The Political Voices of Women

Opinion and Commentary of Over 400 Women Political Bloggers

Entries Comments



Category: Barack Obama

Barack Obama’s Speech In Berlin - Full Video

25 July, 2008 (02:32) | election 2008, politics, Care2, Barack Obama, video, world, opinion, Obama, youtube, democrats, news, election | By: Catherine Morgan

Here is the full video of Barack Obama’s speech in Berlin…



Obama’s Berlin Speech Appears To Resonate With Crowd

Tens of thousands of Germans, along with some resident Americans, filled Berlin’s Tiergarten park to hear Barack Obama talk about the U.S., Europe and their shared visions and challenges. It was a remarkable turnout for the lazy days of late July, when most Germans are more focused on summer vacations than foreign politics.

The audience repeatedly interrupted his speech with applause and cheers, and erupted in chants of “Yes, we can!”

A lot of Europeans are hoping Obama will give them a reason to love America again.

“I expect Obama to be a president who makes it possible to be proud of being a fan of the USA,” said Gerda Schulz, a 72-year-old retiree. Schulz has watched historic speeches here by a string of American presidents — John F. Kennedy in 1963, Ronald Reagan in 1987 and Bill Clinton in 1994 — and on Thursday added the Democratic presidential contender to the list.

Did you hear Barack Obama’s speech? What did you think?

CBS Aires Edited Interview of McCain with Katie Couric?

25 July, 2008 (02:09) | election 2008, journalism, John McCain, Care2, video, Barack Obama, politics, military, Iraq, war, media, news, opinion, election | By: Catherine Morgan

John McCain Iraq surge blunder. Why did CBS air a heavily edited interview of John McCain with Katie Couric?

Part One…



Part Two…


From America Blog

This one is hard to even explain, it’s so bizarre. McCain, looking just awful on camera, made yet another major gaffe about national security policy, on CBS. So what did Katie Couric do? She aired the interview with McCain, aired the question that led to the gaffe, and then inserted an “answer” to the question that wasn’t the real gaffe-filled answer - it was something McCain said in a total other part of the interview. It’s absolutely astounding how far the corporate media is willing to go in order to defend John McCain. And seriously, take a good look at McCain in this video, I was kind of shocked by his appearance - he doesn’t look well at all.

From A Long Tough Blog

This is ugly. Katie Couric asks John McCain a question - and she and/or her producers air his answer to another question. Because his actual answer was so embarrassingly wrong. That her firing hasn’t been announced already shows us how bad off we are.

From Crooks and Liars

As I reported earlier, CBS violated their own Standards when it aired the heavily edited interview of John McCain with Katie Couric. A CBS spokesman tried to defend their behavior and told TV Newser:

Of the 14-minute interview, a little less than three minutes was used on the Evening News. A CBS spokesperson tells TVNewser, “As all news organizations do with extended interviews, last night’s Obama and McCain interviews were edited to fit the available time and to give viewers a fair expression of the candidates’ major differences. The full transcript and video were and still are available at CBSNews.com.”

OK, so this person is saying that they edited these segments to ‘ give viewers a fair expression of the candidates’ major differences’.

I’m sorry that is not what CBS did in this case and maybe the spokesman should look at their own standards in editing and then get back to me.

From Media Matters

On the July 22 edition of the CBS Evening News, while airing portions of an interview she conducted that day with Sen. John McCain, anchor Katie Couric removed a part of his response in which he falsely asserted that the 2007 U.S. troop surge “began the Anbar awakening.” In fact, the so-called Anbar awakening reportedly began in September 2006, months before the surge was even announced. Couric had asked McCain, “Senator [Barack] Obama says while the increased number of U.S. troops contributed to increased security in Iraq, he also credits the Sunni awakening and the Shia government going after militias, and says that there might have been improved security even without the surge. What’s your response to that?” But rather than airing McCain’s direct reply, including the false claim that the surge “began the Anbar awakening” — an agreement by some tribal leaders in western Iraq to accept U.S. aid and cooperate with anti-Al Qaeda operations — Couric aired comments by McCain spliced together from three separate statements he gave during the interview, one of which responded to a different question. Couric gave no indication that these comments had been edited in any manner, nor did she otherwise note McCain’s falsehood.

