Energy...

This evening I drove by a formerly vacant commercial property on Detroit's east side. Tonight however, it was ablaze with activity. The space had been transformed into an east side headquarters for the Obama campaign.

Inside, you could see young, old, black white, urban and suburban-- busy with phones and laptops in tow, working to make a difference during the last seven days of this historic election. I was headed home with my children, but the campaign office certainly looked like a pretty fun place to be. It was alive with energy.

The scene I described made me proud. Something else that's made me proud is a political rap I saw performed a few weeks ago by students from the Ron Clark Academy in Atlanta. These kids are amazing! The rap is informative and catchy. It's stuck with me!

So, if you need more evidence as to how much this campaign has energized Americans of all ages, here it is.

As CNN's Kyra Phillips said--"I'd vote for any of these incredible young people for president!"

Watch and be proud!

Anita

Blogger’s Blues

As we approach the final presidential debate of the 2008 election season, I’m beginning to feel the Blogger’s Blues. Really. I hate to see it all end.

I’ve never been into sports but I believe I can better empathize with my husband—who loves a good football game. He doesn’t want to tape it and watch it later. He wants to see it first-hand, in real time. Each game is its own unique, exciting event. No two games are the same, and the dynamics within each game make it interesting and compelling to watch. It’s his sport.

Well, politics is my sport. I like to watch it in real time and enjoy watching each and every debate, interview and campaign speech. I enjoy blogging and writing commentary a few times a week, and twittering live during debates.

Now what will I do with all that “free” time between 11:00 pm and 2:00 a.m.?

While there’s been a price to pay for all this blogging—mostly sleep deprivation—I’ve benefited too. I’ve been able to keep my writing skills fresh. I’ve kept up to date on the issues and I’ve learned how to develop and present a position quickly—before new news is old news.

Most of all, I’ve joined the millions of other bloggers in various online communities, and I’ve met a great group women within the Political Voices of Women Community blog. http://politicalvoicesofwomen.ning.com/

I’m reassured that I am not alone in my passion for following politics. So I know I won’t be the only individual suffering from Blogger’s Blues when election 2008 comes to an end on November 4th (or 5th depending on when we get the results).

Yes, I’m sure there will be news and politics to cover after the Presidential election. Yet there’s nothing like a really good movie that you just don’t want to come to an end. Maybe I’ll write a song…A blues song…

In the meantime, I will continue to write, blog, Twit, watch streaming campaign events live on CNN.com, read my New York Times political email alerts, and catch up on the political news of the day from each news channel’s video stream. Yes, I have a lot to keep me busy until that fateful day.

One day soon I’ll sing. But I’m not singing the Blogger’s Blues just yet.

McCain and Palin: “We’re angry!”

Have you heard the latest phrase from the McCain-Palin stomp speech? It consists of two very powerful words. “I’m angry.” To place the statement in context, Palin has said, “There is anger about the dealings of insider lobbyists, anger about the greed of Wall Street, and there’s anger about the arrogance of the Washington elite, and there is anger about voter fraud.” McCain has himself said, "You're angry and I'm angry too."

However, the issue I have with the “angry” statement is this: What are all these angry people supposed to do with their anger? The election is not until November 4th. Until then, are folks to let their anger simmer until it boils over into something ugly? God forbid they actually lose the election—then what are they to do with their anger? Are they to do as some extremists in the McCain-Palin crowd have suggests when they shouted “Off with his head,” Kill him! Get him!?”

McCain may want to say that he is utterly appalled, and state that he totally rejects Congressman John Lewis’ reference to John Wallace, in his condemnation of McCain’s campaign rally etiquette. However, the fact is, if McCain refuses to fiercely and immediately— on-the-spot—denounce such statements that come from the crowd at his campaign rallies, he is inadvertently condoning them.

I believe that that Congressman John Lewis—in his statement that “McCain and Palin were sowing seeds of hatred and division”— was simply saying that to allow such unbridled anger and hatred to bubble up and fester is dangerous, and has the potential—if unchecked—to lead to violent acts on the part of some. The campaign has a responsibility to not incite it, allow it or condone it.

