Goodenough Gismo

  • Gismo39
    This is the classic children's book, Goodenough Gismo, by Richmond I. Kelsey, published in 1948. Nearly unavailable in libraries and the collector's market, it is posted here with love as an "orphan work" so that it may be seen and appreciated -- and perhaps even republished, as it deserves to be. After you read this book, it won't surprise you to learn that Richmond Irwin Kelsey (1905-1987) was an accomplished artist, or that as Dick Kelsey, he was one of the great Disney art directors, breaking your heart with "Pinocchio," "Dumbo," and "Bambi."

  • 74%How Addicted to Blogging Are You?

  • Google

Blogs I love and/or learn from

« Bloggy Logic | Main | So, Did Obama Save Himself? »



I don't know; I think it might be very close, even another tie. McCain's albatross is Iraq, and the economy also. I don't think the Bush administration destroyed the economy, but a lot of people, and certainly all Democrats, might think so. And almost everyone is sick to death of Iraq.

Hillary's albatross is, I think maybe, her husband. So all three have formidable albatrosses.

I'm not sure Wright is as damaging as I thought he was at first. He was in the military and maybe he is patriotic, but maybe blacks express their patriotism very differently. Maybe we just misunderstood black culture.

Conservatives will not vote for Obama, but they wouldn't have anyway. Liberals really are not patriotic anymore and goddam America is not going to offend them at all. They would much rather live in Europe anyway.

Maxwell James

OK. Go here, and just work your way down the left-hand column.

If the Rev. Wright phenomenon is indeed so toxic to Obama's campaign, where is the evidence of the damage? There's been plenty of time for it to wreck people's opinion of him. But it hasn't. Neither has his clumsy pandering to the biases of wealthy San Franciscan donors.

Whoever wins the Democratic candidacy is going to get a significant bounce after the convention. I like John McCain, but he's going to lose, and it won't be close.


I just don't agree. Swing Dems (like me) are going to end up voting for McCain. Some may be looking for a reason to be suspicious of a black man. Others have contempt for the elite academic liberals who have contempt for working-class Americans. And then there are the ones like me who just think Obama a) has shown poor judgment and b) needs more time in public life before he's ready to be President.


How accurate have all the polls been in predicting what actually happens at the polls?

Maxwell James

Here's the Gallup poll's historical record. I think it's pretty impressive, Truman-Dewey notwithstanding.

If you don't think the polls are accurately capturing the Americans' reaction to Obama's gaffes, my question would be: why? Are they not polling enough swing voters? As a swing voter, would you not tell them you're leaning towards McCain right now, yet then go and vote for him in the general election?


Maxwell, the success of the final Gallup poll at predicting the outcome of the election most of the time says nothing about the success of much, much earlier polls to correctly capture what will ultimately sway the voters.

Wright, for all the attention paid by those heavily involved in politics, has not really been brought to the attention of the average American yet. The massive coverage sparked today is of a whole new level, and will reach many people who have not previously really heard Wright's message.


The whole point about swing voters is that they don't stay swung. They are swayed this way and that, and they vote either at a particular point on that arc (where election day happens to intersect it), or as a result of a calculation based on many swings. So they (we) are not so predictable.

Maxwell James

By comparison: At the end of July 2004 John Kerry was in a statistical tie with George Bush, 48-47. By the beginning of September, Bush was ahead 54-41 (source). The last three Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads were aired Aug 20 - 31(source).

That happened in roughly two weeks. The Wright affair has been percolating for about six weeks now. I just don't see it having much impact.


Another point is that McCain in particular is not off limits to disaffected Democrats. Last month from a fifth to a quarter of Obama and Hillary supporters told pollsters they would vote for McCain if their favored candidate lost the nomination.

You gotta realize, I'm pissed at Obama. He came so close to getting it right. But you, and he, simply cannot dismiss the concerns of the blue-collar part of the old RFK coalition, and win. And I think that being tone-deaf to that particular frequency shows naïveté and provincialism on his part. Hyde Park provincialism. (I'm from Hyde Park. Well, no, I'm from Kenwood. That's a little different.)


