Clinton/Obama debate lacks fireworks

Last night’s debate was short on fireworks. Many pundits, in offering their pre-debate two cents worth, indicated that Senator Clinton would have to try to come out, guns ablaze, trying to prod Senator Obama into making a major gaffe. That didn’t happen.

The only time anything close to a heated exchange occurred, was on the issue of healthcare coverage. Clinton also appeared to have some designs on pressing Obama on the issue of plagiarism, and charges that his material in his speeches may have been lifted, without conferring credit.

On this issue, Clinton said, “If your candidacy is going to be about words, then they should be your own words. That's, I think, a very simple proposition.”

This brought some cheers, but also a chorus of jeers.

Clinton added, “Lifting whole passages from someone else's speeches is not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox,” a barb targeted towards her rival's campaign slogan.
Obama was up to the task and shot back that he rejected the accusations that he had stolen language from Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick, calling the charge “silly season” politics and in a cheeky quip defended his speeches with, “I've got to admit, some of them are pretty good.”

While I still consider myself in the Clinton camp, I thought Mr. Obama acquitted himself well, handled the healthcare accessibility issue well enough (since none of the media people pressed him enough on this) and both candidates were respectful of one another. I still have my issues with Obama on healthcare and accessibility, however. In fact, the differences in both plans are really the difference between healthcare for some and healthcare for all, or true universal care.

Mrs. Clinton, closing strongly, when asked about her greatest personal challenges, alluded to the Monica Lewinsky affair, but demurred that this was minor compared to what “ordinary” Americans go through.

"I just have to shake my head in wonderment, because with all of the challenges that I've had, they are nothing compared to what I see happening in the lives of Americans every single day," she said, telling of a recent visit to wounded servicemen at a new hospital, in Texas.

And in a generous tribute to the man who is threatening to sink her hopes of becoming the first woman president, Clinton said:

“You know, no matter what happens in this contest, ... I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored,” she said, and reached out to shake her rival's hand.

Both candidates displayed a level of class that isn’t always apparent in the political world.

Mrs. Clinton faces an uphill battle and the next two weeks will decide whether she goes on, possibly to the convention, or whether it becomes a two-horse race, between Obama and McCain.

On a related note, I found an opinion piece in the LA Times that helped me understand why Mrs. Clinton has fared well with Latino voters. The article does a good job of dispelling some of the accusations of “racism” being hurled around. The Clintons have been courting the Latino vote for 16 years, going back to 1992. This history and voting track record remains her best hope for pulling out a victory in the Lone Star State.

Obama-rama

The audacity of hype
Just what else has Obama wrought?
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, Feb. 15, 2008 (Boston Herald)

WASHINGTON - There’s no better path to success than getting people to buy a free commodity. Like the genius who figured out how to get people to pay for water: bottle it (Aquafina was revealed to be nothing more than reprocessed tap water) and charge more than they pay for gasoline. Or consider how Google found a way to sell dictionary nouns - boat, shoe, clock - by charging advertisers zillions to be listed whenever the word is searched.

And now, in the most amazing trick of all, a silver-tongued freshman senator has found a way to sell hope. To get it, you need only give him your vote. Barack Obama is getting millions.

This kind of sale is hardly new. Organized religion has been offering a similar commodity - salvation - for millennia. Which is why the Obama campaign has the feel of a religious revival.

“We are the hope of the future,” sayeth Obama. We can “remake this world as it should be.” Believe in me and I shall redeem not just you but your country - nay, we can become “a hymn that will heal this nation, repair this world and make this time different than all the rest.”

And believe they do. After eight straight victories - and two more (Hawaii and Wisconsin) almost certain to follow - Obama is near to rendering moot all the post-Super Tuesday fretting about a deadlocked convention with unelected superdelegates deciding the nominee. Unless Hillary Clinton can somehow do in Ohio and Texas on March 4 what Rudy Giuliani proved is almost impossible to do - maintain a big-state firewall after an unrelenting string of smaller defeats - the superdelegates will flock to Obama. Hope will have carried the day.