Instead of pulling back on the rhetoric that solicited very troubling outbursts at their rallies last week, McCain and Palin decided to step-up the intensity this week by launching a new “You’re angry and I’m angry too” campaign slogan. It’s an interesting approach, but is it the right approach?

I believe that how individuals conduct their campaign is an indication of how they’ll conduct their presidency. Since its inception, the tone and tenor of the Obama campaign has consistently been one of hope and inclusion—focusing on what unites us, not divides us. Yes, the Obama campaign is pushing back against the McCain attacks with attacks of their own. However, within the last few weeks, the entire tone and tenor of the McCain campaign has grown increasingly cynical and mean-spirited—even inciting the “angry mob” effect at its rallies.

Maybe McCain hopes history won’t repeat itself in his case—or perhaps he just doesn’t know— but historical precedence demonstrates that the “angry” candidate doesn’t win.

Six months ago, Obama referred to some small town Americans as “bitter.” As a result, he was lambasted, labeled an elitist and suffered a dip in the polls as a result. Now, McCain and Sarah Palin are stirring up their crowds by proudly proclaiming “You’re angry and I’m angry too.”

Hey, I understand. We all get angry. Judeo-Christian teaching instructs us to “be angry but sin not.” So fine—McCain, Palin and their audiences have every right to be angry—that’s fine. It’s the “sin not” part of the equation that worries me.

"Human Error?" New Yorkers Forced to Vote for Osama for President

This is truly and outrage!

The following Associated Press article ran in the Detroit Free Press on October 10, 2008. My comments follow.

BALLOT GAFFE: Is it Obama or Osama?

Who is running for president? In an upstate New York county, hundreds of voters have been sent absentee ballots in which they could vote for "Barack Osama."The absentee ballots sent to voters in Rensselaer County identified the two presidential candidates as "Barack Osama" and "John McCain."

In the United States, the best-known individual named Osama is Osama bin Laden, leader of the Al Qaeda terror group.The county elections office faxed a statement in which the two commissioners, Democrat Edward McDonough and Republican Larry Bugbee, said they regret the error but never acknowledge what the error was.

"It's human error, it's very unfortunate, it's an embarrassment to our office, obviously," McDonough said.

###
Compiled from the Associated Press

MY RESPONSE
Let me say it up front: Yes, Rensselaer County is a Republican led county. However, there were supposedly three proofreaders and no one caught the error before the absentee ballot went out to over 300 residents.

Certainly, no one expects stupid errors on a simple ballot with names we’ve all become extremely familiar with. I suspect the person who typed the ballot assumed right—that no one would be paying close enough attention to notice until it was too late.

What could incite an American—let alone a New Yorker—more than being asked to vote for Osama? By the way, the letter “s” is no where near the letter “b” on the keyboard. The “s” is typed with the middle finger of the left hand and the “b” with the index finger.A more accurate “typo” would have been “Onama”, “Ovama” or “Ogama.” Nah… those don’t have the same effect—and they certainly would have been caught.

Osama: Willful or ignorant?
I believe there are three options:
1) Either the individual who typed the ballot was typing with one finger and truly made a mistake;
2) It was a Freudian slip of the finger by a mindless, out-of-touch individual who actually believes the negative emails circulating that refer to Obama as Osama; or
3) The individual purposefully committed election fraud by attempting to reduce the number of votes cast for Obama due to the incendiary reference to Osama Bin Laden.

What about the election commissioners who didn’t catch the error? They probably didn’t see it. How often are simple, routine actions thoroughly analyzed? It’s not excusable, but very likely that proofing an absentee ballot is something that is delegated or neglected entirely.

I’m typically very optimistic and always ready to give others the benefit of the doubt—but this incident is extremely suspicious to me. Why, well, because I don’t believe in coincidence—and Osama—well, it’s just not your typical typo.

What do you think?