So…Why would CBS edit this interview with John McCain? How do we know this is the only time they have done something like this? What do you think?

Afghan Surge Not Likely

24 July, 2008 (13:31) | John McCain, terrorism, Care2, government, video, Barack Obama, politics, military, war, Bush, Iraq, news, opinion, election | By: Catherine Morgan

Even though Afghanistan has become more deadly for our troops than Iraq, there will be no surge. It’s because of the war in Iraq, that there is just not enough troops available for a surge in Afghanistan. This will be another mess that the Bush administration will leave behind for the next President.





From Jessica

First off, let’s be clear about what “surge” was supposed to mean in reference to Iraq. It was supposed to mean that troops would be added to trouble spots in Iraq for a period of six months. The addition of these troops was supposed to bring down violence so that political reconciliation could take place (as the violence levels were being blamed for the lack of political reconciliation). After the six month period, the troops were to be withdrawn, this was why the administration was calling it a “surge” and not what it really was, an escalation. (Keen observers might note that the “surge” has, in fact, lasted an entire year and that the ultimate goal - political reconciliation - is still very far from being achieved.). . .

Afghanistan has needed reinforcements for a long time as the forces there have, for many months, been losing the ground that was initially gained. Resources were directed away from Afghanistan when we went to war in Iraq and we’ve been paying the price for it dearly. This month will likely be the third month that U.S. casualties in Afghanistan are outpacing those in Iraq and considering we a much smaller force in Afghanistan, that’s really not good. Paul Reickhoff, Executive Director of the veteran organization Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America says that many soldiers that served there call it “Forgotistan.”

So, we hear a lot about how the surge in Iraq is working, and how important it is for us to “win” the war in Iraq. But…Are we winning the war in Iraq at the expense of our troops in Afghanistan? Could we “lose” the war in Afghanistan? Let me know what you think in comments.

Satirical Election Video By JibJab

22 July, 2008 (00:40) | election 2008, democracy, John McCain, government, video, Barack Obama, politics, opinion, Bush, Republicans, Obama, Iraq, democrats, youtube, election | By: Catherine Morgan

JibJab has a new satirical video on the election. So, let’s lighten things up a bit. Enjoy

In our first election satire since 2004’s “This Land” and “Good to be in DC”, we bid farewell to Bush and give Obama and Mccain a proper JibJab hazing! And, of course, who could forget about Hillary and Bill? This rip-roaring musical romp gives the election process the proper spanking it deserves!


What do you think of the video? Let me know in comments.

[Cross-posted at the Care2 Election Blog]

One Small Step - Backward?

20 July, 2008 (18:48) | Barack Obama, election 2008 | By: SJ Reidhead

In many ways the summer of 1969 was the most magical in my life.  It changed my life, or rather formed the foundation for all that I am.  It had nothing to do with sex, drugs, or rock and roll.  It wasn’t about Woodstock, even though my parents and grandparents were actually in said town antiquing the weekend there-of.  It was about scientific and engineering feats that captured our imagination.  As a nation we held our heads high.  My girlish fancies were captured by a ‘fairy tale’ young prince who was finally allowed to meet his public in pomp and ceremony that set many young hearts aflutter.

1969 was topped by the most remarkable march to a World Series victory that still is synonymous with the world “miracle”.

Have you ever noticed how “trios” of names dance in our heads.  Larry, Moe, Curley; Grucho, Harpo, Chico; Tinkers to Evers to Chance; Huey, Dewey and Louie; Gaius Julius Caesar, Marcus Licinius Crassus, and Pompeius Magnus then they were followed by Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus, Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, and Marcus Antonius.

Until the death of the Great Luciano the cultural world waxed poetic about the Three Tenors.  You may not know who Patty, LaVerne and Mazene were were, but my father sure does.  (Look up their music, they were icons).

Why don’t we think of them as the Four Musketeers?

There were Three Wise Men.

Remember Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego?

Or what about Peter, James and John?

How about Wyatt, Virgil and Morgan?

