Jarrett-Carter.com

Hillary Clinton could not have made a more explicit, impassioned and empowering statement on behalf of the democratic party than the one she made last night in Denver. From her opening statement voicing support of Barack Obama, to her noticeably brief acknowledgment of her husband as a president and not as her husband, to her appeal to voters to act upon their political conscience and not their individual loyalties, Clinton hit it out of the park.

Her supporters, however, are slow to get their gloves in the air.

There are so many components to this Clinton fever that ring honorable and delusional at the same time. For the same reasons that Barack’s nomination is historic and euphoric to many, the same should be reserved for Clinton’s legitimate run for the nomination. Were this another time and following a more competent administration, the respect would be there for her importance to the history of American politics.

But to waver on basic principles in the face of certain global tumult, to adopt a “anybody but Barack” sentiment over an “anybody but the Republicans,” approach has the color of stupid painted broadly about it. It was an aspect Clinton directly spoke to in her address, and effectively captured on the faces of Clinton delegates courtesy of C-SPAN.

Yet today we are bombarded with stories of continuing angst and dislike for Obama, made all the more interesting by the notion that Clinton supporters would rather vote against their ideals than for the remaining candidate that best emobodies them. Even worse, the discussion has not been advanced about the election from its very outset being hers to lose, which she did narrowly, yet effectively.

When given the choice, democrats, informed and uninformed, sided with Barack Obama.

Maybe its the media’s way of making the election sexier than necessary. Perhaps their intuition about Barack Obama’s global charm and the exaggeration of the democratic primary causes this stir in order for extended discussion and closely-knit polls. Unfortunately, too many democrats are willing to feed the monster of controversy and division, at a time where cohesion and unity would be the best medicine.

Hillary Clinton injected that into the party on last night. We can only hope that cells of jealousy and animosity don’t reject the good stuff moving forward.

Representing for Maryland’s little corner of the blogosphere…state comptroller Peter Franchot, ladies and gentlemen! A sampling of the money man’s insight from Denver yesterday afternoon.

For those of you in Denver, I invite you to attend the reception I am hosting tonight for the Maryland delegation at Dixon’s right downtown beginning at 9 pm. Our special guest this evening will be actor Wendell Pierce, who played Detective Bunk Moreland on HBO’s hit series, The Wire.

Wait a minute. Bunk? Bunk Moreland was the best Maryland could come up with? Avon Barksdale would’ve been a much better choice. Or at the very least, Clay Davis.

Still, Franchot in the blogosphere is a good thing. It shows that even in Maryland, the democrats are realizing and utilizing the connecting power of the Internet to pull this joker out in November.

I wouldn’t classify it as the most eloquent speech I’ve ever heard, mostly because she’s most eloquent without prepared commentary. But Michelle Obama’s address at the Democratic National Convention’s opening night set the tone for the world to meet the woman behind the fist pound. A mother, a sister, and potentially, the most influential first lady in the history of American politics.

She hit on all of the critical points that the media has scrambled together in the face of Hurricane Clinton hitting Denver this week; resonance with “blue-collar” voters, dismantling the notion that she is an “angry black woman,” and eliciting excitement about her husband’s platform of self-generated hope.

“All of us” are “driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won’t do — that we have an obligation to fight for the world as it should be,” she said. “That is the thread that connects our hearts. That is the thread that runs through my journey and Barack’s journey and so many other improbable journeys that have brought us here tonight, where the current of history meets this new tide of hope.

“And, you see, that is why I love this country.”

The ease and confidence with which she delivered her address will go a long way in convincing undecided and perhaps unwilling voters that she and her husband are a certain conduit for change in the face of uncertain times. Not because they have all of the answers, but because they are willing to talk to folks.

She showed herself to be a patriot, but not of the cookie cutter, “God Bless America” variety. She showed working class roots without insulting the intelligence of those who know that she is no longer on their block. But most importantly, she showed her blackness without a hint of arrogance or purposeful intimidation.

