Remember that root beer ad where someone does something astoundingly moronic, like mispronouncing a potential employer’s name as “Mr. Dumbass” during a job interview, prompting the tagline, “Now that’s really thick-headed”? Apparently, John McCain is in open auditions for the next commercial. The news and blogs have been filled for weeks with bloopers and gaffes like his straight-talk™ view that Iraq and Pakistan share a common border, or that Shiite Iran is training Sunni Al Qaeda, or that three suicide bombers in one day in Iraq means the situation is “quiet.” (He’s right on that last point. That is a quiet day in Iraq. Now, if you had four suicide bombings …)
But I think he wins the role with the proclamation he’s given from the start, the one he’s repeated on the campaign trail to thunderous canned applause: that you can be sure McCain will never “surrender” in Iraq. No, not never, never ever. Voluntary withdrawal = unconditional surrender, and that’s one equation that doesn’t compute with Johnny Straight-Talker. That’s right, VFW members, you didn’t surrender to Hitler or Tojo, and McCain will never surrender to Bin Laden, the president and/or chancellor of the country of Al Qaeda, wherever that is, who joined forces with Saddam Hussein to attack us on 9-11. But gee whiz, John, what if our boys take cover in a Spanish mission and are hopelessly outnumbered by surrounding forces from the country of Al Qaeda? Shouldn’t we give up then instead of being forced into a heroic, maybe even legendary, last stand? Nope. That’s liberal loser talk. No cutting and running. We don’t give up until we “win.” Well, wait a sec. What if their soldiers have fortified pillboxes along the beaches of Al Qaeda, and any attempt to take those beaches would be suicide for the first troops to land there. There could be hundreds, maybe even thousands of casualties. Yes, it might make for a really smashing movie some day, but shouldn’t we just turn our boats around and call it a day? No dice, Appeasers. No retreat, Baby, NO SURRENDER!
Just like his pal George W. Bush, McCain understands we must stay in Iraq until we “win.” And please don’t start that crap about defining “win.” We all know what it means. As soon General Petraeus’ forces take one or two key hills, pushing Al Qaeda’s panzer divisions back to the sea where the Coalition of the Willing forces from Britain and Tonga will be waiting for them, Bin Laden will have no choice but to give up his quest to take over the world, assuming of course that he and his girlfriend haven’t already committed suicide in their bunker/cave. Then Bin Laden will be forced to meet President McCain on the deck of an aircraft carrier and sign a historic peace treaty. (And hey, the “Mission Accomplished” banner has already been printed. Bonus! They just have to add the word “Again.”)
What a glorious day that will be. The alternative is of course almost too horrible to contemplate. But for argument’s sake, let's do it anyway: As with any surrender, we would have to concede our country to the victors. The United States would become “West Al Qaeda.” We would be forced to give up Christianity and Scientology and accept Islam. Las Vegas would no longer be Mecca: Mecca would be Mecca. As Giselle looks no better in a burqa than your grandmother does, trust me, you will not be pleased with the next Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue. And I, for one, am not looking forward to that daily 4 a.m. call to prayer. That’s what almost certainly awaits us if Barak Obama is elected and goes ahead with his plan to withdraw our troops from Iraq. Come to think of it, because of his secret Muslim training, that’s what awaits us under President Obama regardless of what he decides about Iraq. And that’s the America's liberals want?? Come on! Now, that’s really thick-headed.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Thursday, May 15, 2008
John McCain and the Lasting Crusade
When C. Montgomery Burns ran for governor of whatever state Springfield is in, Marge Simpson gave him a very simple put-up-or-shut-up test: publicly eat a three-eyed fish spawned in waters contaminated by his nuclear plant. Along that same line, there’s something John McCain can do to win over America-hating liberals like me. All he has to do is move to Iraq. For a month. Outside the Green Zone. And without a battalion of soldiers and a flock of Blackhawk helicopters. Just him and Cindy, hanging out in the country he claims is so much more stable than what the biased media reports in their New York Times.