Little kids start out with the Three Little Pigs.  If they are fortunate someone reads the poem featuring Wynken, Blynken and Nod.  They learn the nursery rhyme of Three Blind Mice. They know about the Three Little Kittens.  Then they start watching television and can tell you who Jan, Marsha and Cindy are.  They learn about Alvin, Simon and Theodore.   If they have any depth they know who the father of Adam, Hoss, and Little Joe is. If they are truly educated they learn the difference between Kirk, Spock and McCoy.

Television, history, and culture aside, none of these have reached the status of three intrepid explorers who’s very names bring with them awe and the very definition of heroism:  Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins.

Neil Armstrong
‘Buzz’ Aldrin
Michael Collins

On July 16, 1969 the powerful Saturn V launch vehicle slipped the bounds of earth and sailed into the sky.

Four days later on July 20, 1969 the small vehicle composed of the Columbia and the Eagle orbited the Moon.  A few hours alter they separated and the Eagle landed on the surface of another world.

Were those our greatest moments as a nation and as a species?  I truly hope not.  The one federal program most important to the survival of our species is NASA.  Because of my dedication to space and our future, I fear Barack Obama’s election.  Like every other topic, Obama has bounced back and forth like a sugared up four year old.  The most concrete thing I can find about his lack of dedication to our future in space comes from Space Politics:

“…Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama released today the education plan he would enact if elected. The full 15-page plan includes a variety of proposals, including reforming early education programs. The last section of the plan, titled “A Commitment to Fiscal Responsibility” explains how he would pay for these initiatives. The passage of relevance here: “The early education plan will be paid for by delaying the NASA Constellation Program for five years,” among other steps. According to MSNBC, Obama would leave in place $500 million/year for Constellation’s “manufacturing and technology base”, but would otherwise transfer the funding to the education effort. None of the campaign’s official statements or other media reports indicate any alternative measures the campaign would take to address what, on its face, would appear to be a five-year delay in the introduction of Ares 1, Orion, and the other main components of NASA’s current exploration architecture….”

Our future is in space.

Let’s put the matter of space exploration aside for a moment.  By delaying the deployment of a new generation launch vehicle Barack Obama is literally damning the United States to a second class status in technology.

How do we service our satellites?

How do we link with the space station?

How do we deploy certain satellites?

What if some unforeseen emergency arises, how do we handle it?

In other words, those magical moments of “The Eagle has landed” are gone forever.  We lose our technological edge to China, Japan, Russia, and Europe as Barack Obama plans to invest more in an educational system that is broken beyond repair.

Obama In Afghanistan and Iraq

20 July, 2008 (17:34) | election 2008, terrorism, John McCain, Care2, video, Barack Obama, politics, military, war, Obama, Iraq, democrats, opinion, news, election | By: Catherine Morgan

Barack Obama meets Afghan leader and discusses terrorism, and he is also going to Iraq. Check out the video clip and let me know what you think? Is this trip going to help or hurt his campaign?



From The New York Times

In an interview with CBS News on Sunday, Mr. Obama said: “We have to understand that the situation is precarious and urgent here in Afghanistan. And I believe this has to be our central focus, the central front on our battle against terrorism.

From Politico

In a presidential campaign where the Democrat faces an especially intense variation of a familiar Republican assault-that he is, in some sense, not “one of us,” the trip abroad represents an opportunity for Obama to assert that he is, rather, not one of them.

He began with stops in which he has been pictured largely in the company of American soldiers. In Kuwait, he examined military vehicles and signed autographs for soldiers on a military base. The first images out of Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, where he landed after a brief visit to a base in Kuwait, show him with two uniformed members of the military, three other American officials, and a large statue of a bald eagle.

From Washington Street Journal

I believe U.S. troop levels need to increase. And I for at least a year now have called for two additional brigades, perhaps three. I think it’s very important that we unify command more effectively to coordinate our military activities. But military alone is not going to be enough. The Afghan government needs to do more, but we have to understand that the situation is precarious and urgent here in Afghanistan. And I believe this has to be our central focus, the central front on our battle against terrorism. …

I think one of the biggest mistakes we’ve made strategically after 9/11 was to fail to finish the job here, focus our attention here. We got distracted by Iraq.

