Yesterday I posted my first response to Obama's Berlin speech and to the first round of media reaction, plus the sections of the speech I found most significant.

Here are a few further reflections on the content and form, especially the specific historical echoes in the speech, from JFK, Reagan, Lincoln and FDR.

First, the most obvious: Obama presented himself to Europe as the anti-Bush, and at some risk.  Despite the inevitable reaction from the rabid right he said early in the speech that he was speaking as a U.S. citizen, and a citizen of the world.  The formula "citizen of the world" has a long history, but it's enough to say that the Bushites had only contempt for the idea. Yet it places Obama in the mainstream of American presidents since Woodrow Wilson.

I remember the day that JFK instigated the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, because I'd intended to see him on parade in Chicago, and he cancelled, saying that he was "ill." I was infuriated, once I discovered the true reason for the cancellation -- because he had lied, and because he had done so in favor of such a misguided attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro. I continued to support much of what JFK did, but understood that I could not expect  him to be true to me.

My mother was a great fan of FDR and Eleanore Roosevelt. She was named after Eleanore Roosevelt, and cheered all of Eleanore's brave activities. Particularly when they came in opposition to FDR's efforts, which were often too tepid for my mom. She strongly supported FDR and marched for peace and justice when he took positions she did not support.

Today, I see Barack Obama's speech in Berlin, and I am cheered by his optimism and outreach. I am also worried by his embrace of the 'good fight' in Afghanastan, and his sabre-rattling to Iran.

As with JFK and FDR, I do not expect to agree with everything that Barack Obama does -- and I expect to protest when he does what I consider to be the wrong things.

I do believe that Obama will make a difference in the most important things:

Obama has been catching some dimissive flak from certain pundits regarding his upcoming trip to Europe.

Granted, Sen. Obama is merely a candidate and not yet the leader of the Free World (although that may be a foregone conclusion) but it's interesting to compare the press musings before Pres. Kennedy's European trip in 1963, equally dismissive and patronizing--and ultimately so wrong.

A relative of mine sent me this op-ed yesterday. Typcially, she relies on more independent news sources and understands that much of mainstream news is biased and, contrary to its raison d'etre, misinformed. But as I read this I couldn't help but wonder: didn't she realize that an op-ed in the Boston Globe would do little in the way of providing honest or reliable information? Perhaps she knew I would find it amusing, or perhaps it was simply one of those loving "jabs" (nothing with terrorists or fists, however) family members take at one another with opposing beliefs. Either way, I found myself amazed by Vennochi's "reasoning". It's amazing that this has become such a hot talking point for conservatives, considering that our current president might be the most arrogant man we've ever "elected" into office. All I have to mention is the word "golf" and I can feel a breeze brushing against my flushed cheeks, a phenomenon that occurs when millions of people shake their heads in disgust. Or, better yet, we could watch Keith Olbermann's response, which is too on-point to resist mentioning.

You may have seen today's NYT article titled "Gore Wants U.S. to Abandon Fossil Fuels by 2018."  Obama has already hailed Gore's speech, which was delivered at a D.C. energy conference; no doubt the cable news shows are already asqueak with the outraged cries of Lilliputians and the dismissive laughter of pundits who make Homer Simpson look like a geophysicist. That's why I don't watch cable news.

Gore's prescription is typically powerful and bears his characteristic mix of gravity and optimism.  But what really struck me was a quote in which Gore pithily connects our ecological, economic and security problems in one tidy formula.  See below the fold.

Here is the NYT analysis of the speech:
http://www.nytimes.com/...

Former Vice President Al Gore said on Thursday that Americans must abandon fossil fuels within a decade and rely on the sun, the winds and other environmentally friendly sources of electric power, or risk losing their national security as well as their creature comforts.

Mr. Gore called for the kind of concerted national effort that enabled Americans to walk on the moon 39 years ago this month, just eight years after President John F. Kennedy famously embraced that goal.

Barack Obama has re-energized American Politics. No one has been able to draw the huge crowds he does; no one has renewed the pulsating desire to participate like he has. Many speak of the JFK years with longing and claim to see images of that era reflected in the Obama campaign. I don’t. Having lived during the JFK era, having worked as a teenager to get him elected, the comparison doesn’t quite jibe. Read More

Good for Barack Obama for deciding to accept the Democratic Party nomination for President this August in a huge outdoor football stadium in Denver.

Stadiums are usually thought of nowadays as platforms for sports and celebrity concerts. But they have a history that hearkens back to the very roots of democracy.

In ancient Athens, the birthplace of democracy as far as we know, the ideal size for a democratic state was thought to be the number of citizens who could sit in a public arena or stadium and debate the issues.

    All of the outrage over anyone daring to question John McCain's fitness to be president by saying being shot down and held as a POW isn't a real test of executive ability got me to thinking a couple of thoughts.