Kenwood's just a little farther from the university. LOL

Michael Reynolds

I'll still bet on the Dems to win. Obama or Hillary, either one. McCain is stuck at 45% at a time when no one's even picking on him and all we know of him is the good stuff.

Wright hurts. But I suspect his latest may actually engender a sympathy backlash for Obama. Everyone's got at least one crazy friend. Hillarty's is Bill. McCain's is George W. Bush.


Could one say that Wright actually makes BObama look further(farther?)away from him, esp since the San Frasiscan 2300$/redstate roast?

I only saw ~a snippet~ @my folks(on Fox:0))- Arabic is a language...

Nope- we'll get what we get- and most likely deserve it either way she swings.


I just called campaign headquarters and told them that Obama needs to denounce Jeremiah Wright now, now that Jeremiah Wright is using his association with Obama as a platform for his views and suggesting any disagreement between them is just politics. I agree that the polls haven't shown it yet, but that was post-brilliant race speech, not post unrepentant rant.

Now that Wright has come out totally unrepentant for his anti-semitic views etc. etc., Wright has given him the proper opportunity to denounce him. He can say that he while he honors the role that he played in leading him to his faith etc. that he cannot stand by and let him continue to say the things he does.

Think about it, people will ask will Obama invite Wright to the whitehouse, will Wright counsel Obama while he is in office -- someone who thinks that we brought on 9/11. That is just not politically feasible.

Furthermore, Wright is totally uncontrollable. The Obama campaign wanted him to shut the hell up, and reports are that they have only had one conversation since the issue emerged and that it was a heated one.

Wright's given him the opportunity, now's the time to excise the cancer before it grows.

If you agree with me and care about the Obama campaign please call (866) 675-2008 . It'll only take a minute.
(866) 675-2008


I was originally very blase about the whole thing, but andrew sullivan, and now amba set off a train of thoughts. I am a very hard core Obama supporter and think all this stuff is just bullshit, but I think amba and sullivan and althouse have a better pulse on what the swing voter thinks, better than me, who will support Obama up until they find him with "a dead girl or a live boy." Obama supporters need to stop whistling past the graveyard on this one. After all, the guy did inspire the guy's book title and he did get married by him and his children baptised. He's got to cut out the cancer.

Pre-today I didn't think Wright was that much of a problem because of the race speech, but now . . . .


Good, eusto. As of right now it is not too late.


As for bad judgment, I do share your intuition that Obama would grow in judgment over time, that he hasn't reached his peak. But the real question for a voter is comparing Obama's current judgment with McCain's or Hillary's. In that comparison, I still go Obama. FWIW.

I mean think of all the horrendous gaffes committed by the Hillary and McCain campaign. Jesse Jackson in 84. Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. Or repeating the Bosnia lie over and over and only after a week saying she mispoke because she was "tired." Keeping Mark Penn on. Etc. Etc. How immature and insane has that campaign acted?

You wonder how much growth people do in fact make after a certain age. And I actually think that this campaign is certainly a crash-course in "seasoning" for the 'Bama.

What do we blame those (of McCain and Hillary) gaffes on?


just called campaign headquarters and told them that Obama needs to denounce Jeremiah Wright now.Posted by: eusto

Why? Wright is being vilified for nothing. Who finds fault with this statement he made today.

“We root out any teaching of superiority, inferiority, hatred or prejudice,” “And we recognize that for the first time in modern history, in the West, that the other who stands before us with a different color of skin, a different texture of hair, different music, different preaching styles and different dance moves; that other is one of God’s children just as we are, no better, no worse, prone to error and in need of forgiveness just as we are.”

The swiftboating that is going on is sickening and embarrassing. It would be different, if his critics were better Americans, but they aren't.



It's more his comments he made about aids, zionism, 9/11, farrakhan etc. that are problematic. Read

Maxwell James

Pat, as to the accuracy of polling, I was simply responding to amba's question. That said, I don't buy your argument that most Americans aren't aware of Wright yet. The story's been in the news, nearly continuously, for over six weeks now. One Rasmussen poll taken in mid-March (source) indicated that 66% of likely voters were aware of it then.