Let me know what you think about Obama’s trip to Afghanistan and Iraq in comments.

Connecting the Dots - UBS, Gramm, McCain

18 July, 2008 (02:13) | government, Barack Obama, money, video, John McCain, politics, Republicans, democrats, opinion, election | By: Pamela Lyn

Last week we all learned that US Presidential Candidate, Senator John McCain’s “former” economic advisor and campaign co-chair, former Republican Senator from Texas Phil Gramm believes that Americans have become “a nation of whiners” and that we’re in a “mental recession“, ( a phrase that may well become as defining as “it’s the economy, stupid”).

However, this week it’s becoming very clear that Gramm’s comments, which some may want to dismiss as just political misspeak, actually reveal a very troubling economic philosophy.

In the following video clip, Lou Dobbs reports on the US Senate Subcommittee on Investigations’ report that two foreign banks, one being UBS, helped wealthy Americans avoid their tax obligations. Yes, this is the same UBS for which Phil Gramm is a Vice Chairman.



If the video is not visible, click here to view it<break>

Of course if you’re as wealthy as Bill Gates and absent of any conscience Phil Gramm’s association with both UBS and John McCain may not bother you. But if you do not fall into either of the aforementioned categories you may be wondering if you want John McCain to shape America’s economy future.Today the New York Times is reporting that after being caught with their hands in America’s cookie jar, UBS has announced that it is making a few changes in their banking policy.NYT reports:

Faced with a federal investigation into its private banking practices, the Swiss banking giant UBS said on Thursday that it would stop offering offshore banking services to clients in the United States.

Mark Branson, chief financial officer of the UBS global wealth management group, told a Senate subcommittee that the company would provide banking or securities services to United States residents only through companies licensed in this country and that it would help the federal government identify American citizens engaging in tax fraud.

On Wednesday, a Senate permanent subcommittee on investigations released a report saying that UBS’s offshore practices helped American citizens hide an estimated $18 billion in 19,000 accounts from the Internal Revenue Service.

In his testimony, Mr. Branson apologized for any compliance failures that might have happened and said the decision to close its Switzerland-based cross-border business was intended to ensure that such failures did not happen again.

Clients in the United States will still be able to access UBS’s services through wealth management units that are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. But advisers based in Switzerland will not be allowed to come to the United States to meet with American clients.

UBS’s decision came as a surprise even to Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, the subcommittee chairman, who said in his opening statement that UBS operated “behind a wall of secrecy” that needed to be torn down

Hmmm, “UBS operated ‘a wall of secrecy’”, does that remind you of anything. *

Isn’t it funny that the Republicans are always accusing the Democrats of trying to raise the taxes which many of their constituents do not now and have no intention of paying?

*(Hint: Bush/Cheney/Secret Energy Meetings/Gonzales)

Is Obama On The Cover Of The New Yorker Satire?

15 July, 2008 (11:13) | terrorism, journalism, Care2, Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, politics, opinion, youtube, Obama, media, news, freedom of speech, election | By: Catherine Morgan

Here is a guest post by Cynthia Samuels from Don’t Gel Too Soon.

obama.jpgOK. What do we think about this? I can tell you one thing. It hurts to look at it, even though I guess I understand what the artist, Barry Blitt, says he was trying to do. Rachel Sklar’s Huffington Post interview with the magazine’s gifted editor David Remnick explains further.

Obviously I wouldn’t have run a cover just to get attention — I ran the cover because I thought it had something to say. What I think it does is hold up a mirror to the prejudice and dark imaginings about Barack Obama’s — both Obamas’ — past, and their politics. I can’t speak for anyone else’s interpretations, all I can say is that it combines a number of images that have been propagated, not by everyone on the right but by some, about Obama’s supposed “lack of patriotism” or his being “soft on terrorism” or the idiotic notion that somehow Michelle Obama is the second coming of the Weathermen or most violent Black Panthers. That somehow all this is going to come to the Oval Office.

The free speech and marketplace of ideas concepts that I’ve treasured all my life clash with my reaction to all of this; I know that. The Constitutional protection of freedom of speech exists to guarantee the right both to speak and to hear not only popular, but also unpopular ideas. We don’t need to protect the popular ones; it’s the ideas that enrage people that need the protection. And I’m all for that.

