The State of the Union

What a masterful speech by Obama. His delivery, as normal, was eloquent and well-timed, but it was the content of his speech and the enthusiasm with which he delivered his fifth SOTU address that was so positive and encouraging. 

He had a wonderful defense of the ACA, pointing out the guest who recently signed up for affordable care and then a few days later had a sharp pain, which led to a surgery that would have bankrupted this particular person the week before. He pointed out that in 2014, gender discrimination, regarding the price of health insurance will end, thanks to the ACA. In Colorado, gender discrimination is already illegal, but in Wyoming, a state near and dear to my heart, but so far behind in many ways, women pay 76 to 100% more than men for health insurance. Wyoming and Arkansas lead the way in this sorry respect and in 2014 they will no longer. 

Obama hit his opponents hard on many issues and, by doing so, everyone watching tonight's address got to see the tepid reaction on the right to: equal pay for women, raising the minimum wage, ending the war in Afghanistan, preventing American military intervention in Syria, making a deal with Iran to put an end to their nuclear ambitions, and to this gem, "America must move off a permanent war footing." Beautiful. 

It was an oddly energizing speech. One doesn't expect much from these formalities, but sometimes something promising breaks through. Tonight that happened. Obama was only confrontational because he listed his administration's successes, those his opponents spent so much time and energy resisting without providing thorough solutions themselves.

And yet, the Republican address is given by a woman whose party didn't seem very excited at all about paying females the .23 cents on the dollar they lose to their male counterparts solely because they are female. 

There is still a lot of work to do, but Obama did channel hope and promise tonight and those who stayed in their seats did not come off looking very good.

Obama...the smallest government spender

Don't know how I missed this one, but this handy little graph and article is a good way to fight back at the Thanksgiving table when your relatives start talking about how economically irresponsible Obama is and how he is ruining the country by spending more than any other president in the history of the United States. 

Check it out here.

The 60 Minutes Non-Retraction

I also posted this blog over at my IR blog, which exclusively focuses on international relations and related topics.

...

After 60 Minutes announced they would apologize for their Benghazi story on Sunday, I eagerly anticipated a detailed, informative apology at the start of the show. Unfortunately, my expectations weren't realistic. What I got, after sitting through 56 of 60 minutes, was Lara Logan telling me she made a mistake. It was all over in less than two minutes. Logan had previously said the same thing on the CBS Evening News and CBS This Morning. Her 60 Minutes apology contained no new information for people who have been following the story.

For example, one would think it would be important to point out that Dylan Davies' book is published by Threshold, "a conservative imprint of Simon and Schuster," a subsidiary of, you guessed it, CBS News. And that said book just hit the shelves around the time the 60 Minutes report aired. The Huffington Post gives more detail regarding this point:

Did "60 Minutes" find Davies on its own, or did his book add an irresistible synergistic flavor to the show's Benghazi report? Did it face any internal pressure to help push for Davies' story to get on air?

Speaking on MSNBC last week, New York Times correspondent Bill Carter speculated that "60 Minutes" leapt to embrace the book because it needed a "new angle" for its Benghazi story.

I just don't think Logan's two-minute presentation was enough. It clearly didn't address the connection between 60 Minutes and the Davies' book, nor did it go into detail about how their key witness for their year-long Benghazi investigation was totally outed as a complete liar. This is a guy that started asking Fox News for money when they attempted to interview him. Fox News turned him down after that. On top of all this, it's Benghazi, a now highly politicized scandal, which the Republicans have pounced on as an integral part of their strategy to discredit Hillary Clinton as she moves toward the inevitable--her decision to run for president in 2016.

Benghazi is still a tragedy, even if 60 Minutes had done a full, in-depth retraction. However, I don't want the journalists I occasionally rely on to give me transparent, reliable reporting, to become what they are reporting on.

On Darth Vader

A quick video of a man I deeply respect talking about a man who made torturing our enemies the norm for America. Andrew Sullivan speaking about Dick Cheney. 

The Deficit....is falling

I found this poll via the Dish and Business Insider. Most Americans do not realize the federal deficit is currently falling. Of course you couldn't know this if you solely listened to Boehner or watched Fox News. The Business Insider poll found that nearly 70% of Americans believe the deficit to be larger this year than last year. Only 22-23% believe it is smaller than last year. The deficit is about to hit a 5-year low...