Interestingly, Obama has been able to win these electoral victories and dazzle crowds in one new jurisdiction after another, even as his mesmeric power has begun to arouse skepticism and misgivings among the media.

ABC’s Jake Tapper notes the “Helter-Skelter cultish qualities” of “Obama worshipers,” what Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times calls “the Cult of Obama.” Obama’s Super Tuesday victory speech was a classic of the genre. Its effect was electric, eliciting a rhythmic fervor in the audience - to such rhetorical nonsense as “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. (Cheers, applause.) We are the change that we seek.”

That was too much for Time’s Joe Klein. “The message is becoming dangerously self-referential,” he wrote. “The Obama campaign all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is.”

You might dismiss The New York Times’ Paul Krugman’s complaint that “the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality” as hyperbole. Until you hear Chris Matthews, who no longer has the excuse of youth, react to Obama’s Potomac primary victory speech with “My, I felt this thrill going up my leg.” When his MSNBC co-hosts tried to bail him out, he refused to recant. Not surprising for an acolyte who said, “This is the New Testament.”

I’ve seen only one similar national swoon. Growing up in Canada, I witnessed a charismatic law professor go from obscurity to justice minister to prime minister, carried on a wave of what was called Trudeaumania.

But even there the object of his countrymen’s unrestrained affections was no blank slate. Pierre Trudeau was already a serious intellectual who had written and thought and lectured long about his country.

Democrats are worried that the Obama spell will break between the time of his nomination and the time of the election, and deny them the White House. My guess is that he can maintain the spell just past Inauguration Day. After which will come the awakening. It will be rude.

[Don't quite agree? Check this out. Cultish to the max!--jb]

Swayed by history

Barack Obama’s dominant showings yesterday, in Wisconsin and particularly, in Hawaii, where he’s viewed as a native son, clearly show that the momentum’s turned his way in the Democratic race for the presidency.

Senator Hillary Clinton’s hope in Tuesday’s primaries was to run close in Wisconsin, which she wasn’t able to do. It now appears that the flickering flames of her lagging campaign may come down to upcoming primaries, dependent on rust belt voters in Ohio and Latino support in the Lone Star State.

I’m not a Barack Obama supporter. When his name first began being whispered as a potential candidate for president, I thought that he was jumping the gun and getting ahead of the curve of his promising political future. It has been my intention and still is that he should have “waited his turn” and paid some dues.

Obama is a politician brimming with charisma, and possesses topnotch oratory skills. However, being president is much more than being an excellent motivational speaker. He’s untested and unproven in the area of governing. Much of the Obama-rama and the accolades cascading his way smack of emotionalism. Having fallen under the “spell” of emotion during my foray into fundamentalist religion, it’s no prettier when witnessed in the realm of politics. Additionally, Obama has gotten favorable press, by and large, and I think this media “bump” has helped him immeasurably. It will be interesting to see if he continues receiving a free pass from the press when (and if) it comes down to Barack, “the Black Kennedy,” vs. Johnny Mac.

I think Obama, like many men with a quest for power and prestige, is in possession of a certain arrogance and need for public adulation. It’s almost as if they feel entitled to their perch above the rest of us. So far, it seems to have paid off, at least in getting the Democrat nod for the presidency. Given the track record of his party, however, I wouldn’t discount McCain’s chances in the general.

Recently, I have decided to have my wife, Mary, do some guest blogging here at Words Matter. If you’ve read her recent posts, you’ll see that she’s firmly in the camp of Mrs. Clinton. Not only has it given you some respite from my writing and choice of topics, I think it has added a valuable perspective—the perspective of a rational woman, with some life experience, as well as, political passion.