With no end in sight to the self-immolation known as the Democratic nominating process, McCain can afford to take the time off. Just a teensy-weensy month to prove that the “surge is working,” and that freedom is the only thing exploding there. Yep, just four measly weeks of eating dates and haggling with shopkeepers. No military escort, but maybe a weekend visit from his friends the Liebermans, who also believe the U.S. needs to stay in Iraq pretty much forever. Getting to know the local Iraqis, and seeing first-hand that those designations as Sunnis and Shiites just means a whole bunch of good natured rivalry, like Democrats and Republicans, or Yankees and Red Sox fans. Needing only the security of the local police. The ones we helped train. You know, like the ones who recently congratulated (and did not arrest) an Iraqi man who proudly murdered his teenage daughter for speaking to a British soldier. Maybe not the kind of “traditional family values” that McCain and supporters like Pastor John Hagee advocate, but a solid example nonetheless of the fundamentalist religious freedom Iraqis can now practice without retribution. Think of the lazy afternoons McCain could spend debating that issue with the locals over a few delicious cups of anise tea.
As you may know, Mr. Burns destroyed his candidacy when he spit out that fish, prompting reporters to note he couldn’t “swallow his own fish story.” But Senator McCain is certainly made of sterner stuff. How about it, Johnny Straight-talker? Ready to enjoy the fruits of democracy that keep springing from the seeds sown by your good friends George Bush and Dick Cheney? Exxxxxcellent!
With no end in sight to the self-immolation known as the Democratic nominating process, McCain can afford to take the time off. Just a teensy-weensy month to prove that the “surge is working,” and that freedom is the only thing exploding there. Yep, just four measly weeks of eating dates and haggling with shopkeepers. No military escort, but maybe a weekend visit from his friends the Liebermans, who also believe the U.S. needs to stay in Iraq pretty much forever. Getting to know the local Iraqis, and seeing first-hand that those designations as Sunnis and Shiites just means a whole bunch of good natured rivalry, like Democrats and Republicans, or Yankees and Red Sox fans. Needing only the security of the local police. The ones we helped train. You know, like the ones who recently congratulated (and did not arrest) an Iraqi man who proudly murdered his teenage daughter for speaking to a British soldier. Maybe not the kind of “traditional family values” that McCain and supporters like Pastor John Hagee advocate, but a solid example nonetheless of the fundamentalist religious freedom Iraqis can now practice without retribution. Think of the lazy afternoons McCain could spend debating that issue with the locals over a few delicious cups of anise tea.
As you may know, Mr. Burns destroyed his candidacy when he spit out that fish, prompting reporters to note he couldn’t “swallow his own fish story.” But Senator McCain is certainly made of sterner stuff. How about it, Johnny Straight-talker? Ready to enjoy the fruits of democracy that keep springing from the seeds sown by your good friends George Bush and Dick Cheney? Exxxxxcellent!
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Monday, March 24, 2008
Little will be fixed before we fix Congress.
Newsflash: Congress is broken.
Yeah, I know, this is not exactly breaking news, but from the tech/legal/academic front comes an effort to address it. A list of what's broken about Congress would be long, but ultimately most of them comes down to one thing: Fuckin' money.
I know it's simplistic, but...
In essence, he is asking for public pressure to get candidates (incumbents and challengers) to agree to four basic principles:
If you are frustrated that Congress can't seem to get anything meaningful done...look at the fuckin' money.
And sign up at change-congress.org.
Yeah, I know, this is not exactly breaking news, but from the tech/legal/academic front comes an effort to address it. A list of what's broken about Congress would be long, but ultimately most of them comes down to one thing: Fuckin' money.
I know it's simplistic, but...
- It's why we're in Iraq.
- It's why almost nothing has been done by the U.S. on global warming.
- It's why our healthcare system is broken.
- It's why George Fucking Bush got elected.
In essence, he is asking for public pressure to get candidates (incumbents and challengers) to agree to four basic principles:
- promise not to accept PAC or lobbyist contributions;
- commit vote to abolish "earmarks" permanently;
- commit to vote to support public financing of public elections, and;
- commit to compel complete transparency in the functioning of Congress and the government.
(from David Weigel's post in the libertarian rag Reason)I find Carville and Begala's idea to be worth close examination. Think about it. A challenger could raise as much money as he or she wants. The incumbent's campaign would get a check for the same amount from the government. Once elected, a member of Congress would never have to ask anyone for money again.
"The most interesting part, so far, has been Lessig's argument to conservatives for why we need public financing. First, the idea he semi-endorsed is not full public campaign finance. It is public financing for incumbents, an idea he credits to Paul Begala and James Carville. Incumbents would be prohibited from raising any money, at all, period. Their funds will come from the U.S. Treasury and be a function of how much their opponents raise. If Challenger Jones raises $1 million, Congressman Smith gets a check for $800,000.
