feminist blogs

So ...

Which candidate do you think will get it? And does his imprimatur matter?

What a strange political season! I see Joe Biden on This Week this morning and say, "Yes, I think he should get the nomination." In spite of things like his support of the Credit Card Company Welfare Bill (aka bankruptcy "reform"), I could find it in myself to support him, and I think he'd be good against whichever of the Republican lightweights get the nomination.

But on Friday night, I saw John Edwards on Bill Maher, and I found myself thinking I could support him. And yet I count myself as an Edward skeptic. His email list -- which I ended up on after I wrote in support of his bloggers after a religious intolerance group attacked them -- doesn't help: for all their asks for cash, the Edwards emails don't say much about his positions behind mere sloganeering. He's supposed to be the best candidate on substantive issues, so why don't they share that in these spammy newsletters? And he's not helped by his hair. If Edwards and Romney end up the nominees, we will never have seen more meticulous hair in a presidential election. I know that's shallow of me, but how you present yourself is a big part of politics. Edwards is always so together that you wonder just how passionate he is. When he speaks, he's passionate, but then he smiles and I almost feel like I was watching a little performance. That's what I was left with on Maher.

Aside: I wish someone would give us an objective comparison of everybody's plans for healthcare reform. It's a mess, and yet all I know about the candidates is they have plans and they've been talking about them for some time. So why don't we get any coverage of what these plans are? Edwards appeals because he sees the insurance companies as part of the problem. But he doesn't appeal to me if he plans to just dump it on the backs of employers. You can't expect small businesses to just take on the weight of financing healthcare. Our economy is driven by small businesses, and many, if not most, of the larger enterprises today started as small businesses. We can't make it impossible for people to start new businesses.

Anyway....

Last week I saw Hillary Clinton on some show or another -- was it This Week? -- and she impressed me more than she has in the past. She's more relaxed now, and it really seems like she's enjoying herself. She may be a natural. But I am extremely suspicious of her political machine and her DLC ties. Still, I'd vote for her.

And then there's Barack Obama. He apparently is drawing the biggest crowds and is raising a lot of money from a lot of people -- the latter part always a good sign -- but I'm not seeing him much on TV. That could be good, because his position is as the new guy, and if you look at him every day for months on end, he won't seem so new. I appreciate his willingness to question political orthodoxy. I like is stated opposition to how politics is practiced in Washington. Even though in the past he has struck me as wishy washy, today he seems much more clear and focused now. I'd vote for him.

Oh, and let's not forget Bill Richardson. I'd vote for him, too (though I don't think he is realistically in the running any more).

What a strange world. With most politicians most times, the more they talk the more I dislike them. That is still true for the Republican candidates, who every time they speak always remind me that they are indeed worse than I thought. But for the Democrats, there's a very strong slate of candidates.

And that's why I feel it's just too late now for Al Gore to get into it. He would throw confusion into the process, and I'm not sure that would be a good thing just now. Leave the confusion to the Republicans.

Many of the conservatives braying about Gore's Nobel Prize have had a convenient brain fart regarding a February 2004 report issued by the DOD:

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.

...do you think the nutroots would stop plugging their ears and shouting "nah nah nah nah nah nah nah"?

Oh, probably not. It's that godless science that's the problem, right?

Al Gore now can add a Nobel Peace Prize to his Oscar kudos, but does it make up for the election the Supreme Court took from him?

What about the rest of us, who are living in a world so broken by that other guy? What do we put on the mantle?

Al Gore's book is fascinating reading. He's undoubtedly never had more appeal as a leader. He stands out in the political crowd.

But let's face it: His appeal comes from the fact that he is not running, that he doesn't need to answer the questions, issue the position papers, fend off the inane attacks, fend off the valid attacks, raise money or glad-hand his way around America. He is now a former politician. Thus his star rises.

Many Kosniks apparently are in a virtual frenzy over hoping he will run. Many months ago, I wanted him to run.

But now I'm with Ezra. And maybe Chris has a point or two, too.

On this day, the Democrats in Congress seem very very small, while Al Gore is like a giant.

I wish he would run. Then I would get really interested. I want to be inspired by the frontrunners. They hit the right notes, mostly, but really I feel like I'm watching a bunch of children fighting for the spotlight in the school musical.

And they have been almost inspiring so far because the Republican candidates are just so much more pathetic and stupid.

Help!

MORE BEER FOR THE ROBOTS!

Saw it today. Loved it. But now I'm depressed again.

Best eight years ever. In my lifetime, anyway. [And no, this isn't your signal to drop by here and tell me that Bill Clinton is the source of all evil.]

I'm glad the filmsters included a "what you can do" sequence at the end, because that was exactly what I was thinking about midway through the film. Without a car for seven years (and I even live in the SubExurbs!) and with energy efficient appliances and lightbulbs throughout Casa de Rox Pop, my husband and I are at less than half the national average of carbon dioxide emissions.

But there's always more we can do. What are you going to do to reduce Co2 emissions?