Showing posts with label endorsement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label endorsement. Show all posts

Friday, June 13, 2008

Meg infiltrates House

This morning I had the opportunity to interview Rep. Dennis Kucinich on his insistence upon bringing articles of impeachment to bear against the president. Read the article here.

Kucinich came off as a polite, funny and impassioned man. Other than impeachment, I asked him if about endorsing Obama. He seemed to think his "kind of" endorsement in Iowa was enough.

He said he'd rather stay in the House than be a part of the new cabinet in 2009 (the thought around the office was that he might want to head up a possible Department of Peace, but apparently that's not in the cards?) He's gonna do all he can to get the Ohio Democrats out to vote this November, but he wants to have a chat with Obama about a couple policy issues.

Sen. Obama, sir? Have your people call his people. I know you guys don't want this impeachment albatross hanging around your campaign's proverbial neck, but we need Ohio.

Thursday, April 3, 2008

McMarketing

This past Sunday, I was listening to the Tavis Smiley Show and his first guest was none other than Sen. John McCain (via telephone).

They talked about the economy, the war, media coverage...then McCain brought up the African American community, asking if Smiley minded if he switched gears.


Well, we all knew Tavis was going there, and the host said as much himself. "But go ahead," he told the Republican candidate.

"I'm a realist. I know I'm not going to get a majority of the African American vote," McCain conceded. "But I'm going to go all around this country...I'm gonna fight for their votes."

Smiley acknowledged that McCain has been on the right side of several issues of concern to the Black community, mentioning his support of the MLK holiday in Arizona and his views on immigration reform. But Smiley made a thinly-veiled reference to McCain's willingness to switch sides.


"I've said before, if this John McCain shows up...he has something to say to Black America," Smiley told McCain.

"There really isn't much that Sen. John McCain can do to convince Black voters to vote for him," said Frances Rice, chairman of the National Black Republican Association.
"The Democratic Party has spent the past 40 years convincing them Republicans are the racist party, when really it's the exact opposite."

Though she says her organization doesn't endorse specific candidates, she told me they support all Republicans and that they might even change their stance this year and endorse McCain.


"We may decide that this is a good year," she said.


...if the "right" McCain makes an appearance? I have a feeling her idea of the right McCain and Smiley's might differ. Now, if Bush's McCain shows up...

How about some electoral history?


Bush got 11 percent of the Black vote in 2004
and 9 percent in 2000. And this is the guy who ignored the country's premier civil rights organization until 2006!

Going back to the B.W. ("before Dubya") era,
Republicans scored 12 percent in 1996 and 10 percent in 1992. But these numbers are even more shocking when you consider America's "first Black president" only got 83 and 84 percent in those two elections, significantly less than both Gore and Kerry (Perot stole a good share of the African American vote both years-7 and 4 percent, respectively). I am really more surprised by George W.'s success with the Black vote than Clinton's failure, however. Not that I'm an identity voter, but it would piss me off if a male candidate that only goes to church every once in a while was billed as America's first woman or agnostic president...

In all, I think Tavis got it right. Support the right issues and you'll get the votes you deserve. Identity politics is so out of style. Or if it's not yet, it will be by the time we get to November.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

post primary addendum


Shortly after I posted my most recent blog, McCain won Vermont, Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island and Mike Huckabee bowed out of the race, endorsing his former rival (as if he had a lot of choices).

Continuing the goodwill religiosity tour I started yesterday, let me posit that Jesus would be happy his children are getting along so well.

With all four March 4 contests under his belt, McCain has secured the nomination. Will he get the Catholics too? Apparently, Catholics are the new swing voters. Bush lost them to Gore, but won them against Kerry. My prediction? Though the Hagee endorsement won't sit too well with them, Catholics who voted for Bush will transfer nicely to McCain, as long as he remains pro-life. One thing is for sure, with endorsements from Huckabee and Hagee, McCain’s got the evangelicals locked up, or at least what’s left of the once powerful bloc.

Tuesday, March 4, 2008

WWJVF?



This week, John McCain accepted the endorsement of San Antonio televangelist John Hagee.

The president of The Catholic League said Hagee has "waged an unrelenting war" on the Catholic Church. That may seem a little extreme, but Hagee did call the church a whore and a cult and associates it with both Hitler and the anti-Christ. McCain said, while he doesn't endorse Hagee's views, he'll take the endorsement. This is a marked departure from Obama rejecting Farrakhan's help.


I was raised Catholic and made it (begrudgingly) to confirmation. I'm admittedly non-practicing. But I wondered, if things were different, would the Catholic Church have the answer to this burning question: who would Jesus vote for?

I called The Catholic League and they told me they don't endorse candidates for president. Knights of Columbus has the same policy.

In the Priests for Life Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics, they advise voters to "avoid to the greatest extent possible voting for candidates who endorse or promote intrinsically evil policies."


Ok, no evil. That's good to know.

I called the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and they said that while they do not endorse particular candidates, they publish guides leading voters to the "right" candidate. This year's guide doesn't mention any candidate by name. However, Catholic Online insisted that Mike Huckabee fits the Bishops' description best, expressing surprise that the "best Catholic running for the highest office in the land seems to be the best Evangelical too."


See, there? We can all get along! Until Huckabee drops out, that is.

I grew up in a family of Democrats, but recently all my aunts, uncles and cousins have switched allegiances to the Bush/Cheney machine. I was going to call them up for a quick poll, but I have a feeling it's easier to get an answer from The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. At least they don't have my church attendance record on file. And they haven't been at the table for Christmas dinner. They also have never called me a devil-worshipping communist. Thankfully, my immediately family is still quite liberal and I don't hold grudges.