But for a responsible and respected publication like The New Yorker to abuse that freedom by offering such blatant stereotypes to make its point, particularly when the subjects are the first African American Presidential (Columbia and Harvard-educated) candidate and his (Princeton and Harvard-educated) wife, an accomplished attorney — each of whose life trajectory suggests two stars who did everything expected of them to grow into exciting, productive citizens — seems to me abusive and dangerous. In an effort to make a point about the hate that’s being distributed concerning these two, they’re feeding it.

It will be interesting to see how many right wing websites and publications make use of this image. There’s been plenty of reaction so far and most of it is far more sophisticated than I could dream of being. I’m having too much trouble with my emotional, gut sense of right and wrong to be very thoughtful; this just feels wrong - perhaps even more so because of who printed it. I’ve been a New Yorker groupie since I was a high school kid in Pittsburgh wishing I was in Greenwich Village living the life of Susie Rotolo. Like this - walking through the Village with Bob Dylan.




So it’s particularly disturbing to me that something so terribly offensive was pubished by this beloved icon.

The stereotypes don’t fit the Obamas, obviously. That’s what the New Yorker is trying to demonstrate by feeding these stereotypes out there in such a naked way. But even if they did, how many of us who ever cared about anything is willing to stand by every position we adopted in our younger days?

Congressman Bobby Rush was a Black Panther. Now he’s chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection, serves on the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet and is a co-chairman of the Congressional Biotech Caucus. Isn’t that what we want? Growth.Even if the Obama’s were flamers back then (and I don’t think they were, by a long shot), isn’t the American way for young activists to rebel, maybe the wrong way, early in their lives then “grow up” to ultimately help to make change from inside? Justice Hugo Black, one of the great justices of the 20th century, started out as a member of the Ku Klux Klan - then went on to be a staunch defender of civil liberties for all. If we deny our future leaders the capacity to grow and question while they’re young, we will end up with leaders who may be what we deserve, but not who we need, by a long shot.I guess what I’m saying is that this effort to force Americans to confront political trash talk by offering up a visual representation of it all is, to me, a terrible mistake. An image that casts a shadow over the remarkable symbolic gift of this landmark candidacy - an image that lingers like a scar.

[cross-posted at The Care2 Election Blog]

Also See:

McCain, Obama campaigns agree: New Yorker cover is not satire.

Should Obama & McCain Come To BlogHer? What about Hillary?

13 July, 2008 (17:25) | journalism, politics, opinion, election 2008, mommy bloggers, bloggers, Barack Obama, news, democrats, Republicans, election, women, feminism, Hillary Clinton, blogging, BlogHer | By: Catherine Morgan

PunditMom is asking the question…Should Barack Obama and John McCain should come to the BlogHer conference?

Last year, after attending my first BlogHer conference, I was a little put out when I discovered that most of the Democratic presidential candidates were making appearances at The Yearly Kos conference just one week later (now called Netroots Nation) and not BlogHer.

Having heard more times than I care to count that women voters are the key demographic to winning elections – especially this election — it just didn’t make sense. Of course, I was thrilled that Elizabeth Edwards was hanging out with us BlogHer chicks, but it’s a different message to send a spouse rather than the candidate him- or herself.

I hoped that would change this year, especially with the general election just four months away.

What do you think? Do the Obama and McCain campaigns realize the impact that over 1,000 women bloggers could have? Are they making a mistake by not attending?

Personally, I would love to see Hillary Clinton there.

My Pathetic Hypocrisy

13 July, 2008 (00:29) | John McCain, Barack Obama, bloggers, election 2008, GOP, women, Hillary Clinton, democrats, Republicans | By: SJ Reidhead

This is my first post for the Political Voices of Women.  For those of you who aren’t familiar with my blog, The Pink Flamingo, I will do a quick introduction by saying that I am a Republican.  In fact, I consider myself a Republican, first, last, and always. I want to thank Catherine Morgan for inviting me to add my political voice to that of other women.  It will be primarily conservative, but I like to have my own opinions.