Reinventing the Rules

"Those who keep talking as if there are two sides to this, when there are not, are as much a part of the vandalism as Ted Cruz. Obama has played punctiliously by the constitutional rules – two elections, one court case – while the GOP has decided that the rules are for dummies and suckers, and throws over the board game as soon as it looks as if it is going to lose by the rules as they have always applied." - Andrew Sullivan

I wish I had better thoughts about the GOP than Sullivan's, but I don't. What can you say about the House Republicans who have committed to shutting down the whole game because they don't approve of a new rule? It's embarrassing for them and the shutdown as a whole is embarrassing for the entire US government. 

Like every law, the ACA can be debated, tweaked, assessed, and changed as truths come to light during the rollout and impact of the law. So why doesn't the Republican party make this their focus? Instead they claim democrats are not willing to negotiate on the issue. But this assumes negotiation should take place on this issue at this point in time. On his show last night, Jon Stewart rightly pointed out that the debate over this was already held. There is no gap to bridge. Stewart further mocked the ridiculous talking point on the right that Obama should be as flexible with the opposition party as he is with the Russians and Iranians. If Obama can make a deal with the Russians and be heading toward something/anything resembling a peaceful resolution/way forward with Iran, but can't seem to move forward with House Republicans, then it does not reflect poorly on him, but on the GOP. 

I would love for the GOP to develop some sort of constructive criticism of the ACA, which they find so abhorrent, but that criticism does not exist. There is only vague reference to a law and how it spells doom for the economy, the US government, and the American way of life, but without providing any proof of the latter even happening or the two being connected. 

Never Forgetting, But Moving On

Last year, on September 12, 2012, the day after the eleven-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I read an article in the New York Times. I found one snippet of the article to be profoundly disturbing. Like many 9/11 anniversaries, there was a rally at Ground Zero on this day last year. Someone was speaking to the assembled crowd and the line that received the loudest applause was not, “We will never forget,” but “We will never forgive.”

I understand if someone who lost a loved one on 9/11 has not forgiven those who are responsible, but I don’t think “We will never forgive” should be our rallying cry on this day or any other. If we rally around a statement like that it puts us in a reactive state of mind, the one everyone was in the morning the towers fell. 

I have searched for and have failed to find a video I remember watching on this day twelve years ago. The video was of a man, one of the thousands walking out of Manhattan on the Brooklyn Bridge that day. He saw that a news camera was filming the scene and he took a moment to yell into the camera. His voice was understandably filled with rage and he said, “You see this, you see this?” as he pointed toward downtown, “Whoever you are, wherever you are, we are coming for you. We are coming for you!” It was a moment of raw emotion that we all felt that day. It was healthy to have that feeling, to express it, but not healthy to hold on to it.

During the interregnum, between that crisp, fall morning and this morning twelve years later, the US’ ventures in the Middle East have often been misguided by the “We will never forgive” attitude, an attitude that helped fuel erroneous claims that Saddam Hussein was connected to 9/11 and that he was intent on using WMDs or getting them into the hands of terrorists. It is an attitude that has fueled the rise of Islamophobia in the US. It is a “shoot first—think later” state of mind that some still cling to and that others are slowly beginning to shed as the country learns how to walk that fine line between Never Forgetting and Moving On. Do both today.

Movie Review - Game Change

Regardless of one’s political orientation, I think it wise to cautiously approach movies that explicitly focus on a political figure. To treat with a grain of salt the things you hear and see in these movies, even if they are supposedly based on actual events, is a good start. There, that was my preface for the review of Game Change (2012) based on the nonfiction book of the same name written by Heilemann and Halperin.

Game Change was produced by and aired on HBO. Although the book spends more time on the other players in the 2008 campaign, the movie primarily focuses on the decision by the McCain campaign to select Sarah Palin as McCain’s running mate.

What struck me first, considering that Hollywood is solidly on the left of the political spectrum, is that the movie gives McCain and those in his inner circle a very fair shake considering the recklessness of their decision. McCain is portrayed as a very amicable man, one who early on recognizes that Palin wasn’t the best choice and a man who does his best to make her feel comfortable in the national media spotlight and on the campaign trail. From what I read in 2008 and since then, this portrayal of McCain and his team seems accurate. There were clearly some people who were skeptical of the Palin pick for several reasons. One, she was essentially a small-town politician, drastically unprepared for the demands of a national campaign. Two, the typical vetting process for a VP pick is 4-8 weeks. In order to pick Palin, she had to be vetted in 4-5 days, increasing the chances that after the selection something harmful about Palin would be unearthed and irreparably damage McCain’s chances. And three, when compared to other VP choices (Pawlenty and Lieberman) Palin did not have the national recognition that could instantly garner new support and subsequent donations.

