I had the same reaction to reading Hillary Clinton's assassination comment as many people here and in the media.  Either this was another insidious political dog whistle--the worst possible one--or more likely, another bit of evidence that she is out of conscious touch with the darker side of her unconscious.

Others have also pointed out that she could have picked many other election years to make her point that nomination battles go into June and beyond. But what makes the RFK example especially awful is that it doesn't even make sense.

Because had Bobby Kennedy lived beyond that horrific day I remember vividly, the 1968 Democratic nominee was still not going to be decided until the convention.  His assassination is irrelevant to her point.    

The pundits and political experts hear Barack Obama talking about changing Washington and ending the old politics, and say how inspirational he is.  And then they demand that he act according to the old politics.

It's starting again on the questions of Hillary Clinton leaving the race, and the related question of who Obama will choose for vice president. I happen to believe that on both of these topics, the conventional wisdom will once again be wrong.

For example, there's an article by Dan Conley in Salon that Teagan Goddard's Political Wire calls a "must read," which suggests the kind of deal that Hillary might get in exchange for her support.  His major suggestion is money--a bunch of Obama cash to retire her campaign debt.  

Whatever the ultimate meaning of the results in the PA primary, Tuesday night the TV pundits will be making their judgments based on the percentage of victory.

Both campaigns are trying to set expectations, but clearly the Clinton campaign must regard any margin of victory as a huge vindication, and a reason to go on.

But an analysis on Bloomberg.com should bring a little reality check to the meaning of PA. Many have pointed out that it is almost impossible for Clinton to surpass Obama in elected delegates.  But one factor some in her campaign have suggested might break her way is the popular vote.  The Bloomberg report looks at that.  And it's conclusions are devastating.    

The media is full of Katrina recollections and evaluations right now, and by Labor Day, they'll be gone.  Democrats can't let America forget Katrina.

I say this because those responsible for the unnecessary tragedies in the Gulf, and the sickening fact that they continue, must be held accountable, and must be prevented from endangering more lives. This is a dangerous situation for the American present and future, and just about all the nation can do about it at this point is to break the Republican rule of the federal government by electing Democrats to Congress.

So I am going to be unapologetically political here.  What follows is my first draft script for a Katrina campaign ad, simple enough for amateurs to produce but designed for wide distribution. I've posted a version with photos at Dreaming Up Daily that gives a rough idea of what it might look like.    

It's crunch time.  It's time to get the main messages out. With candidate speeches and blogs, big money ads and homemade video, with all the means there are. Because it's not going to be as easy as it sounds from the latest batch of predictions, each inflating the other.  It's going to take work to close the deal.

It's time for Democrats to tell their story, and the first thing the party must recognize is that they need to tell it from the beginning.  That's where most good stories start, but there are real world reasons for what I mean.

From the beginning means: don't assume.  Don't assume voters know a lot.  Don't be condescending or phony, but just deal with that fact.  And understand the story they want to hear this election year.

Water is not just necessary for life.  Water is life.  Our planet is mostly made of it and so are we--one species of intelligent aliens identified us as "ugly bags of mostly water." (Bonus points to the comment that correctly identifies the source.)  

We grow up knowing the simple formula for water: H2O. Yet for all our vaunted science and technology, we have no idea how to make it.  Our science knows a few things about it, but we don't know really what water is.

We can't build or manufacture or create water.  Our lives depend on the water that exists, that our earth as a complex system provides.  Water is in many ways the basis of civilization, and how water is shared is a primary creator and medium of culture.  But as the world's fresh water is increasingly threatened by what the modern world has done to the planet, water again becomes a test of our civilization and our future.  For many, it already is.  For the rest of us, it soon will be.

On August 6, 1945, Hiroshima was destroyed by the first atomic bomb used in warfare. Three days later, President Truman began a pattern of lies that characterized the nuclear age.

But another lie also emerged from World War II, when the kind of bombing we see today--from the air, on urban centers and civilian populations--was first done regularly, on a large scale.  The lie is that bombing is an effective, reasonable and legitimate method of waging war, whereas there are other despicable and illegitimate acts committed by uncivilized and ruthless enemies, called terrorism.

The truth is that bombing is terrorism, and it always has been.    

Promoted by Steven D.

The Iraq war is becoming as long and agonizing as Vietnam--one poll says it is even more politically divisive.  Chuck Hegel said last week that the situation on the ground in Iraq is an "absolute replay" of Vietnam.  And there are other resemblances as well.

Rather than make comparisons for you, let me simply tell a few stories about that time that seem relevant to recent discussions here.

