Author: hankkalet

Hank Kalet is a poet and freelance journalist. He is the economic needs reporter for NJ Spotlight, teaches journalism at Rutgers University and writing at Middlesex County College and Brookdale Community College. He writes a semi-monthly column for the Progressive Populist. He is a lifelong fan of the New York Mets and New York Knicks, drinks too much coffee and attends as many Bruce Springsteen concerts as his meager finances will allow. He lives in South Brunswick with his wife Annie.

The speech — 10:56 p.m

Connecting to the MLK speech 45 years ago — “America we cannot turn back” — and linking it to the lives of every American today, before closing to a standing ovation.

Talking Points Memo offers an interesting take on the stadium:

I think — not just in the speech but in the lead-up over the course of the afternoon — the impression of this event, holding it in a stadium, is one of a mass event, an open event, a popular event, not one of grandiosity as many of the critics claimed. (I would structure that sentence better; but I’m trying to listen to what he’s saying at the same time.)

Thoughts on the speech so far — 10:54 p.m.

Barack Obama is offering the laundry list everyone has been asking for, a list that includes small-business and middle-class tax cuts, an end to energy dependence, a promise to protect Social Security, equal pay for equal work and an end to the war and America’s isolation from the rest of the world.

It is a moderate agenda , with some progressive elements, and a few red flags that worry me. Most notably, Obama’s strong position on the environment — higher fuel-efficiency standards, alternative fuels, solar and wind power, investment in efficiency and subsidies to help working people afford cleaner cars — is tempered by a commitment to nuclear power.

But the speech is long on the notion of “American promise” — the idea that we are in this together, that there are larger ideas that drive us, that people matter. I am not the best one to gauge it — my cynicism is tempered by a wish for change and a deep progressive streak — but I truly believe this speech will resonate among the uncommitted.

“This election has never been about me,” he said “It’s about you.”

Change. Change — think of Dylan’s “Times They Are A-Changin'” — a song about a moment in time, or another of his songs, “Blowin’ in the Wind,” which hits many of the same notes.

The speech and the packed house is a reminder of the massive turnout during the primaries — just as McCain’s difficulty in drawing crowds is a reminder of the lower turnout for the Republican primaries.

The speech continues

Some more lines:

“I don’t believe John McCain doesn’t care what’s going on in the lives of Americans. He just doesn’t know.”

“It’s time for them to own their failures,” he says of the GOP.

The shots of the crowd are rather amazing — a stadium of 70,000 rabid followers a day before the Republicans, before John McCain, is to hold a rally in Ohio, a rally at a 12,000-seat arena. And if you want to go, there are still tickets.

The speech begins

Some nice early lines:

“We are better than the last eight years. We are a better country than this.”

“We love this country too much to let the next four years look like the last eight.”

“What does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush has been right 90 percent of the time?”

Take me out of the ballgame

So, let’s get this straight: The Yankees continue to play “God Bless America” during baseball games, a practice that began in 2001 after the 9/11 terror attacks. OK, fine. What’s odd, however, is that a fan says he was removed from the game because he attempted to go to the restroom during the musical interlude.

There is some discrepency over the policy at the stadium, The fan, Bradford Campeau-Laurion, told CBS TV that he was told that

theYankees had a rule restricting movement in the stands during the playing of God Bless America. The rule is enforced by ushers, stadium security and the NYPD.

The Yankees, however, say

there is no rule against moving or using a bathroom during a game but police say if a fan is disruptive to others they have the right to kick that fan out.

Police say the incident was alcohol related, but a witness has come forward to contradict the account.

To many, this might seem a silly tangent at a time when we are fighting two wars, the Russians have crossed into a neighbor’s territory, the economy is tanking and so on. But I would argue that these empty displays of patriotism set within these large eventws create a dangerous atmosphere that admittedly was much more stifling in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. But watching earlier coverage of this campaign, with its focus on flag pins and Michelle Obama’s remarks about pride in country, remembering as well the way the GOP turned war heroes like Sens. Max Clelland and John Kerry into caricatures, ,Dixie Chicks, Tim Robbins, Bill Maher, Linda Rondstadt — the list of public figures (and the anonymous horde) whose criticism of the war and the president resulted in ugly controversy and rebuke seems endless — it’s pretty clear that we still view dissent as dangerous. I’ve experienced this first hand, in letters and e-mails I’ve received when I’ve criticized the war, the president, John McCain, Fox News, conservatives, etc.

The dissent issue has faded, to some degree, but not completely — consider this story from The Progressive magazine:

Professor Robert Ovetz was driving through San Francisco on the morning of June 30 when he saw the lights of a police car behind him.

Ovetz pulled over.

“When the officer came up to my window, he asked the typical police requests: registration, drivers’ license, insurance card,” says Ovetz. “I asked him why he was pulling me over. And he said because of the bumper sticker on my back window.”

That sticker says, “No to Empire,” in large bold letters, and on the bottom in very small letters, “www.thenation.com,” Ovetz notes. It’s a bumper sticker from The Nation magazine.

Ovetz’s first reaction was to laugh, he says.

Then he recalls the following conversation:

“How could it be illegal for me to have a bumper sticker on my back windshield?”

“It’s obscuring your view.”

“You’re just trampling on my free speech rights.”

“No sir, I’m just doing my job.”

That’s the standard response in these situations. But it does appear to be a case of selective enforcement. And it is wholly consistent with the kind of infringements we have experienced since 9/11.