INVISIBLE OBAMA

OK, I'll weigh in on Eastwood.  I have remained silent throughout the Republican convention because I chose, a few days ago, to take some time off to finish my new book--convention be damned.  But here's something I have not heard elsewhere with regard to Clint Eastwood's grotesque performance: aside from its inanity and impropriety, his characterization of Barack Obama was so far off base as to be pitiably inept.  Nothing the president has ever said or implied would suggest that he'd stoop to the kind of crass, unadulterated rudeness the movie start attributed to him.  Eastwood was talking to himself in that empty chair, not the president.  It was pathetic.

Pathetic too, in my view, are the accusations of bitterness, anger and envy that have become a daily part of the Republican arsenal against him.  If anything, the president has erred on the side of kindness, old-fashioned courtesy, a willingness to listen and, yes, compromise.  To a fault.  And in plain view of anyone who might have taken the trouble to watch and listen to what he has had to say.

The attribution of words, thoughts, feelings and intentions to one's opponent is a well-worn rhetorical device.  I hear a lot of it from the Republican side: this is what Obama thinks--when he has said and done nothing to indicate that he thinks anything of the sort.  Eastwood's performance unintentionally revealed both the frequency and the crassness of the strategy. Cite his words, yes, by all means.  His own words.  And cite them in context, please, unlike the "you didn't build that" quote out of which the convention created such a ridiculous straw house.

Fortunately, there have been plenty of Big Bad Wolves around to huff and puff and blow that straw house down.  No further help needed from me.

FOLLOW THE MONEY

Once again today, I recommend reading Richard (RJ) Eskow's column about the influence of the monied on the current election.  He says it far better than I could...

ONE TERM MORE

Here's a fine video, sent to me by a good friend.  It's called One Term More.

Have fun!

"LEGITIMATE RAPE"

I note that the Republican Party is now up in arms against one of their own, whose crime was to say out loud what many of them believe.  The mainstream of this far-right party agree on legislation to outlaw all abortion, even in cases of rape and incest.  They have proposed as much, and have confirmed their position in votes in the House of Representatives.  Their current outrage rings hollow.  It is pure political posturing, and has nothing to do with the substance of the issue.  I'll withdraw the comment if and when more Republicans renounce their previously-embraced position on abortion, not when they merely denounce a fellow Republican for presuming to draw attention to that position by giving it voice.

THE RYAN TACTIC

Once again, I'll let Richard (RJ) Eskow speak for me.  Almost.  I don't go quite as far as he does along his line of argument, but he presents a frighteningly plausible scenario for what he calls "corporate statism"--and I call oligarchy.  Please read his screed.  And do what you can to assure the re-election of Barack Obama.  Giving money helps...

Oh, and here's Robert Reich, on the Romney/Ryan economic plan.

A LETTER TO THE TIMES

(Cross-posted from The Buddha Diaries.)

Here's a letter I wrote this morning to the New York Times, with a link to the op-ed piece that it responds to:

The examples that Ross Douthat ("Romney's Mormon Story," Sunday, 8/12/12) offers of Mitt Romney's generosity reinforce the image of a man willing to help those in his immediate circle: he "shut down his business to hunt for a colleague's missing daughter," "helped build a memorial park when a friend's son died of cystic fibrosis," and "lent money to renters to help them buy a house he owned."  Without wishing to deprecate the Republican candidate's generosity or his religious faith, I find these examples unconvincing evidence of a broadly humanitarian vision that cares deeply about the vast numbers of today's vulnerable and defenseless, both in this country and abroad.  They are evidence, rather, of a narrow, even self-serving view that fails the test of the all-encompassing concern for humanity that is needed in a President of the United States today, in view of the huge challenges that our nation and our planet must imminently address.  The economic vision they exemplify is equally parochial in its implications.  Does Douthat envision a shining Salt Lake City on the hill?  

Given the volume of mail the newspaper receives, I suppose it's doubtful that my letter will see print.  Still, worth writing, if only to clarify the thought for myself.  

The basic question I would like to ask candidates and voters alike is this: Do you have plans for those less fortunate than yourself?  If so, please specify.  

REASONS...

This arrived yesterday as one of the many political emails I receive every day.  I thought it expressed things pretty well...

Thanks for reading.  Please join me... think about posting your own reasons to support this president in his reelection bid.  The country has a lot riding on his success!