When you’ve spent over half of your life with a person, you develop a level of comfort and trust in that person’s views and opinions. If you know Mary, you’ll know that when she’s passionate about something, she’s hard to ignore. It’s more than just persuasion. She’s also a genuine, relational person. That’s probably one of the reasons why as a salesperson, many of her customers have been with her for years. She inspires a loyalty in these customers that make them stay with her, even when Mary’s changed companies. She also has an intuitive sense about things and especially people that I’ve learned to acknowledge.

After 2004, I changed my party affiliation from “Democrat,” to being “unenrolled.” I was fed up with the Democrats, “the gang that couldn’t shoot straight,” as I liked to call them. I felt lukewarm for Kerry and when he rolled over like a drunk, conceding the race immediately, even though there was considerable controversy in Ohio, with allegations of voter fraud; I vowed I was done with the Dems.

Despite this vow, it’s been hard for me to remain on the sidelines. I certainly agree with others, who contend that in America, our political choices are limited and the shades of political choice are difficult to parse. It’s the old “Demicans” vs. “Republicrats” dilemma all over again. Ignoring my better instincts, there’s something about the horserace that drags me back into the political fray.

My wife has been a fan of Hillary for awhile, but that wasn’t always the case. The major reason for this has to do with reading Clinton’s book, Living History, which came out in 2003. Mary is an avid reader. I’ve never known her not to have a book in progress, plus she’s always listening to an audio book, so she plows through a lot authors and titles. She first read former President Clinton’s book, My Life. She was impressed with the book about the scope his life. She then decided to read Mrs. Clinton’s book, which helped her realize that Hillary was “an amazing woman.” I can already hear the gnashing of teeth of the Hillary-haters, brought on by that statement.

Mary contends that on the basis of reading her book, she believes that HRC is a person motivated by the desire to do good and make a difference in the lives of others, especially women and children. Oddly, these qualities, and her advocacy for these groups, which, by the way, are certainly a matter of public record, often get overlooked. Instead, we have commentators on both the right and the left criticizing her for her ambition, her brashness, for being “too tough,” and even going so far as comparing her to Shakespeare’s, “Lady Macbeth.” These very same qualities and strengths are lauded in men, particularly if exhibited during the battles of political blood sport.

On Friday, Mary came home with Living History, in audiobook form. While my wife is out and about most of her work day, my 9 to 5 experience involves days on the road and then, playing catch up in the office. This week, my only time behind the wheel has been traveling 20 minutes to work and then, back home.

The first cassette of the 18 that make up the audiobook of Living History was sitting on my seat, Tuesday (I had President’s Day off) morning. Mary had mentioned that she’d feed me a tape at a time, to see if I wanted to continue.

Driving to Lewiston, for work on Tuesday, I was captivated, hearing the genesis of Mrs. Clinton’s life and her surroundings. Granted, autobiographies tend to highlight the better qualities and minimize those things that are less flattering. Still, hearing about where she came from, her experiences growing up in Illinois and the stories of her parents and the town where she came of age struck a chord with me. Maybe it’s because I’m spending almost all of my time away from work detailing my own life story, growing up in a small Maine town, for a new book. Or maybe I’m just a sucker for people’s stories about their formative years, but for the past two days, Living History has been difficult to pop out of the cassette player, before turning the car off and heading into the office, for work.

I’ve enjoyed reading author and radio personality, Studs Terkel’s books about the American experience. While Terkel was born in 1912, he didn’t publish his first book until 1957, when he was 45. Another decade would pass before Division Street was released. I recently picked up The Studs Terkel Reader, which I’ve been going through, a chapter here, a chapter there. Some of my favorite stories have been the ones taken from Hard Times: An Oral History of the Great Depression.

Mary and I journeyed westward towards the Chicago of Studs Terkel, in July, 1983. We ended up marooned in the post-industrial graveyard of northwest Indiana. Both 21, married less than a year and expecting our first child in December, we drew upon whatever inner strength we had, a reservoir we weren't aware of at the time, but one that was put there by the experiences of our past.