When Palin was brought on board things soured very quickly. (Also accurate to what I have read.) The movie portrayed this very well, showing concern on the faces of aides one moment and then showing them high-fiving each other in the aftermath of Palin’s RNC speech and her debate against Joe Biden. Despite the fact that Palin memorized her debate answers, line by line, McCain’s campaign rejoiced because the debate was not the disaster of epic proportions that they fully and rightly expected. However, other than these two highlights, Palin proved to be power-hungry, ignorant, narcissistic, and amazingly childish at every opportunity. I had read that at one point Palin listed Africa as a country. This particular hiccup wasn’t in the movie, but other infamous ones were, like her inability to distinguish the reasons behind the Iraq War and the War in Afghanistan or her foreign policy advisors having to explain to her who the Axis powers were in WWII. Needless to say, the McCain staff quickly realized the gravity of the situation and either gave up completely or pushed on, leading to the ridiculous step taken to prevent a disaster in the VP debate, have Palin memorize 25 responses.

What I didn’t expect to feel during the movie was sorry for Palin, but I did. She was so obviously out of her league, despite her amazing acting ability and last minute heroics on a few occasions. At one point, Steve Schmidt, McCain’s top advisor (played by Woody Harrelson) turns to Palin and says, “You seem completely un-phased by all of this.” Palin (played flawlessly by Julianne Moore) turns to Schmidt, pauses, and says, “It’s God’s plan.” I do not know the accuracy of this specific conversation, but it perfectly sums up Palin’s attitude, as if she deserved the nomination, as if she was expecting it. It is deeply disturbing. So, on one hand, I feel sorry for Palin that she was way out of her element, but on the other hand, she did this to herself by embracing radical delusions of grandeur.

The movie very accurately portrays Palin as the element behind the radicalization of McCain’s campaign and of his supporters. It was Palin’s idea to bring up William Ayers and casually suggest that Obama liked to pal around with terrorists. McCain, having went through one of the low-points in American politics during the 2000 Republican primary contest against Bush, in which McCain was accused of fathering a black child out of wedlock when in actuality the McCains adopted their daughter from Bangladesh, strongly resisted dirty attacks from the campaign on Obama’s connection with Ayers and Rev. Wright. Eventually, McCain conceded, letting Palin loose on Ayers and from that point on in the campaign we really did see the nutters come out of the woodwork. They were drawn to Palin because she showed them that someone with her viewpoint could once again make it in America. She made the far, far right feel like they had a chance.

The video below is from a McCain rally. During this rally, McCain had to confront some of these nutters who were clearly energized by Palin’s ridiculous accusations and racist undertones. It was certainly a low point in the 2008 campaign and McCain had to address childish statements from adults. It was embarrassing for his campaign at the time, but he handled the situation gracefully.

Although Palin has largely disappeared from daily headlines, I think the radicalization of the right is still partially fueled by her brief time in the national spotlight. I think Game Change subtly suggests that Palin is one of a few select people responsible for this. I will get a bit repetitive here, but I did think that the movie was very fair to McCain and his campaign. Choosing Palin was a huge unforced error of the 2008 campaign, one that scared me and angered me, but now, in hindsight, one that I can sit back and laugh about. 

Just Because This Is Awesome

Sullivan referring to Dick Cheney:

But I guess when you’ve been caught red-handed torturing prisoners, you go big or you go home. He’s gone big, and as far as I am concerned, he can go to hell.

The Royal Crush

I was watching the NBC Nightly News last night and the time NBC devoted to each of its stories in the first thirteen minutes of the broadcast caught my attention. First of all, all the news that is worth reporting is typically included in the first 10-12 minutes of a nightly news broadcast. The latter half of the broadcast is typically saved for feel-good stories, the weekend box-office report, minor weather-related disasters, etc. The shows are naturally front-loaded and one can typically tune out after the first or second commercial break. 

