I have long held that it is the ‘mature’ who should be ‘invited’ to war, since they’ve both the most to lose and the perspective to question mindless enthusiasm for violence.

By the same token, the contact ’sport’ of politics should be our natural realm, essentially because we have the least to lose yet retain the perspective to wonder aloud, based on life-experience, when the mindless hold forth and idiocy rules (almost said ‘drools’).

Other than that I’se in near toal agreement. The only problem is that the ‘wisdoms’ of the d party have a far different ‘take’ on things: Witness Pelosi’s Very Empty Table and Obama’s FISA ‘perspective’ etc. etc.

But you are correct about the bracing invigoration of seriously taking it to ‘them’.

But, I fear, ‘collegiality’, if not complicity, rules.

I am also a Vietnam War Vet, and thusly, I am entering my “codgerhood”. And politics is a contact sport best practiced by the younger folks among us.

As to the “full frontal assualt”, politics or policy can accomplish much. Creativity of Ideas, is the sum total for addressing this “need”.

Back when President Clinton called for a ‘dialogue on Race’, there those among us in the Sonoran Desert and who were waiting to suggest that the Voter Registration Application be changed to include and prohibit the behavior of Racism or Bigotry be practiced by either the major political parties or those in the membership affiliation.

Consequently, singling out the RNC as the ’stalking horse’ for the McCain Camp, could do wonders for the Obama campaign. This disdain of McCain would envigorate our fellow Democrats even more.

Jaango

I has a total whitebread dude, I am not sure that a full frontal assault will work. But I think perhaps those who will get angry or scared by it would never vote Democratic anyway.

In any case, I do think directly addressing it is important. I do think Obama camp played into GOP hands by seeming to go out of their way to deny they were playing the race card.

But the whole spectrum of race/elitist/strage/unAmerican attacks, whether implicit or explicit must be directly addressed in some way that is strong and confident.

I agree it has been very successful with the pundit class, except for a few centrist news celebs who seem to have gotten fed up, or decided they were not gong to make fools of themselves in public this time. But is public paying all that much attnention yet?

Seems to me Obama or McCain get a little, temporary bump in the polls, whenever their pics or names get splashed around prominently, no matter what the content, or whether pro or con.

A most-relevant comment indeed.

I hope that you will consider commenting here often, as contrary to what you apparently ‘believe’, I am certain everybody here would not only appreciate your perspective, but be much in agreement with it.

Thank you for risking the moment and sharing your thoughts.

David

My family history on my father’s side is Yaqui Indian and on my mother’s side, it’s Apache Indian. However, I much prefer the Chicano nomenclature. As such, I don’t have to do my usual or traditional assuagement to Anglo Guilt. The other day, a friend of mine from Las Vegas erupted in his dislike for Hispanics and delivered to me a rant that I like to think came from one too many liquid tokes of a scotch and water.

Regardless, I have learned over many years that only a “full frontal assualt” will cure the hate and ignorance, and thusly, I wrote back with the following “stereotype” and for asking which “knee he preferred.”

To wit:

A young ventriloquist is touring the Southern United States and on his way back to Chicago he stops to entertain at a small bar in Arkansas. He’s going through his usual stupid Redneck jokes, when a big burly guy in the audience stands up and says, “I’ve heard just about enough of your smart ass hillbilly jokes. We ain’t all stupid here in the South.”

Flustered the ventriloquist begins to apologize, when the big guy pipes up again, “You stay out of this mister, I am talking to the smart ass little guy on your knee.”

In any event, should I lose a friendship over this, then a friendship never really existed, and life for me still moves on. Needless to say but I will, it will have been his loss.

So, if Obama does not do the “full frontal assault” method, he will lose his many friends here in the Sonoran Desert. Take, for example, last Friday, a corporate entity and know as Behavior Research here in Phoenix, released its Rocky Mountain Poll and which indicated that 79% of Chicanos are voting for Obama, 9% for McCain, and the remaining 12% are being split among Nader, Barr and the still Undecided. And I mention this only to self-justify my prediction of January, that come November, 75% of Chicanos/Hispanics/Latinos would be voting for Obama. If not, I would “eat crow” and invite my friends to celebrate my debasement.

Of course, Charlie Black has posited that McCain got 77% of the Chicano vote back in 2004 for his re-election. Black conveniently forgot that the Democratic candidate ran on a “anyone but Bush” campaign platform and which is an egregious behavior attempted for either a Democrat or a Republicn, and thusly, as a Democrat, I voted for McCain on the premise that after having been trashed by Bush and Atwater in 2000, he-McCain deserved a second chance. Any I must say that I expected McCain to self-destruct once America got wind on the nonsense attributable to his “mavericky” status. Sadly, America still hasn’t caught up with this nonsense for the “mavericky” and the malarkey.

Jaango

ALL who post or comment here possess unlimited poetic license.

New words are coined almost daily and definitions shift like techtonic plates, all in good humor, of course.

Seriously, no umbrage over verbiage is EVER to be considered as anything other than, “Shocked, I am shocked! Quickly! My smelling salts! My fainting couch! My pearls!”

Bob in HI