  Probably too many of you are too young to remember the Democratic Saint - John F. Kennedy. He was the president who was also a World War II hero,  one who got his PT boat cut in half by a Japanese destroyer while making  a night attack on Japanese shipping, was injured, and risked capture before being rescued with his surviving crew. They even made a movie about it, PT-109. That campaign seems like such a simpler time now, almost innocent - yet it was the one that really schooled Richard M. Nixon and set him on his dark path.

   Is John McCain a kind of anti-JFK? An aging war hero well past his prime, defending a failed regime?  Does he have a comparable cult of adulation? Instead of New Frontiers will he lead us into The Wasteland?

(more)

As We Celebrate Our Independence, It Is Time for Energy Independence.

On Friday July 4th we will celebrate Independence Day marking 232 years since our founding fathers declared that the United States of America would be an independent nation.  Back in 1776, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and others showed courage, leadership and vision by drafting the Declaration of Independence creating a democratic government based on freedom and rights for the common people.  

Now, 232 years later, we need to see the same courage, leadership and vision from our elected leaders to declare independence again.  In 2008, the independence we need to declare is not from tyrannical leaders and an oppressive government but energy independence from foreign sources that have too much control over a product that is so vital to our nation.

The Club For Growth is an organization dedicated to making the rich richer through politics. I started to read their blog when it looked like one of their own, Matt Shaner, would win the Republican nomination for the Pennsylvania 5th Congressional District. We here in the fifth dodged a bullet on that one, but I've kept the blog in my RSS reader and look at it everyday just for the fun of finding something like this.

Recently I who am a member of a group on Democrats.org was like other members subjected to a series of emails designed to garner support for a Hillary write in campaign, and barring that threaten us and the Party with switching their vote to McCain. While I have little time for these threats, I do feel that they must be answered.

By ADAM SCHRECK, AP Business Writer

NEW YORK - United Airlines said Friday it will start requiring minimum
stays for nearly all domestic flights beginning in October. It is also
raising its cheapest fares by as much as $90 one-way.

The second-largest U.S. carrier said the moves are among a number of
changes it is making to combat record high fuel prices. The Chicago-
based airline has been among the most aggressive in the industry in
pushing fares and fuel surcharges higher in recent months, and its
latest policy could prompt other carriers to consider following suit.

Starting Oct. 6, most United fares will require a one- to three-night
or weekend-night minimum stay, spokeswoman Robin Urbanski said.

I heard David Gergen repeat it again last night on CNN.  "Iraq and foreign policy are McCain's strength" or something like that. This and the myth that the Republicans' strength is national security are repeated over and over as accepted wisdom by the media or in the GOP campaign in the manner of the "Big Lie" technique perfected by certain totalitarian regimes trotted out routinely by the GOP anytime they want to demonize some tinhorn dictator or quasi-dictator.  How many U.S. citizens know that Iran's "I'm a dinner jacket" is far from being a dictator?  He's more like a cheerleader.

This is the crowd that ignored the serious threats of imminent attacks in the summer of 2001, opposed the 9-11 Commission, and misled us into a war in 2003.  How many Americans recall that there were UN inspectors in Iraq just before we invaded and that they were making progress?  The fact is that Bush was determined to start a war, regardless of the facts. McClellan's book and the record show that this was a war not only of choice but of Bush's vanity.  He wanted to be a "War President". And that is not good foreign policy or prudent national security.

Looking at the amount of hope and inspiration espoused on this blog and looking at the hatred, bitterness and vitriol being spewed by Larry Johnson on his blog is like going into an alternate universe. I love you guys here at Dkos because you guys are optimistic, hopeful and like me dreamers. Believing that the world as it is is not the world that it has to be, we can work together and accomplish this and the only way to do it is by working together for it.

Does the Obama candidacy signal a return of "the sixties"? It's possible. What does that mean? Even those us who were there remember the sixties imperfectly. Not because we were permanently stoned. Memory is selective. We remember it as better than it was. We were young, and that makes a difference.Yet, as tristero observes over at Digby's place, the sixties were not just a time of flowering creativity and the securing of new freedoms, but also a terrible, difficult and dark time for anyone who had any political awareness.

Yes, he just did at his little speech that you can catch live on teh Cable News stations.

He just challenged Barack to a series of country-wide townhall meetings together where they can duke it out, and then referenced this:

Paraphrased "Because, Mr. Goldwater and John F. Kennedy had agreed in 1963 to engage in the same townhall meetings I'm suggesting, and it would have happened, if not for the tragic event of that year...blah blah blah, and I hope that Senator Obama will accept my invitation."

Is it just me, or is it impossible for Barack Obama's opponents to refrain from mentioning the assassination of a Kennedy when speaking of him and the upcoming election?

Shades of Scorpius...

... well it's my birthday, too - yeah!

Last night Senator Clinton did not concede. She appeared conceited. But was there (I hope) an altruistic reason behind her motives?

Today is the 89th birthday of Dorothy Rodham - Senator Clinton's mother. And, by a strange bit of coincidence, it is my 39th birthday (yes, really 39 - not 39 "again").

Could Senator Clinton's delay in concession be as a "gift" to her mother?