Call me a cock-eyed optimist, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I can conceive of George Bush doing one right thing in his presidency--he could boycott the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games. Gordon Brown is pledged to do it; in the tradition of Maggie and George Sr., why not? Even John McCain has said its OK:

It is powerfully positive that Tibet's suffering at the hands of China has made the big news again. The 72 year old Dalai Lama has been an exemplar, if not THE examplar of peaceful power in the face of ruthless state oppression in our time.
The timing is, as a Tibertan might say, auspicious: that Obama's historic speech on race in America which challenges white America to rise-up and push back the Confederacy of Drudges in order to rise back up to the level of our Founding Framers; and the historic, may-not-come-again opportunity for the world to wholeheartedly support the long-suffering Tibetans in their struggle for autonomy (merely!) with a vulnerable China anxious to put a good face on itself for the upcoming Olympiad.

An important article in the New York Times appears this morning, as John Edwards clearly stakes out a position to the left of Clinton and Obama. Not a hit piece, but exhibits evidence of the right-wing frame:

Just because my enemy attacks one of my friends does NOT mean that that friend is my BEST friend. BUT, when the smarmy Peggy Noonan attacks one of my friends, it is cause to sit up and take note. And when the nature of that attack is in the Malkin-Coulter vein, we know we have struck the tender underbelly of the Rightwing Beast.

I've taken it upon myself to stir the pot regarding all things Hillary, not because I'm a hater (I'm not!); but because the 'traditional media's frame (with POLLS and POLLS and POLLS to support it) is that HILLARY'S NOMINATION IS ALL BUT INEVITABLE... NOT!!
The bloviating of Rove doesn't help, but even without Karlypoo the wind of the corporate so-called journalists blows strong, and doesn't help the democratic process (which needs time to winnow through the candidates and their positions to see what's actually wheat and what's chaff.)

More below:

Robert Scheer's excellent article in the LA Times yesterday points out the contradictions in Hillary's positions on Iraq and the military-industrial complex that we've been warned about since Eisenhower. Because she is a woman trying to overcome the "Geraldine Ferraro Effect" ('Is she tough enough?"), she projects more willingness to use the American military to accomplish imperial aims than just about anybody else. THIS IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR THE PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT AT THIS JUNCTURE.

   Yesterday on Father's Day I went into the public space in the Beantown area, and read all 3500+ names of the Americans killed in Iraq, their age, rank, and date of death.

    It took more than 7 hours to finish--it was one of the most intense experiences of my life. And somewhere in the middle of all that death, the idea came into my head:
IF GEORGE BUSH HAD TO READ THESE NAMES, HE WOULD WITHDRAW THE TROOPS TOMORROW. (Props again to Meteor Blades for his example on this front.)
http://www.dailykos.com/...                

More below the flip...

   Tomorrow I will go into the public space of my East Coast hometown and read the names of the 3500+ Americans who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country in Iraq. All props go to Meteor Blades for his inspiring example, and diary entry from 6/4/07. My action will be a bit different--it is NOT POLITICAL PROTEST. I will bring no bullhorn, shout no slogan, try to change no opinion. IT IS A GRIEF RITUAL--meaning: like a proper Memorial Day event, it is not about the politics of the war; it is solely about remembering, honoring and grieving those we have lost.

The clearly stolen election in Mexico has had a devestating effect on me--I'm through with presidential elections! I'm tired of being played! And I encourage every thinking person in America to feel the same. It doesn't matter if its Hillary, Al or Russ--there will be no free and fair election in America in 2008. The only possibly valid election results would be an absolutely crushing, Johnson/Goldwater-like defeat of the Republicans.

If the essence of 'Bush's Brain' is the juvenile, Machiavellian clinging to power, then the Democrats' answer must be "Country First", or better, "America First". The madness of the methods of the neo-con ways becomes more transparent daily, even in "fly-over country." Dem's must claim, not as  gimmick but because it is true, the mantle of adult patriotism. The ability to love and act on some principle higher than one's own narrow self-interest is the mark of adulthood. Democrats must claim, own, and propagate this as a meme: the 'culture of corruption' Republican Party is constitutionally incapable of anything other than enriching itself--democrats are the ones to lead the country back to the greatness that the Greatest generation gave to us. Country First. America First!

Don't miss Derrick Jackson on Dean and 'race matters' in the South in today's Boston Globe:
linked texthttp://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/01/02/deans_blunt_talk_about_r ace/

The Democrats ARE the party of civil unions (if not gay marriage) in the eyes of America--that is not a choice.
The only choice is--will Dems be defensive about it (letting the Rethug's frame the issue);
OR
(and this is a new thought for me)
will they take out the red marker and throw Mississippi and Texas into the trashcan (to let them stew in hell in their own prejudice)
AND speak boldly in defense of the right for people to marry whoever they hell they damn well want.
A bold stand will draw many suburbanites to them--let the rednecks rot in their pre-civil war ignorance.
Dan Kennedy of the Boston Phoenix says: why not dare to try to use it as a wedge to further split the libertarians away from the neo-cons?