After watching six minutes of last night's broadcast, NBC had covered the impending flu season, Syria, and the approaching fiscal cliff. The fourth story of the night was about William and Kate expecting a baby. NBC devoted 4 minutes to this story. They even had an expert on to talk about the symptoms Kate would be dealing with in this case of acute morning sickness (inability to keep down any food/fluids, throwing up, etc.)

Let's just break down last night's newscast:

Story 1: The flu season is going to be bad. This story airs every year. Spare us next year, will you? - 2 minutes

Story 2: There are human rights atrocities constantly taking place in Syria right now. To be honest, it's genocide. Bashar Assad continues to oversee the destruction of huge swaths of the country and people he is responsible for. Thousands of children have died. There is no distinction made between combatant and non-combatant. When Assad's forces are on the hunt all are in the crosshairs - 1 minute

Story 3: Politicians on both sides of the aisle continue to be stubborn and selfish as the fiscal cliff nears. But let's just say it, the Republicans need to do a little pride-swallowing. The majority of the country clearly favors increasing tax revenue by raising tax rates on the top 2% income earners. In this sense, Obama's reelection did give him a mandate to do just that, raise the rate on the super-rich. The negotiations, or lack thereof, continue with little or no progress. - 3 minutes

Story 4: Duchess Kate is pregnant. She went to hospital, where she remains to this day. She has acute morning sickness, the same exact acute morning sickness thousands of women get every day, just in this country. So, what's the story here? - 4 MINUTES

Story 5: Dangerous carbon monoxide levels at a school threatens hundreds of children and staff. - 1 minute

Story 6: More proof that America's favorite sport is increasingly more dangerous and harmful to the body, particularly the brain, of football players, leading to very early diagnoses of degenerative brain diseases. - 3 minutes

Boiled down even more:

Flu season - 2 minutes

Genocide - 1 minute

We are all screwed if this fiscal cliff thing isn't resolved - 3 minutes

Girl who was born and married rich dude who was also born gets a bad case of morning sickness - 4 minutes

Potentially lethal carbon monoxide levels at school. - 1 minute

Nation's pastime making football players die early. - 3 minutes

Bad case of morning sickness trumps flu season, genocide, fiscal cliff, carbon monoxide levels, and pretty conclusive research on degenerative brain diseases. Excuse me, I'm going to go throw up.

Election Eve 2012

I have really missed being able to blog about this election season. The other day I looked back at how many blogs I was writing in 2008. It was a lot. On average 28-33 blogs per month leading up to and during the month of the election. 

I just went back and looked at my election live-blogging from 2008. I don't think I will be doing the same tomorrow, as I don't have the kind of audience that I did four years ago. Nor do I think I'll have much to say, but we'll see about that. 

I haven't read the live-blog from 2008 since, well, November of 2008, so there were definitely things I forgot about. Like this:

7:15pm - A CNN correspondent at the McCain celebration in Arizona says, "It is a much different mood here." Yeah, like a funeral. 

8:23pm - MSNBC calling Ohio for Obama. Self-protective denial is wearing very, very thin. And with that, Josh Marshall isn't live blogging anymore. He is "F--k Ya Blogging". Priceless. 

8:59pm - Via TPM, the Rocky Mountain News calling Colorado for Obama. [Remember the Rocky Mountain News?] 

9:23pm - The shots of Grant Park are extraordinary. I'm a little nervous about such a huge celebration. I hope people are smart and safe. I hope Obama is safe. Meanwhile in Arizona, it looks like a singalong for McCain fans. 

9:50pm - Fox calls Virginia for Obama. 10 minutes out from calling the whole race? Possibly. Tap the keg. Sullivan writes, "You drinking yet? Stupid question." 

10:00pm - Called it for OBAMA! OBAMA! OBAMA! OBAMA! I can't believe Americans just did that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

11:19pm - I've said all I can say at this point. What a night. What a night. All is not wasted. Goodnight.

I think what's clear about the election this year, is that we probably won't have the race called by 9pm Mountain Time, like it was in 2008. I have a busy day on Wednesday so I am not prepared to stay up very late tomorrow. I might have to call it quits at midnight if nothing has been called by then. But, if Obama would somehow manage to win Florida and Virginia or Florida and N.C., the race could easily be called by 9pm. However, that's extremely unlikely to happen. Even if Obama manages a victory in Florida, it'll be too close to call tomorrow. At least that's my view. Nevertheless, I remain hopeful for a called race sometime tomorrow evening. I still think this is a possibility because of Obama's appearing to hold on to Ohio, PA, N.H., Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, and maybe Virginia. If his margin of victory is great enough in those states for them to be called blue tomorrow night, then Obama will get his four more years. 