You also need to know that I am a staunch supporter of John McCain.  Periodically, over the next few months, I will endeavor to convert those of you who are not.  When the election cycle began, I did not like Hillary Clinton.  I had little use for her.  As the months went by, I began to have a grudging respect for her which has grown into very real admiration.  I wonder if I could handle myself as gracefully as has she.

I don’t like hypocrites. I don’t like people who are fake, be them liberal, moderate, conservative, Democratic or Republican.  Much to my consternation, the other day I found myself guilty of that very behavior. It made me think – quite a bit. 

I stopped off at the bank to do the usual after a week out of town.  I noticed that the girls working behind the counter were dressed in a manner that reflected more a ‘Friday’ casual look than banking Tuesday.  If their attire was ‘serious’ banking, then I am afraid to see what ‘Casual Friday’ might entail.   It reminded me of several things.  First, are we going to you know what in a hand-basket because of our sloppy dress?  Second, is it any indication of a lapse in societal manners, morals, and customs?

I was waxing poetic about the downfall of civilization as we know it until I started a chain of thought that took be back to South Carolina about 20 years ago.  My father had some friends I never really liked.  He only hung out with them at his morning coffee stop, and had a tendency to eat a greasy spoon lunch with them, every weekday for years and years and years… He had a friend who was involved in eggs, chickens, and a heck of a lot of money.  His friend decided to remarry after his 2nd wife ran off with the deposed county sheriff cum private investigator.  Is the story sounding a little shady?  It should. 

My father’s friend made the great and terrible mistake of asking my mother (who has been hailed by one and all as one very classy lady – my sister and I don’t even try to keep up with her) to take wife #3, or was it #4 under her wing and teach her how to dress, talk, act.  You can imagine how well that went, especially when another wife of another of my father’s friends told my mother about this other woman’s previous profession.  You guessed correctly, it was one of the older professions.

Anyway – the professional woman previously mentioned happened to work at one of the local banks, which has since merged and re-merged as frequently as her husband had exchanged wives.   Everyone always commented on how this specific branch of this specific bank always had the sharpest looking and dressing women. 

Low and behold that branch was the location the women who really worked for the bank were stationed.  They would report to another city, to a high-rise office building owned by the bank, where a party room was maintained.  There, important officials, politicians, and clients would be – shall we say – entertained.  The women were rewarded with higher pay, trips, clothes, jewelry, etc.

I had a friend who worked for this specific bank..  There was nothing glamorous about her. My friend was as chunky as am I. She could never get ahead, but other, less talented women who were quite attractive, were promoted over her and shipped off to the specific branch in question.  After years of being ignored, banging her head on the glass ceiling, she went with a newly formed bank, where she quickly rose to the top of the local ladder.

One day my friend’s bank bought the other bank.  Guess who ended up managing that specific ‘whore’ branch (as it was known) and ended up as a VP of what was now one of the top banks in the country. Yep, my friend. The cute little trick-turners were doing what my father’s friend’s newest wife was doing, looking for rich husbands.  They had to do something considering they were unemployed.

There is a moral here.

Perhaps the girls working at the local bank here, where were so ‘dressed down’ are the talented ones.

I thought a lot about judging people and that glass ceiling.  Evidently there are some organizations where a woman’s appearance is more important than her abilities.  During the primary elections there was a tremendous amount of conversation about Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits and her ‘dowdy’ attire.  Little did those criticizing the Senator from New York, that she was wearing fairly expensive, American made and designed togs.  Maybe it is all about appearances.  You would never hear a male POTUS candidate be criticized for his attire unless it was outrageous. 

I guess it’s that old glass ceiling.  Speaking of which,  Barack Obama is talking a good game about equal pay for equal work.  The problem is he doesn’t practice what he preaches.  Women on his staff make an average of $6000 less a year than the average man who is doing the same job.   Both Hillary Clinton and John McCain pay women a little more or the same wage as they do the men who work for them.

Appearances can be a funny thing.

FYI - According to my mother, who was in the bank the other day, those two girls who were so casually dressed were ‘as dumb as dirt’.  I guess that blows the whole moral of the story.