Rock Hackshaw's blog
Too often when I write about the Brooklyn political scene, I unnecessarily take a verbal-beating from folks unknown. No big thing; when you are a political writer in New York, you learn to absorb punishment. So here I come again with another column about the “hood”.
Okay; so I know we have two and a half years to go before the 2016 presidential elections; but I just wanted to get my two-cents in early.
As of now, I am leaning towards supporting either Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA); Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT); or Republican Colin Powell; should any of them decide to run for the presidency.
Many of my faithful readers know that I often refer to politics as “the only game in town”. By now, some will deduce my reasoning behind this statement, while others will probably remain guessing. Using figurative language is one thing, using metaphors and analogies is another; but the reality still is that political involvement means dealing with real people and tangible challenges: and that should automatically be the good parts to politics. And yet -too often in my regard- political involvement can lead to some really sad outcomes.
Observing the political machinations of Republicans has become a tedious chore lately. After Barack Obama’s initial election as the 44th US president -and the first person of a mixed racial background to hold the position- it appears as though Republicans have gone bonkers. How else can one describe their collective behavior since Obama’s 2009 inauguration?
This is the second part of Rock Hackshaw's three-part column reflecting on the passing of Nelson Mandela.
If you haven’t read part one of this three-parter then I suggest you do so. These columns are being written in response to what I see as the media hypocrisy surrounding Nelson Mandela’s death: there is a context and there are specific themes.
This is the first of Rock Hackshaw's three-part series on the passing of Nelson Mandela.
In this country, whenever I want to find the best coverage of unfiltered news on cable television, I go to CSPAN. For the most part you only have to bring your intellect to the viewing chair. It seems as though most of the other networks aim to either indoctrinate or proselytize. I doubt that’s an objective at CSPAN.
Look, I don't want to get too deep here. There is no need for all that. Things are both simple and elementary. The stuff this column purports to be about is truly self-explanatory.
Quite often in politics seemingly insignificant endorsements eventually bear lots of surprising fruit. In this year’s NYC mayoral race, such an occurrence could be shaping up. There are five top candidates in the democrat’s September primary, and the consensus amongst political pundits appears to be that the winner of this primary will be the next mayor of New York City. I suspect that this view is being propagated by voter-registration numbers which suggest that democrats dominate the rolls; and also because a democrat hasn’t won the mayoralty since 1989.
After I wrote the first part to this column, I received a call from someone claiming that I must have known Anthony Weiner was contemplating a run for mayor; prior to writing said column. I did not. Later, I heard over the radio- I think it was on WINS/1010AM- that some firm was “push-polling” for Weiner at two positions: mayor and city comptroller. To me, the implications of this new information appear to be this: Tony is seriously looking at some kind of city-wide run this year.
It’s been exactly three months since I last submitted a column to my editors for publishing. This is the longest hiatus (by far) I have taken in the past 8 years writing on the blogs. Let’s just say that some of life’s challenges had me on the run for a moment; so I took a time-out. Let me acknowledge those of you who took the time to contact me just to enquire about my health and wellbeing. It’s nice to know that my columns are appreciated worldwide.
THIS IS WHAT THE TALKING (and writing) HEADS OF MAINSTREAM MEDIA WOULDN’T TELL YOU ABOUT THE UPCOMING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
I start this column with exactly two weeks to go until the election. The debates ended tonight (thank God, or who, or whatever). Pollsters are now destroying their fingers and credibilities. Canvassers are becoming Jehovah-witness- like nuisances, with their incessant door-knocking and bell-ringing. Fundraisers are begging credit-card holders for as little as three dollars a clip. E-mails from Obama and his minions are flooding my inbox.
I start this column in New York City. It’s three o’clock on the morning of a public holiday we celebrate in this city: Columbus Day. It’s only fitting that I write this column today since it deals with a simple but profound prediction: Mitt Romney has no chance of winning next month’s presidential race. He will be soundly defeated. This is a general election that has been over long before the primaries started: contrary to all the media hype of it being a close race.
A few years ago I wrote a column positing that all five district attorneys in New York City should be term limited to twelve years. It was simply an extension of my thesis that ALL elected officials in New York (federal, state, city/local) should be term-limited accordingly. There is no need for me to revisit the many arguments for term limits that have been made in this city since way before 1991. Three referendums have shown overwhelming voter support for the proposition.
For almost two years now, I have been writing columns telling you that Mitt Romney will handily lose this upcoming presidential election. So I am moving beyond that now: it’s a “fait accompli” in my book. Romney is -and has always been- as horrible a candidate as any the republicans could have nominated. There are much better presidential candidates in the Republican Party. Most of the good ones chose not to run this time around.