To me, the choice couldn't be clearer tomorrow. If you paid attention from 2001-2008, what makes you think returning to those policies is a good idea? That's what a Romney presidency is, a return to the past. The economy was in free fall when Obama took over. We were losing approximately 750,000 jobs a month at the time Obama moved into the White House. It took him some time, but he started to reverse that trend and he still is. It's a slow recovery and I understand some of the frustration out there. But I don't understand American impatience with the recovery. This impatience signals to me that these people never grasped the severity of the economic crisis. I generally don't understand American impatience with nearly everything anyways, but when it comes to the idea of just returning to the same old policies because four years of different policies haven't dug the country out of the deepest economic abyss it has seen since the 1930s is preposterous. This is to say nothing of Obama's other accomplishments like the Affordable Care Act (which actually does insure 30 million people who otherwise wouldn't have health insurance and who won't if Romney is elected and successfully repeals ACA, don't believe me? look it up), ending our atrocious, misguided war in Iraq, and concentrating on the only one that mattered and putting it to an end in Afghanistan, and killing Osama Bin Laden (something Bush had lost sight of ever since his obsession with Iraq truly took ahold of him in the wake of 9/11). 

I have never believed in a President who is going to solve all of your problems. No such President exists. And I think too much of America doesn't know that, which is certainly a contributing factor to the impatience I referenced above. However, I truly believe that there is an honest, caring man in Obama who cares for the greatest number of Americans, far more than Romney does. And because of this I am not choosing the lesser of two evils. 

I voted early last Friday for the man who has expressed deep and passionate concern for working-class Americans and their plight, who actually has the guts to ask for a tax increase for the very wealthiest in the country. If I was in that "wealthiest" category I would gladly accept the tax increase, but I'm not, and I don't feel bad for anyone in that tax bracket who would be asked to pay 3-4% more. 

I still believe in Obama. I don't believe a vote for Obama means a vote against America, but that's exactly the meme that the Right has pushed over the last two years of campaigning. This idea that America is becoming un-American, that our opportunities are slipping through our fingers, and that Romney represents the "true" American spirit is simply vacuous. 

I am hopeful for tomorrow and I believe there is clearly a right and a wrong choice on the ballot. I hope America makes the right one.

MSNBC, The Lumineers, and Mr. Potato...head?

Here are a few DU Debate Fest pictures from yesterday.

I'm not enforcing stereotypes here, but she was wearing an NRA hat.

Next door to the Romney table.

Mr. Potato Head....wait a minute.

Readying for Obama's arrival.

Secret Service and security taking some pictures before the Debate Fest gates open.

Martin Bashir broadcasting from DU, right in front of the Mary Reed Building.

Chris Matthews

More talking to cameras. I can't be the only one that always thinks of Bashir's interview with Michael Jackson when I see him. It's a classic. Here's the interview.

Let's play hardball!

The Lumineers put on an excellent show. 

A bass drum like the sun.

Mark Koebrich of 9News recording a segment during the Lumineers' concert.

America!

DU Debate Reaction

When you really believe in the majority of a politician's policies, when you know that they are going to be better for this country than the other politician, when you just really like someone over the alternative, it really sucks to see them lose a debate. Obama is my candidate, always has been. I firmly believe his interests align with a much broader swath of Americans than the interests of Romney. But Romney won the debate last night. Pretty solidly too. 

It's been written about Obama that he is not very confrontational. It's not that Obama doesn't lash out and call someone out, but it's that he takes so long to do so. So when Romney presented himself as a candidate vested in all of our interests, a candidate who says he is going to balance the budget by reducing taxes by 10% and cutting government spending, and as a candidate who believes in a fair tax system, Obama was slow to react or didn't react at all. This hurt Obama. He was probably caught off-guard by Romney's shifting positions and blatant lies too. Obama looked down a lot. He scribbled on his notepad. He didn't maintain eye contact with Romney. He had a hint of a smile at all the wrong times. He didn't interrupt. He was polite at a time he should have been confrontational with Romney. He was silent, when he should have asked why Romney pays a lower tax rate than those people cleaning the White House? He should have mentioned his Jobs Act that could have created more jobs for Americans. He should have pressed Romney on his government spending cuts. What are you going to cut, Romney? I mean, besides getting rid of PBS and Sesame Street, what else are you going to cut? He should have asked Romney why another massive tax cut is the right policy when government revenues from taxes are at a 50-year low?