Now that’s quite a hello.

The New York Times has done an incredible job on the racial ramifications of Barack Obama’s run for the presidency of these United States. Their latest offering outlines the possible signals of the end of the civil rights movement as a result of Obama’s, and other black politicians’ political ascendancy and merit.

“I worry that there is a segment of the population that might be harder to reach, average citizens who will say: ‘Come on. We might have a black president, so we must be over it,’ ” said Mr. Harrison, 59, a sociologist at Howard University and a consultant for the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies here.

“That is the danger, that we declare victory,” said Mr. Harrison, who fears that poor blacks will increasingly be blamed for their troubles. “Historic as this moment is, it does not signify a major victory in the ongoing, daily battle.”

A more than valid point. America has never been worried about the well-spoken, well-intentioned negro. This country has always been and always will be afraid of the uneducated and exploited African-American, who doesn’t know much, but does know they can’t lose what the country never afforded them the opportunity to have.

And to that end, there will be endless consternation on both sides about what are fair and equitable resources in education, how much social programming means in urban and rural settings, and how the media can balance dueling perspectives on belief systems and their impact on national legislation.

Just because the country is willing to elect a black man as its leader doesn’t mean that the country has a crush on people of color. It means one of two things; that Bush was genuinely that bad of a president and people want to make up for the mistake in a big way, or that the country is more respectful of intelligent leadership, no matter the color of the person dispensing it.

By and large, many white folks are likely to assume the all bad things in society are most likely to be committed a minority, and most likely a black person. To that end, they are going to put laws, rules and safeguards in place to ensure that it doesn’t happen. Black folks, and soon enough Hispanics, are likely to continue disliking this form of preemptive action, and will continue rallying against it in the name of freedom.

And that’s not a black or white thing, it’s an American thing.

So don’t worry. Civil Rights will be here to stay with Obama and beyond Obama. Because the truth is that we’ll never be fully civil to each other, and we’ll always have the right to be that way.

For the last 48 hours or so, it was all about Joe Biden as the pick for Barack Obama. But now that Obama has gone down south and gotten himself some peanuts, the Internet is on fire about Chet Edwards.

Chet Edwards?

You sure that’s not John Edwa…Yeah, you’re sure.

And if you want to kow why Edwards is so hot, all you need to know is two words. Bible belt. Edwards is a democrat out of Texas, whose credentials seem to have checked out well with party officials. As a Congressman, you can check out his voting record here. He’s pretty close to middle of the road, which is not unlike our dear Senator from Illinois.

Plus, a selection of Chet Edwards is a move towards these white American, blue collar workers conservative media keeps putting out there like they are the new African-American vote.

If this is a direction he’s leaning in, it would be surprising, but not bad.

And I don’t mean that in a way like Barack Obama would not be a successful attorney or politician without George W. Bush, but there’s no way in hell America as a whole embraces a liberal black man for president without the absolute failure of its current administration.

He is the most unpopular president in the history of the country. He is master craftsman of ridiculous sayings, and has cuased most of the globe to hate all Americans because we ‘elected’ him on two occasions.

And yet, without his disastrous tenure as leader of the free world, our country would not be in a position to embrace common sense and vigor for change from a face unfamiliar to this point of a presidential race.

I heard Michael Eric Dyson say that Obama is treading a path laid by Martin Luther King Jr. and illuminated by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. To an extent of being recognized black men in the media, that is true. But Obama brings the calming nature of King in a time where racial flames do not abound. He brings a cultural awareness to a country more integrated into its principles by arts and entertainment.

He brings an energy for results at a time where Americans have grown all too tired of misinformation and blatant lying from the government.

So thank you, George W. In a twisted and sick way, you’ve accelerated race relations in this country by at least 30 years. In an evil and perverted way, you’re making America more appealing to the rest of the globe.

And for once, your ignorance is paying off for the rest of us.

So how long do you think it will take for the Daily Show to make a mockery of this place?