"Why should conservatives and libertarians support this, given that Lessig accepts a $2 billion estimate of the cost? 'Why is government so big?' Lessig asks, rhetorically. 'Because Congressmen must get elected. The insidious relationship between the desire to regulate and the need for congressmen to get re-elected drives the expansion of government.' Compare that $2 billion cost, Lessig suggests, to a radically shrunken (and less busy) FEC and the diminishment of loopholes and handouts."
If you are frustrated that Congress can't seem to get anything meaningful done...look at the fuckin' money.
And sign up at change-congress.org.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Doesn't The Moon Look Beautiful Tonight, Honey? Hey, Do We Have Any Beer In The Fridge?
If Rolling Rock’s ads are to be believed, guerilla marketing will leave its earthly confines this week when the brewery tries projecting its corporate logo onto the moon’s surface with a laser beam. Is this for real? Is it a hoax? Do they really have the technology to do this thing? Will we need a telescope or can we enjoy the show with the naked eye? And most importantly, can the whole thing be stopped??
I thought the nightmare of high tech advertising was the retina scanning portrayed in “Minority Report,” where people couldn’t go anywhere without being scanned, identified, and then bombarded with personal ads based on their recorded purchase history. But that nightmare is reserved for the future, a bleak future in which a heavily-armed Tom Cruise flies around in a jetpack. The laser beam plan is here and now, and it’s so brilliantly simple. Make the boring old moon a huge cosmic billboard for corporate America to light up nightly with ads for Target or Ford or Pizza Hut (because, if successful, little Rolling Rock will be quickly elbowed to the side by bigger companies with bigger laser beams). Beautiful logos just shining there for the entire hemisphere to enjoy. Is that a “Harvest Moon?” No, it’s a “Harvest of Values Moon,” from your True Value Hardware Store. Sea of Tranquility? That’s what awaits you at America’s Best Western motels.
According to their website, Rolling Rock will also be beaming messages, or has already been beaming messages, requested by pretty much anyone who asks. Here’s one by Joe from Buffalo, New York, that was aimed at the Crater Plinius: “Let’s go Sabres! Buffalo Sabres Rock!“ I am not making this up. Some of history’s greatest poets like Byron, Shelly and Coleridge, have written a beautiful verse or two about the moon. Now we have Joe from Buffalo. Writing on the moon.
America doesn’t own the moon, even though we personally planted a flag on it long ago (in part so that MTV might one day have something cool to use for its logo). And according to Wikipedia, the U.S. and Russia signed a treaty that places the moon under the same jurisdiction as international waters, and restricts its use to peaceful purposes. Unfortunately, a second treaty, one that deals with lunar property rights and forbids one nation from exploiting the moon’s resources, has not been signed.
Maybe it’s time to revisit that issue. I know Congress has other priorities, which is how it should be, but this is a long-term problem in the making. If the Rolling Rock experiment is successful, it’s going to be uber-cool. For about 10 seconds. And then the prospect of never seeing the moon in its natural state again will sink in. And then it’s going to suck.
I don’t know what the mysterious “33” on the Rolling Rock bottle stands for, but for me it’ll represent the number of times I’ll want to kick Ron, Rolling Rock’s congenial marketing spokesperson, in his ass if this thing leads to a permanent orbiting ad campaign.
I thought the nightmare of high tech advertising was the retina scanning portrayed in “Minority Report,” where people couldn’t go anywhere without being scanned, identified, and then bombarded with personal ads based on their recorded purchase history. But that nightmare is reserved for the future, a bleak future in which a heavily-armed Tom Cruise flies around in a jetpack. The laser beam plan is here and now, and it’s so brilliantly simple. Make the boring old moon a huge cosmic billboard for corporate America to light up nightly with ads for Target or Ford or Pizza Hut (because, if successful, little Rolling Rock will be quickly elbowed to the side by bigger companies with bigger laser beams). Beautiful logos just shining there for the entire hemisphere to enjoy. Is that a “Harvest Moon?” No, it’s a “Harvest of Values Moon,” from your True Value Hardware Store. Sea of Tranquility? That’s what awaits you at America’s Best Western motels.