Obama just wasn't on his game last night. And since the majority of Americans aren't going to FACT CHECK this debate, it will be taken at face value, which equals a win for Romney. If the election were held tomorrow, there's no doubt in my mind that Obama would win. His poor performance last night hasn't and will not cost him the election. It would take two more equally poor performances from Obama to do that. I guarantee that Obama is going to come out swinging in the next debate. Well, he has too. But I think he will because he is a fighter. When pushed to the edge he can reach that level of bluntness bordering on rude that is sometimes necessary to control a debate. I am much more interested in the other two debates now, but I sure wish Obama had won the debate at DU. 

And one last thing, the real loser of the debate last night was Jim Lehrer. What an awful moderator! He didn't keep either man on topic. He let Obama talk four minutes longer than Romney. He was owned by Romney, who just kept rolling over Lehrer's attempts at moving the debate onward. He seemed ancient, off his game, and outmatched. And he'll lose his job if Romney becomes president. Well, at the very least, he needs to lose his job of moderating presidential debates. 

DU Debate Debacle

For almost eight years, this blog has been a place for me to share stories, articulate my opinion, post pictures, post video, and to share what little fiction I have written. Today it serves one of its most important purposes, that is, a place for me to vent my frustrations. The topic: the first presidential debate at the University of Denver (where I currently am in graduate school), happening tomorrow (if you've been living in a hole in the ground). 

When I first heard of DU hosting the debate, I was excited and happy for the university and its students. Now I know the error of my thinking, that the debate is brought to a university to expose the most important people on campus, the students, to a historic moment in the election season is what I thought this was going to be. Having never been on a campus that hosted a presidential debate, I didn't know any better. But a few months ago as signs started to appear all over campus about impending closures, event cancellations/rescheduling, and class cancellation for October 3rd, I began to have my doubts.

Now, one day away from the event, it is clearer than ever that the debate is not, and has never been handled as an event, to benefit the students. Reported this morning on the local news, Magness Arena, in the Richie Center, is going to hold 1000 debate spectators. DU students will occupy approximately 92 of those seats. The students lucky enough to attend were picked in a lottery yesterday morning. All students and 2012 graduates of DU were automatically entered into the lottery. Knowing full well that only a small section of the student body would be able to attend the debate, DU designed an on-campus watch party called Debate Fest. The initial introduction to Debate Fest was an email that called the party a ticketed event available only to DU students, faculty, and those living near the campus in the university hills neighborhood. An email invited people to register and reserve their spot for Debate Fest, where they could enjoy the festivities, feast from Denver's best food trucks, and enjoy a show from The Lumineers, who will play prior to the debate. I, along with hundreds more, registered for the event. Shortly after registration opened, Debate Fest reached capacity. This should not have been surprising to anyone, but it seemed to have surprised DU. 

Yesterday, DU re-opened Debate Fest registration. It once again closed shortly thereafter due to the remaining spots being filled up. Then, last night, DU sent out an email with tips for Debate Fest. Here, I highlight point number three from the email:

3.) Please note that registration does NOT guarantee entrance to DebateFest. The number of people admitted to the event will be limited based on space constraints due to fire laws. We recommend that you arrive early.

What this means is that any student or faculty member or neighborhood resident can show up as early as they want tomorrow and get in line for Debate Fest. The doors open at 3pm and space is now on a first come, first served basis, thus guaranteeing that many of those that did register for the event (read: students) will be denied entrance to their campus and "their" debate. There are many reasons why this is frustrating. To mention one, I am a graduate student. I have reading to do tomorrow. I can't devote my entire morning to standing in line for a party I am not even sure will be a good place to watch the debate from. My plan was to walk over at 3pm, stand in a short line, have my name scratched off a list because I registered for the event, and then walk inside. I am one of many students who planned to do that tomorrow. 