Maybe it’s just me, and the fact that I’m not really a coffeehouse stalwart, but going to a place where political intercourse will be happening more often than not seems a little tiring to me. Coffee already makes you hype, there’s no reason to be hype and politically motivated at the same time.

Maybe it works well in this Chicago neighborhood, but there’s a strong chance the Hyde Park crew won’t take this lying down.

Further capitalizing on her stupidity and infamy, Paris Hilton has responded to John McCain using her image in a recent ad against Sen. Barack Obama. Problem is, this video will probably get more play than the political ads themselves in the next 1-3 weeks.

While he would make you believe that he is a shining advocate for the progress of black issues in the American mainstream of conscience, Tavis Smiley knows full well that his position of “not giving Barack Obama a pass” is more shameless self-promotion than cultural integrity.

There is a bottom line that most people know, agree with and accept, and that is that no man can be a president to a specific demographic. Mainstream media has already succeeded in improperly designating certain figures as spokespersons for the black race; and it usually does nothing to change our positioning among the rest of the nation.

For Smiley to continually frown upon Obama’s unwillingness to address black concerns specifically prickles on a lot of fronts that he’s not ready to fight. His doctrine of the concerns and struggles of black people are well-founded and often logically explained, but his arrogance won’t let him see that he is slighting the rest of the country and black people in the process.

Asking any elected official or candidate to be frank about remedying centuries of injustice against one culture is unfair and unreasonable. The race of the candidate matters not, but to paint that person into a corner by leveraging systematic racism against them is downright dirty.

There is no answer from one man or woman that can alleviate the pressure of racial strife. That is a collective agreement that each individual must come to. Yes, leadership can start the discussion, but there is no strict and fullproof policy that can eliminate health disparities, educational gaps and social deconstruction.

But more important than the daunting task Smiley wishes to heap upon Obama or any other candidate for president, is the notion that black people, in all of our struggles and pain, are incapable of caring about issues facing the whole of America. Smiley, in his bluster and plethora of media exposure, takes every opportunity to lament the ills of the black community, as if they are troubles limited exclusively to our people.

Tavis, we care about homeland security as much as we care about racial profiling. We care about bad housing loans as much as the good folks located in parts uncolored. And we care about all of the troops coming home and their well-being.

So does everyone else.

Using his platform as an unpredictable weapon of misguided insight, Smiley is recklessly positioning the African-American conscience as a selfish, self-absorbed entity wishing that we could burn this mother down and get all of our needs catered to. Right now. His suggestions of our tribulations being more than those of white folks or immigrants, denigrates our essence as a community-minded people.

Not just our community, but the global community.

There is nothing wrong with advocacy at the grass roots level, but the expectation of Tavis Smiley in the name of helping black folks is irresponsible and poorly thought out. I applaud his work in advancing the black perspective, but blurring our perspective among us, and others, will leave all of us seeing the real issues a lot less clearly.

Here’s the thing about the Green Party’s ticket for the presidential election. I fully respect to sisters of color running for the presidency. I think that it is a testament to how far our country has come to see that anybody would nominate two women for any viable bid for government leadership.

Having said that, I really don’t know their purpose.

I listened to Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente this morning on Democracy Now! I tried desperately to align an open mind with what I’ve been classically trained to believe was a antagonize force in the country’s established game of glad-handing and promise breaking.

And for all of the bluster of what Democrats and Republicans do wrong, that’s all I heard. Bluster.

Tell me something I don’t know, sisters.

Tell me your side on foreign policy, health care and education. Tell me how you stand to be a serious voice for activism and the people’s right to govern themselves.

Don’t tell me what I already know doesn’t work. Because that makes you a bystander talking about how bad a house fire is when you could be fetching some water.

Are you unhappy interrupters? Are you an unbridled and unfiltered solution to many of the problems that plague the United State’s two-party system? Or are you content to be middle of the road?

If that does make you content, to just be a dissenting voice loud enough to distract others from policies and philosophies that will be enacted in spite of your message, then get off of the road.