Deprecated: mb_convert_encoding(): Handling HTML entities via mbstring is deprecated; use htmlspecialchars, htmlentities, or mb_encode_numericentity/mb_decode_numericentity instead in /var/www/html/wp-content/plugins/super-cool-ad-inserter/inc/scaip-shortcode-inserter.php on line 37
By now you may have heard about this profile of Mayor Luke Ravenstahl from the Washington Post. It’s exactly what you’d expect: It documents his rise to power, and some of his more notable gaffes. Then it cites Ravenstahl’s tender years as proof that his support of Hillary Clinton is “an effective rejoinder to the idea that Sen. Barack Obama … has a lock on young voters” in the upcoming presidential primary.
Well, if you say so, Washington Post. Most of the young voters I know think of Ravenstahl as the World’s Youngest Living Good Old Boy. (That’s when they think of him at all: You’d be amazed, Washington Post, how few young voters give a damn who a mayor endorses.) But I guess you know best, being the high-powered national journal that you are.
If I’m Ravenstahl, though, the line that worries me the most in this story was an attempted compliment:
“His youthful good looks have helped make him a sort of crossover celebrity — the Britney Spears of Pittsburgh, his spokeswoman says.”
Um, Britney Spears? The celeb whose self-destructive tendencies and bizarre public behavior have made her a laughingstock? The one whose fresh-faced youthful appeal quickly faded in the harsh glare of the spotlight? Is THAT the Britney Spears mayoral spokeswoman Alecia Sirk meant?
Is there something you’re trying to tell us, Alecia? Our lines are open.
This article appears in Apr 3-9, 2008.
The story of your mayor in the Post was fascinating. But comparing him to Brittney was low.
I like the part where it said he was Pgh’s second most effective surrogate for Hillary. I say when something like Mark Penn or Sniper Fire comes up, we rush to Ravenstahl to get Hillary’s side of the story.
Actually, that is an excellent idea.
Maybe that was one of the other factors (besides Lamar gifts) in Ms. Sirk’s resignation from her job. Yesterday.
Hillary’s China comments at the Pittsburgh forum represent extreme hypocrisy. History will record the most heinous assault on America’s national security interests by a U.S. president as Clinton’s transfer of our most advanced missile guidance technology to the CHICOM for a few campaign shekels. A CHICOM financial arrangement that Hillary continued thru her Chinese bagman, Norman Hsu; and, her ChinaTown dishwasher scam. Does any rational person really want to return the Clinton cabal/scandals/circus to the White House? Greg Neubeck
As an Obama supporter who is not terribly familiar with the weapons for campaign money story, I can only say: never trust anyone who uses the word CHICOMS.
It’s called China. (And McCain is going to lose).
One thing that has been ignored in the media circus is this!
http://www.blackagendareport.com/ind…=576&Itemid=34
Quote:
It is easy to spend hours on the insanity that falls under the general heading of Obamamania – the imagined positions taken by the candidate, the things never promised that Black folks swear to have personally heard and seen. But the great tragedy of the current campaign season is the total failure of what passes for Black leadership to have any influence on the growing Obama phenomenon, a corporate manifestation that has never promised anything to Blacks, yet claims to be the center of a “movement.” In truth, having sold their votes for nothing, African Americans have for some time been irrelevant to the current campaign discourse. At this late date, some progressives claim readiness to challenge Rightist tendencies in the Obama machine. But time ran out on that option long ago. Next time around, we’d better have a movement.
In a literal sense, Barack Obama never lied to Black people, since he never offered African Americans anything. For their part, Black voters never requested anything from Obama. From Obama’s standpoint, it turned out to be a perfect arrangement. Obama suspected he could get virtually every Black vote for free, and he was right. For the rest of the campaign, Black opinion was irrelevant. Black Americans appeared to fear that if they asked for the slightest political assurances on traditional Black concerns over peace, the social safety net, and race-based public policy responses to race-based problems, Obama might go poof!…and disappear. Who could say he wouldn’t, since it wasn’t Blacks who had summoned him to run for the highest office, in the first place? By saying nothing that might conceivably rock the Obama boat, Black voters (and so-called leaders) made themselves completely and utterly powerless to affect his campaign – which was fine with Obama and his corporate backers.
Obama’s comment to the workers in small towns in Pennsylvania have caused great concern. But we all have to consider them and decide if he used good judgement!
http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com/