That doesn't mean that some clever ad director couldn't make Wright's comments stick more closely to Obama somehow. But it hasn't happened yet, and given the length of time involved, I don't think it's going to happen.

Maxwell James


You gotta realize, I'm pissed at Obama.

I am too - less about Wright, which I think is a piffle. But his SF comments irritated me.

As I think I've said before, just because I think Obama will win, doesn't mean I think he should win. I would much prefer someone of his style to be president when the Republicans hold Congress.

That said...

But you, and he, simply cannot dismiss the concerns of the blue-collar part of the old RFK coalition, and win.

His SF comments aside, I don't think Obama is doing this, and I believe his campaign is already increasing its outreach to white, blue-collar Democrats. I am deeply skeptical that 6 months from now, many of those voters will choose McCain over Obama out of either racial or anti-intellectual bias, because I think very few blue-collar whites are either racist or anti-intellectual.

As for the judgment thing, well that's the heart of the matter isn't it? But eusto's comment applies here: neither McCain nor Hillary have made a persuasive case that their judgment is any better. Indeed, one could easily argue the opposite.


Oh, come on, Spud. If that was all he said he could be the whole nation's pastor. Nobody put those other crazy words in his mouth.

Peter Hoh

Obama had better pull out another Philly speech, but this one has to be better, and he has to break with Wright.

I'm not ready to write Obama off just yet. I don't think that the GOP can count on getting out the vote for McCain the way they got out the vote for Bush. How many times can you use abortion and gay marriage to get evangelicals to the polls? They are starting to figure out that they are being used, and this time, the GOP candidate doesn't speak their language.


Maxwell: I don't think most blue-collar whites are racist any more -- that's a dwindling remnant. And I don't think they're anti-intellectual -- but they sure are anti- any intellectual who implies that they're a bunch of thumbsucking yahoos with their gun and bible in bed under their security blanket. Blame them? I know you don't!


What a horrible man Rev Wright is showing himself to be. He is arrogant and dismissive towards his critics and does not seem to recognize the harm he is doing.

Obama seems to have used him as a surrogate father in his spiritual growth, only to find that his new-found father does not want him to succeed, does not want him to do better than Wright himself has done.

It's the Oedipus story, with Power standing in for the wife/mother.


With all the analysis and hand wringing about Rev. Wright's impact on Obama's chances, it is easy to forget what a disservice the Reverend has Christianity. He has discredited African-American churches, which have been the pillar of hope for a beleaguered community. He has misled his parishioners by preaching a Gospel of hate. Jesus said, "Love your enemies." Perhaps Matthew 5:44 was left out of the Black Liberation Theology Bible.


I can't retrace my steps now, but somewhere -- from Althouse to Sullivan to the Milbank comments -- I read someone saying that other African American pastors need to stand up now and repudiate Wright and the libel he has perpetuated on the black church.

Charlie (Colorado)

Spud, if my grandfather --- born in Atlanta, his own father named after Jefferson Davis --- had said the same things about blacks that Wright has been saying --- that they can't think logically like white people, that they have a natural sense of rhythm, that they make decisions based on feeling and intuition --- you would run him out of town. Hell, I might help.

(Don't think he said that? Go have a look. Phrased it a bit differently, but that's what he's saying.)

Sadly --- and I live in Denver, I mean that word --- I think Amba's right, and that there will be at least a very strong movement to not nominate Obama. People are already promising violence in the streets if Obama doesn't get the nominatino; add that to Recreate '68 and it's going to be a rough week.

After that rough week, McCain will win, and we'll get to hear another four yers of how it was "stolen."


he cannot stand by and let him continue to say the things he does.

Obama can choose, or not, to condemn and disavow, or not, both the content and the rhetorical flourish, or not. What he cannot, and should not, do is somehow embody the idea that he can, or should, have the power to "let," or not, anyone to say anything.

Yeah, that's a wordy paragraph. The question is, did it end up being too subtle, or God forbid, nuanced?


For reasons I won't share here, one of the sound-bites circulating tonight really resonated with me, though I am insisting to and for myself that it percolate for a day or two before I render analysis, much less judgment.