Such discussions, acrimonious and very emotional at times, were common in the decade beginning in 1965.  Before getting into the nature of those discussions, let me share what someone has recently told me about the mechanism of response in these situations.

In case you missed it, over the weekend the AP issued a weather forecast, for this week, next month, and the rest of your life.

The AP likes to keep it factual and punchy, if not short and sweet.  So here it is:

For the next week, much of the nation should expect more "extreme heat," the National Weather Service predicts.

_In the month of August, most of the United States will see "above normal temperatures," forecasters say.

_For the long-term future, the world will see more and worse killer heat waves because of global warming, scientists say.

After that, you might be inclined to look for stories about Scarlett Johansson, or American Idol (although given the above news, I can't believe people find much comfort in the statistic the Idolateers are fond of spreading around, that more people voted for the current Idol winner than ever voted for a President of the U.S.) But some of the details might answer your questions about what's really going on, which suggests what we really should be doing.

Are we moving towards utopia, or oblivion? What does the national mood ring say? It might suggest how effective the Democrats "6 for 06" plan will be in the coming election.

Via Teagan Goddard's Political Wire there's this:

Washington Wire highlights evidence of a growing long-term deep funk among Americans in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll: "Among the six-in-10 Americans who say country is 'on the wrong track,' most see 'long-term decline.' More than two-thirds of those over 50 aren't confident life will improve for 'our children's generation'; 62% of those under 35 agree. Americans are especially gloomy about the environment, health care, public morals and housing costs; nearly eight in 10 expect college to become less affordable. By 47%-24%, Americans fear the quality of jobs in the U.S. will get worse."

It seems good for Democrats' chances, but is it?  Let me briefly suggest my doubts after the jump.

Climate Crisis denying is a lucrative job, but it's getting very lonely.  In recent days, scientists who authored the two studies principally used by deniers to support their claims have written opeds saying the deniers are misusing and distorting their data, and that they fully accept the reality of global heating as caused mostly by our years of dispersing greenhouse gases.

One is in the New York Times today. Peter Doran is the coauthor of a 2002 study that found some cooling in Antarctica, which deniers Michael Crichton and Ann Coulter (among others) have cited as proof that heating isn't happening, or that scientists don't agree, or that scientists don't know what they're talking about.

Here's what Doran says...      

We are in a period of brutalization that continues to intensify.  The latest uptick in violent language and brutal policy may be evidence of the Bushites and the Rabid Right fighting for their political lives in the face of majority opposition, but it sets a new standard of brutality that affects the whole public dialogue, and all of us as individuals.

"Brutality" means humans acting like beasts (or at least how humans interpret animal behavior.)  It carries with it the expectation that human beings in a civilized society should progress beyond this automatic behavior when it is clearly inappropriate and counterproductive, especially in the long term. It also implies an attitude about the value and sacredness of life. Progress used to include moving farther away from brutality to the rule of consciousness and more "human" means of solving conflicts.  

Brutalization is shifting individual and societal standards to accepting higher levels of brutality as normal and acceptable. In civilized humanty, it is retrogression.  So how in the world, early in the twenty-first century, did we get here?

Now that Al Gore's movie and resulting articles and TV (including a docu on Discovery Sunday) are bringing the moral imperative of the Climate Crisis into wider public awareness, it's time to get clear on what we need to do about it.

Because there are two crises within the Climate Crisis, requiring two sets of actions. Right now people are talking about the evidence of the first crisis--the extreme weather, melting glaciers and other visible and measurable effects--but they are talking about solutions for the second crisis.

We need to do two things: fix it and stop it.  Here's what I mean:    

Promoted by Steven D. Get to know your favorite Captain better.

When I chose the Internet ID of Captain Future, I didn't realize that right wing bloggers often used "captain" in their names. I was paying playful homage to heroes of my childhood who often seemed to have that rank and title, like Captain Video, Captain Midnight and of course Captain Kirk (though I tended to identify more with Mr. Spock), and the captain who brought these figures and what they represented into the adult world: Captain Jean-Luc Picard.

These childhood heroes--which also included Superman, Robin Hood, Lancelot, the Cisco Kid and the Lone Ranger, as well as Saturday morning space opera commanders---championed the weak against the tyranny of the strong. They stood for social justice as well as the rule of law, and personal qualities of integrity, honesty, intelligence, courage and loyalty.

I've been re-evaluating my own identity, on the net and otherwise, politically and otherwise, as I passed a personal milestone--one that the Boomer generation faces, ready or not. Some words about my journey, which may have something to do with yours, if you make the jump.