I couldn’t appreciate it at the time, but the archetype for our journey to Indiana, had been forged by another young couple, nearly 60 years earlier. My paternal grandparents, Michael and Anna Baumer, had journeyed across the Atlantic Ocean, from Kleinschwand, Germany, aboard an ocean liner. They arrived and passed through Ellis Island, on January 11, 1924. From there, they made their way to Lisbon Falls, where my Opa worked at the Worumbo Mill and put down the root that I would be later become grafted into.

As I listen to the audiobook narrator read Hillary’s story, I recognize that like Mary and I were forced to, she’s been drawing on her own personal reservoir of strength, one that is rooted in the story of her own mother, forced to fend for herself, at the age of four. Later, her mother, Dorothy, deprived of love and affection early in her life, managed to learn how to love and nurture her own daughter. Living History is a testament to her story and her impartation of strength to her firstborn child. Women from Hillary’s generation, the ones that broke away from typical gender roles and stereotypes, were spurred on by their mothers. While her father (shaped by many of the same depression era experiences Terkel chronicled) certainly helped shape the woman she would become, countless times, particularly when struggling with Wellesley and being away from home for the first time, it was her mother that demanded that she "tough it out," rather than return home, which would have satisfied her father. I think her mother, the woman who Hillary wrote, “cried the entire 1,000 mile trip back to Park Ridge,” recognized that if Hillary returned home and went to school nearby, she would never tap her true potential.

For a period of time in my life, I truly believed that incrementalism and parsing of minimal differences made supporting a presidential candidate meaningless. My recent experiences with workforce training have revealed that government programs can make substantive differences in people’s lives. I try to imagine what could be accomplished if training dollars were reinstated and I had the opportunity to double the number of programs I was able to run. Hence, my political beliefs have modified into a more pragmatic approach than in the past.

The real Roger Clemens

It's been a long time since I've thought of myself as a fan of Roger Clemens.

After exhibiting much promise and being hailed as the next Nolan Ryan, he exploded with a breakout year, with 24 wins and his first of six Cy Young Awards, in 1986, for the Red Sox. Clemens went back-to-back on the Cy Young train, capturing the coveted pitching award again in 1987. After several more solid years during the late 80s and early 90s, including a third Cy Young, in 1991, he let himself get fat and lost his competitive fire. 1993-1996 saw Clemens win no more than 11 games, as he made numerous trips to the DL and only occasionally reverted to the pitcher that once regularly dominated AL hitters.

On September 20th, 1996, in one of his last starts in a Red Sox uniform, “The Rocket” struck out 20 Detroit hitters, at old Tiger Stadium, including Ken Phelps, four times. While this game meant nothing, with both teams out of playoff contention, Clemens showed that he still could dominate major league hitters, when he wanted to.

Then, after not getting a guaranteed fourth year during contract negotiations with the Sox, Clemens became a baseball mercenary, motivated by money, more than anything, heading north to Toronto first, and then, back stateside, in New York.

This Roger Clemens, who drew the ire of Red Sox fans, won three more Cy Youngs; two in Toronto (’97 and ’98) and another for the "evil empire" (in 2001).

When he left Boston, after the 1996 season, Clemens was going to be 34-years-old. Conventional wisdom, pre-steroid era, was that a power pitcher, like Clemens, had probably seen his best years and performances. Only Ryan and a handful of other power pitchers had been able to dominate hitters well into their late 30s. Clemens would actually win 18 games, at the age of 41, in 2001, pitching for his home state Astros, in Houston.

While Boston fans who followed the club pre-2004 have never fully forgiven Clemens for his betrayal, many had managed to put aside our strong dislike of Clemens, and had adopted, somewhat grudgingly, an acknowledgement of his accomplishments; some of us even managed to work up some measure of admiration, albeit with much difficulty.