And that is the one involving a weird dichotomy which, contra not just logic but also personal experience, stated, in effect, that there are no politics within the church, that there is no "politician"—-definitionally, as it was presented—-in "clergyperson," and so forth. Wonderful it would be, would that be the truth.

But it's not, y'know. I don't have to go to national politics or to a currently in-spotlight individual member of clergy to say that. I only have to look at and within my own garden, so to speak: my own church, and within my own denomination.

Really, some days, IRL, in the context I just specified, I just want to say: Who's zoomin' whom?

RW Rogers

Obama's ship is not sunk, yet. Remember (you, too, Maxwell!) most people are NOT paying much attention right now. As a general rule, most don't concentrate on the election until about a month beforehand, unless there is a hot primary contest in their state, when they pay attention for a couple of weeks and then go about their lives as before.

Obama's current problem is North Carolina. He needs to win big, and show that he can win some part of the white vote, while not losing his overwhelming majority of an energized black vote. His problem at the moment is how to solidly remove Wright as an issue without causing an uproar amongst his heaviest supporters. If he's not successful, Wright (and ads like those already run) will be an enduring background to the campaign from here on out. And that will cost him lots more votes in swing states. He can turn it around, but thus far he hasn't shown the interest in doing what he needs to do. Maybe he can't.

FWIW, this is the kind of thing I thought would happen and why I found the Philadelphia speech lacking. I thought then that his failure to differentiate between the private comments of his grandmother and the public pronouncements of his pastor was illuminating. Given what Wright has recently said in his unscripted moments, it stretches credibility beyond the breaking point to pretend one never heard him utter similar thoughts in private conversations over the course of twenty years' close association (much less somewhere around 1000 sermons). That said, I am sad to see the predictable come about.


Yeah, it's sad, and scary too, because of the potential for THE VERY OPPOSITE of the "healing" Obama imagined he could bring about.


I just posted two comments. The second was not an extension of the first, unlike so many other instances in my commenting. They were two separate thoughts (among the various circulating), separately expressed in separate comments, from different places..

I guess I'm asking for a little bit of "step into my world" here, or at least some toleration. Not sure but what that's out of place, and I certainly would understand why. Still.


And that LAST comment is now completely out of place. I typed in the verification code, hit enter, and then responding to someone's call, walked away and didn't get back for 45 minutes, at which point I realized I'd screwed up the captcha, or something. And stupidly didn't check the thread before doing captcha again.

Sorry about that, folks. What can I say? Seems to be the harbinger of narratives to come, or something like that: feeling as if I'll be off my game forever, never quite getting right.

RW Rogers

Don't worry, Reader. I think we all understood. (BTW, I've lost count how many comments never got posted here because I forgot about the captcha feature and clicked away before it processed.)


One of the many reasons I hate TypePad's CAPTCHA is that it's slow, and while it's digesting you impatiently dart away to e-mail or another tab or window (I do, anyway), and forget about it, and come back and it's still stuck there, and then your comment is out of sequence. This has happened to me countless times.

Anyway, this is an informal medium -- it's allowed to be messy and hiccuppy and dashed-off and a dozen other forms of impromptu and imperfect. The intent shines through.

Not to worry


Invest 26 minutes and listen to Rev. Wright's speech before you condemn Obama for it. I find his message to be moderate, refreshing, truthful and in keeping with Obama's message of inclusion. The commentary on it in blogland has been excreable.


"I find his message to be moderate, refreshing, truthful"...?

I think it's just you, though, Clark. Open your eyes. This was ugly no matter how much you try to put lipstick on it.

RW Rogers

Clark, I assume you didn't listen to the question and answer session after the moderate speech (assuming the speech you are referring to was the one to the National Press Club). For some strange reason, I don't consider his replies moderate. Maybe it was his claim that the government spread AIDS as a form of genocide. Moderate, Clark? Wright's unqualified endorsement of Cone & Black Liberation Theology was refreshing, Clark?

