Posted tagged ‘west wing’

I miss President Bartlet

September 22, 2008

Marvelous:

OBAMA The problem is we can’t appear angry. Bush called us the angry left. Did you see anyone in Denver who was angry?

BARTLET Well … let me think. …We went to war against the wrong country, Osama bin Laden just celebrated his seventh anniversary of not being caught either dead or alive, my family’s less safe than it was eight years ago, we’ve lost trillions of dollars, millions of jobs, thousands of lives and we lost an entire city due to bad weather. So, you know … I’m a little angry.

OBAMA What would you do?

BARTLET GET ANGRIER! Call them liars, because that’s what they are. Sarah Palin didn’t say “thanks but no thanks” to the Bridge to Nowhere. She just said “Thanks.” You were raised by a single mother on food stamps — where does a guy with eight houses who was legacied into Annapolis get off calling you an elitist? And by the way, if you do nothing else, take that word back. Elite is a good word, it means well above average. I’d ask them what their problem is with excellence. While you’re at it, I want the word “patriot” back. McCain can say that the transcendent issue of our time is the spread of Islamic fanaticism or he can choose a running mate who doesn’t know the Bush doctrine from the Monroe Doctrine, but he can’t do both at the same time and call it patriotic. They have to lie — the truth isn’t their friend right now. Get angry. Mock them mercilessly; they’ve earned it. McCain decried agents of intolerance, then chose a running mate who had to ask if she was allowed to ban books from a public library. It’s not bad enough she thinks the planet Earth was created in six days 6,000 years ago complete with a man, a woman and a talking snake, she wants schools to teach the rest of our kids to deny geology, anthropology, archaeology and common sense too? It’s not bad enough she’s forcing her own daughter into a loveless marriage to a teenage hood, she wants the rest of us to guide our daughters in that direction too? It’s not enough that a woman shouldn’t have the right to choose, it should be the law of the land that she has to carry and deliver her rapist’s baby too? I don’t know whether or not Governor Palin has the tenacity of a pit bull, but I know for sure she’s got the qualifications of one. And you’re worried about seeming angry? You could eat their lunch, make them cry and tell their mamas about it and God himself would call it restrained. There are times when you are simply required to be impolite. There are times when condescension is called for!

Does anyone care to explain to me why Sorkin isn’t Obama’s head speechwriter?

Infuriating, or maybe just saddening

August 9, 2008

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/perspective-on-mazen-asbahi.html

I’m increasingly disappointed by Obama. It’s not that he’s a bad candidate. I (along with many others) projected unrealistic hopes onto him. As the recent New Yorker profile drove home, he above all is a savvy politician. I think we’re headed for a presidency of idealistic speeches but compromises that, well, compromise those ideals. I’m not against compromises with the right over policy differences (such as the current energy bill be floated around) but I’m incredibly disappointed that the Obama campaign immediately folded on this point (depending on your viewpoint, maybe that should read “had to fold.”) Spare yourself the high risk of bleeding eyeballs that reading the comments about Rany’s letter–I’ll paraphrase:

DEMOCRAT: Obama had two choices: fight the good fight and lose the election or fold the hand and win big. This is the way our elections/campaigns/government/society is: best to deal with it. Obama’s running a smart campaign. Once elected, he’ll do Great Things for the Left. Anyone who thinks Obama can take on the problems with the media/electorate/system AND win in November is a deluded fool.

LIBERAL: Obama’s turned out to be just another pol. He’s selling out his principles (or, at least, the principles we wish/expect him to have.) This is a shameful act on the campaign’s part.

RIGHT WING MOUTH-BREATHER: Obama’s a Muslim. All muslims are terrorists. Thus, Obama’s a terrorist. Or, my favorite: Obama’s a flip-flopper who’ll cave on any issue to get elected. Which would be true, is only you replace the word “Obama” with McCain.

Personally, I fall between the first two positions (and piss all over the third). Actually, it would be more appropriate to say I’m torn between the two: my head’s with the Democrat, my heart’s with the liberal. Part of why I got excited by Obama’s campaign is that I thought he wasn’t a typical politician–and the speech of Race shows that he stands at least a little bit out from the pack–so the continual proof to the contrary is supremely disillusioning. What I want, more so than a progressive politician to win, is for someone to defy the system and win. Is President Bartlet really too much to ask for?

Seriously, I see the realists’ point but I’m not willing to concede that fighting back against these ridiculous smears is a bad move. Didn’t Kerry prove that not pushing back is even worse? I expected Obama to respond strongly to this kind of shit. It has to be at least possible to make a principled stand and have your words and actions rise above the racists’ moronic shouting, especially when you have a gifted orator like Obama in your arsenal. Seize the moral high ground AND FUCKING STAY THERE.

The whole “courting the moderate vote” concept that drives this type of decision is nauseating. I myself am in some ways a centrist, though 8 years of Bush have certainly pushed me farther to the left than ever before. But I want to see an Independent seize that middle ground and break the fucked up partisan politics we currently tolerate, not watch two guys whose recent voting patterns show them to be near the extremes of the spectrum suddenly abandon their ideals and run out the bread and circuses act.

John, Pat, Heather, whoever else actually reads this thing, I’d like to know your opinions on any of this.