Many of us, once again feeling betrayed that we cut Clemens any slack, is now reveling in his recent disingenuous charade, feigning innocence and doing his best to throw his former trainer, wife and just about anyone else, under the bus, his narcissism on display for the baseball world to see. That’s exactly who I’ve always known Roger Clemens to be. A stupid arrogant jock, who turns out, is a cheater. Rather than credit his hard work, we now know he’s been “juiced,” like Canseco, Bonds and all the other baseball cheaters out there.

My hope is that like Pete Rose, he spends the rest of his days in baseball purgatory, forever banished from the Hall of Fame and finds himself plastered prominently as one of the poster boys for the game's steroid era.

On a related note, could the members of the congressional delegation have been any more pathetic, especially Republican hypocrite extraordinaire, Dan Burton, from Hoosierville? What a bunch of worthless suck ups!

The change is Hillary!

I was born in 1962, and I grew up during the 1970’s.

It really was a great time to grow up. I could ride my bike down to the local store and get a Popsicle for 12 cents or a candy bar for 10 cents. There was actually penny candy. I would meet my best friend at the corner—we both had a love of reading. We would ride our bikes to the public library and get a basket of books or go to the high school swimming pool for open swim where it cost a quarter for three hours of swimming bliss.

Other things I remember—smiley pins, peace, not war, singing “where have all the flowers gone” in folk Mass, seeing the names of the missing in action of our young men in Vietnam after the nightly news, getting a POW bracelet and realizing my person became missing on my birthday, Watergate, women burning their bras and the Equal Rights Amendment.


I was the youngest of four children. I had two sisters and one brother. It was a traditional family of the time, where my father went off to work and my mother stayed home. My mother was different than other mothers. She was a little older as she had me at 34, which was considered “old” in 1962. She also encouraged her daughters to do things even if it wasn’t common for someone of their gender. My two sisters and brother and I were an equal opportunity household when it came to lawn care. We had a huge lawn. I will mention that we had like three or four lawnmowers and hopefully, one would work. In my friend’s family, the brother or father would end up with the duty of mowing the lawn. In our family it was shared, between the siblings. I don’t remember my brother sharing in the housework duties; I will have to ask my mother about that.

I remember my mother with some of her lady friends starting a league of women voters group in town. I also recall my mother inviting her friends over for a brown bag lunch and they had to talk about a certain pre-determined subject (no gossip). The time I overheard them they were discussing the pros and cons of the various presidential candidates. It got interesting, as the ladies at the brown bag lunch represented both major parties.

My best friend Pam and I spent a lot of time together. We met before Kindergarten. I helped her zip her coat, so our horrible mean kindergarten teacher wouldn’t yell at Pam.

We were both Catholic and spent time at CCD (church school). When we were in 5th or 6th grade, our priest was going to come to our class and perform the Catholic Mass. Our priest was actually a Monsieur (a “higher up” in the Catholic world) and really a nice person. I told him that I didn’t think it was fair that girls couldn’t be alter people. At that time only boys could do the duties. My husband was an alter boy, growing up in a nearby town. ERA had not gotten to the Catholic Church in 1973. Pam and I couldn’t be alter girls. Our priest decided to let us be alter girls at the mass that was held at our CCD class in the neighbor’s home. It was a big deal in our life...Unfortunately we couldn’t perform the duties at church. That was one of the many disappoints that I had, early in life.

When I used to attend the Little League games that my friend Pam’s brother played in, there weren’t any girls playing. The town didn’t even have summer softball. Pam and I did swim competitively, as that was a sport both sexes could take part in.

Fast forward to the early 1990s and my son played Little League baseball and youth hockey. There were a few girls playing both sports. One of my son’s female friends played on her middle school hockey team and I remember opposing fans yelling, “get her!” They hated seeing a girl playing hockey with the boys. From the 1970s to the 1990s, females moved forward, but a lot of people still didn’t accept it. I was very happy when that one female that my son played youth hockey, earned a full scholarship to a division 1 school to play hockey. You go girl!