And btw, Clark. Most of us have listened to the speech (or read it), and not just the snippets. In fact, we took the time to listen (or read) the infamous sermon that Wright claims was taken out of context. It's available, Clark.


It wasn't the speech, it was the Q & A. Like two different people. He doesn't know when to stop.


Perhaps ugly is what you want to see, Pogo. Wright talks about some ugly things that some Americans would like to forget about, but he does so in an open, honest and forgiving way, at least in this speech.

I did listen to the whole speech, btw, and read the transcript of the Q&A. Open YOUR eyes, why don't you?

RW Rogers

I see that your eyes are wide shut, Clark. Have a wonderful life!


Here's what I said in a post on Feb. 26:

"Here's what I'm afraid of:

Obama will get elected and get blamed for every problem Israel faces.
[My anti-Obama Jewish friends] will say 'I told you so,' every time Sderot gets hit or a bus gets blown up, even though these things have been happening for years now.

Obama will get shot at, or worse, and Jews or Jewish interests will take the heat.

Once again, we won't have gotten at the truth.


Obama won't get elected.

Jews and Jewish interests will take the heat.

Once again, we won't have gotten at the truth."

Still hoping I'll be wrong...


It's ironic and pathetic that he ran on a platform of healing, and the effect may be the precise opposite. We desperately need a new Dr. King to step forward right now. This could be the catharsis that's necessary before healing, but more likely it will be a gouging reopening of old wounds that will set race relations back more than a generation.


It's more his comments he made about aids, zionism, 9/11, farrakhan etc. that are problematic.

Posted by: eusto

What do the comments have to do with Obama? I wish Wright would go away too, but not because I don't like him, because I do. Obviously, the "fake" controversy is not helping Obama. The hypocrisy here is the free pass McCain gets with his sought out endorsement from Hagee. People will say, well, McCain didn't sit in his church for twenty years. But if Omama had never heard of Wright, but sought out Wright's endorsement, then it would be ok?? I don't think so.


Hey, gang! Meeting of the Jewish Conspiracy tonight at my place!

Seriously, I do know some blue-collar people who won't vote for Obama, but they're not going to vote for McCain, either...they just won't vote.


Oh, come on, Spud. If that was all he said he could be the whole nation's pastor. Nobody put those other crazy words in his mouth.

Amba, I don't want Wright for my pastor because I'm not a church goer. But, I will say, if I had to have one, I'd rather have Wright for my pastor, than the Jerry Falwell's and Pat Robertson's of the world, or the pedophile priests.


Melinda: What time?

I can lead us in a little Torah study beforehand...


David, as long as there are ten of us, it should be fine.

Spud, I wouldn't want any of those guys as my pastor. They're not spiritual advisors; they're grandstanding showmen.


I still believe, that consciously or unconsciously Wright wants Obama to lose and is doing all he can to make that happen. A black man being elected president would deal a mortal blow to his world view and his power base.

I think there's something to that. Now Al Sharpton's playing the Uncle Tom card:

Barack Obama made a call for nonviolence in the aftermath of the Sean Bell verdict - infuriating the Rev. Al Sharpton, who accused the presidential candidate of trying to "grandstand in front of white people," sources told The Post.

During what a source described as a "heated" phone call yesterday, Sharpton told Obama he was disappointed with the Illinois senator's words on Friday, when Obama said "resorting to violence to express displeasure" was "completely unacceptable and counterproductive."

Regardless of what you think of the verdict, I say, "Good for Obama." If he can stand up to the crazies in his base, he's gone up several notches in my estimation.


Well, Obama has just held a press conference and denounced Wright's comments and general view of things. "That's not the man I met 20 years ago." Which, of course, was what he needed to do.

I don't agree with the view that, by providing this opportunity to get back to his "together" message, Wright has inadvertantly helped Obama. But I think the damage will be fleeting. As Michael noted above, everybody has at least 1 crazy friend. And most of us know several people who are crazy on at least one subject, even if they are relatively sane otherwise.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

New on FacTotem, my Natural History Blog

Jacques' Story: Escape From the Gulag

The AmbivAbortion Rant

Debating Intelligent Design


  • Listed on Blogwise

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2004