Who Will Snoop Dogg Vote For?

February 2, 2008

Political activist / Media correspondent Snoop Dogg, oh wait, I mean Blunt Smoker/Rapper/#1 Pimp Snoop Dogg is torn up about who to vote for. Or at least thats the implication between CNN political ticker headline Snoop Dogg torn between Obama, Clinton. Now I have no problem with this article, I mean people are always curious what candidates celebrities support.  And with the rockstar like craze Obama has been using to help people look past his weak credentials and even weaker plans, it is refreshing to see a celebrity not just jump on the wagon.  Many celebrities with little to no political knowledge have jumped behind Obama helping to raise money and awareness.   Some how there is this implication if you don’t support Obama over Clinton you are some racist who hates change.

What I thought was funny is that the article is the top story on the CNN ticker, which is a blog I frequent several times a day.  If I were Snoop I would write a rap about the two candidates and switch between the verses who I was supporting.  Add in his characteristically smooth hooks and he now has new hit that every station will jump to play throughout the primary season.

Advertisements

Score One for Team Clinton

January 24, 2008

I read an editorial on the New York Times website endorsing Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination tonight. I am not going to rephrase or highlight it, because I believe you should read it for yourselves in its entirety (its not long). I feel it accurately captured my view on the election, and the differences between Clinton and Obama.

I like both of them politically and because of the great overlap in their platforms it can be hard to differentiate.   I would be happy with either in the White House, but one clearly has more experience and is at least vocalizing more specific, in depth plans for our country.  While they share similar goals for the country, I need a president with plans to achieve those goals.  Although Clinton’s plans have not always panned out, she has always been forward about her successes and failures and willing to keep moving to get things done.

Read the Editorial Here


Black Women: Black or Female?

January 21, 2008

CNN.com has an article by reporter Randi Kaye about the difficult choices facing African American female voters in South Carolina. The premise is who will black women vote for? Will they vote their race or their gender. Read the Article Here.

I think that is a degrading oversimplification about a group of people.  While I highly doubt Randi Kaye is a sexist (Randi is a women) or a racist (she has had wonderful coverage of Katrina and other potential race issues).  The article smacks of racism and sexism.  I expected to read the name of some 65 year old white man on the by line.

Black women are both black and female.  It is not trading on either to vote for the candidate of one’s choice.  The article does not acknowledge until 3/4 of the way through, and only then with one sentence, that black women are capable of voting on the issues.

The tone of the article just didn’t sit right with me.  It takes a serious topic (and a serious portion of the voters in South Carolina) and trivializes it into black and female stereotypes.

At Anjay’s Salon in Charleston, the only thing louder than the hair dryer is the chorus of political opinions.

Salons are a target for the campaigns — across the state they have turned into caucuses of sorts. They’re where women gather and gossip.

Why is it when women are gathered talking about politics a reporter has the nerve to call it gossip.

For these women, a unique, and most unexpected dilemma, presents itself: Should they vote their race, or should they vote their gender?  No other voting bloc in the country faces this choice.

Race and gender are not the two separate halves that compose black women.  I think if a black women is torn between the two candidates over race or gender, it is about race and gender issues.  There is a difference between voting for Clinton, as a woman, because you believe she will more vehemently right for reproductive rights, and voting for her because she is a woman and you think it is neat to have female president.

It could just be me reading too much into the article.  But I think a few revisions, better selection of quotes, and a little more caution in using stereotypes and this could have been  an actual piece of journalism.


Video of The Day

November 3, 2007

Gotta love his moves.  He will be the smoothest dancing vice president hopefully.  (even with moves like that I have to support Clinton.  She has the experience, talent, and plan to be our next president.)


Quote of the Day

November 3, 2007

“I don’t think they’re piling on because I’m a woman, I think they’re piling on because I’m winning.

hc.jpg


How Nobel of You, Mr. Gore

October 12, 2007

al_gore_nobel_1011.jpg 

Al Gore, the former Vice President, and the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have won the Nobel Peace Prize.

In a statement, Gore said he was “deeply honored,” adding that “the climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and spiritual challenge to all of humanity.”

The former vice president said he would donate his half of the $1.5 million prize to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a U.S. organization he founded that aims to persuade people to cut emissions and reduce global warming.

Most of us remember Gore as the stiff counter part to the charming Bill Clinton.  He ran against George Bush and won the popular vote, but lost the electoral college.  Many people think the election was stolen from him (because of some voter issues in Florida).  I think many of the votes he got were people voting for him just to vote along their party lines and/or because he was associated with Bill Clinton.  He didn’t really stand out for anything himself.  He had  a note worthy lack of passion about anything. 

After the election he decided to dedicate himself to a cause he championed his whole career, global warming.  All of a sudden he appeared alive, passionate, and like a true leader.  It begs the question where was this Al Gore during the 2000 election?  Maybe there would be no war, no dead soliders, no giant deficit, and no debate over whether innocent children deserve health care.  Maybe scientiests could do live saving research and unlock the potential of stem cells.  Maybe the world would be a better place.  The one thing we know would be different, our president would actually care about global warming.

As to him running for president.  I don’t think he will or that he should.  At this point that would make him a liar.  I also think running against Hillary Clinton would create a chasm in the party.  Can you say Vice President??? (Just an idea)


Clinton gets some gay lovin’

September 24, 2007

I thought my dream magazine cover had materialized when I first saw:

What could be more perfect? Clinton, who is widely regarded as one of the most intelligent females of her generation, is the cover of the Advocate. Two possibilities, one she is announcing she is a lesbian, which would be pretty much the coolest ever, since the new face of lesbianism would be a brilliant successful woman, rather than a shaved head lumber jack. Or she has decided to embrace gay marriage completely rather than civil unions. Either way I was down.

But then I read the article. While she has a track record of respecting the gay and lesbian community and she is still my choice for the primary, she just reiterated her typical stances on all the relevant issues. But the article points out the obvious question. Why do the gays love her? The article states: “Just why are we so in love with Hillary? Her husband signed the vile “don’t ask, don’t tell” law and the nefarious Defense of Marriage Act, she refuses to endorse same-sex marriage even though everyone suspects she privately supports it, and on other issues important to us she can sound a little soulless.”

For me, it is just she is the only candidate that I honestly believe sees no difference between gay and straight people. For political reasons she cannot endorse gay marriage, and if that would make her an unviable candidate I wouldn’t want her to. But she has courted the gay vote since long before it was the norm for democrats, she opposes her husband’s don’t ask don’t tell, and she is the most visibly comfortable with gay issues. Most of the candidates say the right thing but look queasy when asked about gay issues. I don’t Clinton is even the most liberal candidate; it is probably related to being the only female candidate. In general women seem to be more tolerant. Maybe she understands discrimination better than your average rich white man.

She might have a run for her money, many gays are jumping on the Obama bandwagon. I think this election will change history in any event.  But we’ll see.

Source Article