The DU Presidential Debate is for DU administration, big-time DU donors, and the press. It is not for the students, nor is it for the Denver community or undecided voters. By yesterday, campus was crawling with members of the media from all over the world, while fences continued to sprout up everywhere to keep the students away from the most important, high-profile event that will ever happen on their campus. This event is a sham and it is embarrassing how DU has handled it from the start. 

The Power of Propaganda

I was recently visiting with a friend who is smart, wise, successful, and much older than me. We were just starting our day together and as a topic of discussion I shared my class lineup at the University of Denver this fall (I’m an MA candidate at the Josef Korbel School). One of the classes I am taking there this fall is called modern Islamic political thought.

Thinking my friend was about to further the discussion of Islamic political thought I listened intently to the words that came out of my friend’s mouth. “Egypt’s looking for a new Islamic leader. I say let’s give him ours.”

I might have looked like a deer caught in the headlights for a second while I took these words in, realizing my friend truly wasn’t joking. And then I held a private funeral in my head for the intelligent conversation that was clearly not going to happen.

I played dumb. “I don’t get it,” I said. “What do you mean?”

“Well, that’s a political thought,” my friend said.

I was thinking that to call it a political thought is to give it more merit than it’s due. “What’s a political thought?” I asked.

“That we should give Egypt our Muslim leader,” my friend responded.

“Obama is not a Muslim.” I tried to say this as calmly as possible.

“Oh, he’s not?” My friend responded.

“No, he’s not. And for you to call that idea a political thought isn’t right. It’s absolutely garbage.”

My friend looked taken aback. My stare was intense and I could feel my pulse rise as I waited for a response, but there was none. That was the end of our political discussion for the day. But for the rest of the afternoon I thought about our conversation and I was embarrassed over and over again for my friend. That my friend could believe such a lie, such propaganda, was sickening.

It was my first personal experience with someone who has truly been fed a political lie enough times that in their head the lie has found a permanent home as a supposed truth. This particular lie is often presented as a legitimate concern by right-wing media outlets. On Fox News someone might joke about it, but no one is reprimanded for it, no one speaks up and says, “We are better than that.”

Yesterday’s conversation exhibited the power of this propaganda machine. The lie starts with one person and is then adopted by a cabal, whose only interest is their own, whether it be the political downfall of a certain politician or a desire to stay rich, powerful, and barely taxed, or a combination of these. These people are powerful enough to own TV stations, radio networks, whole news organizations, and they use these assets as hugely powerful tools to present myths and rumors as fact while simultaneously hiding the truth from our eyes. (See Roger Ailes and Donald Trump.) Gradually, the lie spreads across the audience, who might have even dismissed it as ridiculous the first time they heard it or read it (I hope my friend did at least that). But the saturation and the never-ceasing tide of money coming from the wealthiest Americans has proved itself strong enough to hold hostage the intellectual and independent-thinking abilities of many Americans. (See the continuing belief by some that Obama isn’t American or that Obama is a Muslim.)

One of the more popular lies among the Right (although, to clarify, it’s not a lie for them) is to compare the Obama administration to that of the Third Reich. Yes, the same propaganda machine that convinced my friend that Obama is a Muslim, would also have you believe Obama harbors a secret agenda of spreading national socialism across America.

Nothing about Obama’s policies has ever evoked, for me, a whisper of Nazi Germany. In fact, it was the conversation with my friend that had me contemplating many a table conversation in 1930s Germany, when it might have been shared by a friend or family member that they had joined the Nazi party to the absolute dismay of anyone at the table who had a brain. I am not calling anyone a Nazi here. If you want to see that, watch a week of Fox News and you’ll see someone hint, at least once, that an Obama policy is strikingly familiar to one of Hitler’s policies. No, I am referencing the power of propaganda. The Nazis certainly mastered it and both the Right and the Left have adopted some of their strategies. But now, at this point in America’s history, I think it’s clear that the Right’s propaganda machine is churning out a lot of lies and doing whatever it takes to shift the mantle of power back to their side by spreading fear and angst that we have a president who is not American, but also a president who is a secretive Muslim who is colluding with Islamic nations across the world in order to favor that religion’s interests.

I am in awe of the propaganda machine and its ability to convince smart people that they most adopt such vacuous ideas. Next time, don’t consume the lies. Instead, try to do the thinking yourself.