When one of my closest and dearest friends graduated from her high school as valedictorian, she planned on pursing a nursing degree. Her parents were happy about it. My friend recently told me that my father pulled her aside and said “you are smart enough to be a doctor; you should be a doctor.” She came from a good home where her brothers mowed the lawn and she stayed inside to do housework. She said that no one had faith in her like my father did. That is how most females grew up during the 1970s.

The females of my son’s generation have had many opportunities that my generation has not. The generation before me had even less.

At my Democratic Caucus I was standing outside handing out information about Senator Clinton. Some of the men had some really demeaning things to say about her. This came from supposedly “open-minded” Democrats. I thought back to the ice rink—“Get her!”

I don’t think many of the young women who are be supporting Barack Obama realize how ground-breaking Hillary Clinton is. I knew little about Mrs. Clinton until I read her autography, a few years ago. Yes, I am still an avid reader. Luckily, I don’t have to ride my bike to my local library as I would have to go for quite a long ride. I was blown away when I read where Hillary came from and what she has done in her life. When I was hankering to be an alter girl, Hillary Rodham was attending Yale Law School.

It is a time for a woman to be given the opportunity to run the show in the USA. Currently, according to Parade Magazine, there are 13 other female heads of state in the world. It is time for a women president in the USA. She is the best qualified. America thinks they are so with it, but we have yet to have women at the highest level in our country

I get a lot of emails. I have split my adult life between being a Republican and Democrat and for a very short time, I was as a Green. I get information from all sides. I know how the other side thinks.

A few months back, I received an email. I am not sure the exact date as I deleted it. The email told about Senator Obama coming to Maine. I was interested as I really like the opportunity to see candidates in person. I am a closet political “junkie.” Then I read the email and I realized it was a fundraiser and I had to pay $25 to see him. I emailed the person who was the contact. I told him that I wanted to see Senator Obama but I wasn’t a supporter yet. I asked where Senator Obama would be speaking for free. The Obama organizer said I would have to pay to see him in Maine. I replied that I could understand that they needed to have a fundraiser, but they should have another event for free. Even if it was for a 10 minute event. That way people like me could hear the senator and maybe become a Senator Obama supporter, or “groupie.” The organizer indicated that I could go to NH and hear him for free, if I wanted. I thought it was odd that I have heard many candidates for free, such as Dick Chenney, John Edwards, John Kerry, Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean. I hadn’t supported any of them, until I saw them in person. I didn’t get to hear Senator Obama, as I wasn’t going to part with my $25.

I have asked Obama supporters why they support him. The answers are pretty much the same. “We want a change in Washington. It’s time for a change.We want to bring the country together. We want to bring Republicans, iIndependents and Democrats together. We want to unitify the country.”

I am the same age as Senator Obama and like I said earlier, I have spent half my adult life as a Republican and the other half a Democrat. The right dislikes what the left stands for, and the left dislikes what the right stands for. I know first hand as we cannot talk politics with my husband’s family. We were not on speaking terms during the last presidential election. At Thanksgiving, I had a seating plan to keep the Republicans separated from the Democrats. Don’t you think the rest of the country will feel the same way about their party and their views? We just need to all get along. It is easy to say but harder to do. I know first hand.

Have Obama supporters drunk the kool aid and think Obama will just go to Washington even without having any experience and track record and will just work together with all and everyone will play nicely in the sandbox? While we are at it, we also want to end world hunger, Aids and child abuse. Just saying we want a change doesn’t make it happen.

I want change from my business-to-business sales job and so I am going to be an airplane pilot. Oh, I don’t have the experience and yes I wear glasses so it really wouldn’t work out too well. I do want change, so miracles will just happen. I will have 20/20 vision and I will fly international, not domestic, because I want to see Italy. It’s my change, so I can dream.

We do need a change but the change is Hillary! Give the girl a chance. Listen to her. She has something besides merely saying “we need a change.” She has qualifications and policies to back up her talk. It’s not just empty words.