestinians a kick in the pants to get things moving, would that really be such a bad thing?

sometimes, in life, it's more important and critical to CHALLENGE than to ENABLE. we've had enough of this enabling for the last seven years - complacency has gotten us nowhere, and i don't believe that's good for israel or the palestinians.

beyond this narrow frame, shouldn't our candidate, our president, be a leader, a visionary, someone that young people can look up to? i'm not personally interested in defending corporate interests at the risk of huge fiscal irresponsibility and cutting of more social programs, public art, or health care.

when i see barack and michelle obama, i see what i would like to be, what i would like for my children to see. a young family, loving, committed to public policy, open and frank and honest, willing to take a chance and defend these values (no war!).

i have a dream ...

bless you!

i have elected, no pun intended, to join millions of bloggers today - all voicing their support for one candidate or another, espousing the virtues of this one over that one, and pointing out all that is wrong, which brought us in part to this point.

today i woke up (physically and metaphorically speaking) and i actually know who i'm voting for.

obama.

yes, he's young, full of hope, promising change. he's kennedy-esque, has a lovely family, and knows how to connect with people.

but these are not my reasons for my decision. barack obama gets my vote for the two things that he does not subscribe to:
1. he does not believe in the war in iraq, never did, and never got hoodwinked into voting for it
2. he does not end every speech by saying 'god bless america, and god bless you'.

it is my opinion that the premise for the iraqi war was always shaky - the united states had issues with the taliban and their tacit approval of fundamentalists on their soil. even though i am a pacifist, i recognize that sometimes it is critical to 'strike' in the interest of true security. iraq is another thing. france did not (rightfully) succumb to the pressure put on them by this administration, and while we are sinking (the dollar, the deficit, the vilification of our society universally), france is encouraging private enterprise in the construction of new high speed trains for improved infrastructure. why DID hillary clinton vote for this offensive (and it IS offensive!).

how did a so-called 'inexperienced' politician have the insight (not through cynicism) to separate what was critical from what was vengeful?

additionally, if i want to be blessed by any higher authority, i don't want that benediction coming from my president. i have a rabbi, thanks. what DID ever happen to separation of church and state? let's not pander to the god-fearing (porn-watching) set - hasn't seven years of that been enough?

we need politicians, not priests!

donkey or elephant?

actually, neither please.

fish nor fowl will do it for me this election season. perhaps it's just middle age, focusing all of my efforts in the direction of staving off the inevitable decline that keeps me from focusing on the election one year from now. in the diner this evening, we sat in our booth, waiting for the customary onslaught of french (freedom? remember that - ugghhhh!) fries, botched coffee, frozen colombo yogurt (always makes me think of sri lanka), and other treats ... and i wondered aloud to jane 'what's the difference'?

not one to normally take a politically apathetic stance, i feel disenfranchised from the political system (not the actual process). ultimately, for me, the wind has gone out of the sails even in terms of 'beating the republicans'. true, i view the current administration as the root of all evil (not the axis of evil, though!) ... the credit crunch, skyrocketing fuel costs, rampant terrorism and war, and iraq - why haven't we done more? health care and education, the most basic fundamental rights which should be extended to all citizens, seemingly denied to many. a classic class conflict, fueled by economic disparities which control access to a brighter future.

in spite of the angst created by this situation, i don't see a star shining bright who can save us. i was very much enamoured of hillary a year ago - she is extremely smart, tenacious, and incredibly articulate (not to mention tough as nails) - barak, all gq chic with the requisite accroutrements (lovely wife, kids, etc.) ... somehow they all now just seem like talking heads. debates come and go, blah, blah, blah - ultimately, is there anyone out there who is passionate enough to effect real change?

al gore, who i had the pleasure of meeting shortly after he, um, 'lost' the election - now there's a leader. whether or not you think he puffed his feathers by proclaiming his invention of the internet or not, here is a guy who took a bad situation and made it better - not just for him and tipper (ie. big book deals, etc.) but actually took his stern and wooden persona, applied himself, learned all he could about the environment, and got the word out. not bad for an academy-award-winning-nobel-prize-toting has-been. thank you mr. (kind of) president.

so help me, help me get out of my ennui - i need a path to follow to next november. hopefully my vote won't only go to a candidate with the most money who i think will be able to 'beat' the republicans - hopefully i will believe that my vote will put someone in office who will actually stand their ground and produce positive change.

h