According to their website, Rolling Rock will also be beaming messages, or has already been beaming messages, requested by pretty much anyone who asks. Here’s one by Joe from Buffalo, New York, that was aimed at the Crater Plinius: “Let’s go Sabres! Buffalo Sabres Rock!“ I am not making this up. Some of history’s greatest poets like Byron, Shelly and Coleridge, have written a beautiful verse or two about the moon. Now we have Joe from Buffalo. Writing on the moon.
America doesn’t own the moon, even though we personally planted a flag on it long ago (in part so that MTV might one day have something cool to use for its logo). And according to Wikipedia, the U.S. and Russia signed a treaty that places the moon under the same jurisdiction as international waters, and restricts its use to peaceful purposes. Unfortunately, a second treaty, one that deals with lunar property rights and forbids one nation from exploiting the moon’s resources, has not been signed.
Maybe it’s time to revisit that issue. I know Congress has other priorities, which is how it should be, but this is a long-term problem in the making. If the Rolling Rock experiment is successful, it’s going to be uber-cool. For about 10 seconds. And then the prospect of never seeing the moon in its natural state again will sink in. And then it’s going to suck.
I don’t know what the mysterious “33” on the Rolling Rock bottle stands for, but for me it’ll represent the number of times I’ll want to kick Ron, Rolling Rock’s congenial marketing spokesperson, in his ass if this thing leads to a permanent orbiting ad campaign.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Client 9 Broke Commandment 7. Thank Heaven The Feds Are Here To Restore Moral Order.
I don’t live in New York, so I’ll assume for argument’s sake that the governor’s sex life really is the state’s most pressing issue, just as President Clinton’s sex life was once America’s most pressing issue. But I’m still a little unclear as to what Governor Spitzer did that required his resignation. Did he miss important meetings or fail to sign important legislation because he was too busy getting laid with an extremely over-priced prostitute? ($5K for one woman for one hookup? She looks hot in those photos, but she isn’t exactly Heidi Klum.)
Was he expected to be moral leader? If so, what kind? It may be my twisted sense of morality, but I find it immoral when, for example, a government leader orders a first-strike invasion of some tin pot dictator’s country and baldly lies about having "slam dunk" evidence of weapons of mass destruction and ties with a terrorist group that carried out an attack on U.S. soil that rivaled Pearl Harbor. That’s the kind of thing that provokes yawns from our Puritan elders, most of whom are members of that leader's political party. I have the same apathy: I just can’t work up any outrage over where Elliot Spitzer put his dick.
I’m not saying he didn’t break any laws, but for now it appears he resigned because he got his rocks off with someone who wasn’t his wife. No, I don’t live in New York, but I do live in the U.S., and I’m wondering if prosecuting adultery is really the best use of federal law enforcement resources. If it turns out Spitzer used public funds or campaign money for these trysts, well that’s something entirely different. But that has yet to be determined. With any luck, the FBI will spend thousands of man-hours and millions of tax dollars finding out.
Apparently, it wouldn’t be the first time. I once heard that during the height of the Clinton impeachment, up to 200 FBI agents were investigating the President’s infidelities. I don’t know if that’s really true, but it certainly sounds true. After all, it may have been Clinton’s Justice Department but Congress controlled the money, and that particular Congress had only one priority: Get Bubba. This was uncomfortably close to the time we know that Al-Qaeda members were in the U.S. setting up cells and laying the groundwork for the 9-11 attacks. How many FBI agents were investigating that situation? Were they even aware of that situation, or were they concentrating on other top priorities?
The last time I checked, names like Osama Bin Laden and Whitey Bulger still sit near the top of the FBI’s most wanted list. I guess that’s the equivalent of the “wish list” option you find on shopping websites; you put the diamond necklace and the 60 inch flat-screen on the wish list, but the reality is that you’re going to order the vacuum cleaner. And it’s not going to be the deluxe model you wish you could buy. The Emperors Club VIP is the FBI’s second-rate vacuum cleaner, and catching its madams and Johns is the best they can do for now.
I think Bruce Springsteen summed it up best (as he often does) during a concert I saw in October 2005. The Boss was joking about his recent travels, telling us he’d just spent some time in the Twin Cities partying on a boat with members of the Minnesota Vikings. He was talking about a scandal involving players who had brought prostitutes from other states onto a charter boat for a little more sightseeing than the brochure promised. Bruce was clearly mystified that charges were being brought. “I’m just not sure what those young men are being prosecuted for,” he said. “When did fucking become illegal?”
Was he expected to be moral leader? If so, what kind? It may be my twisted sense of morality, but I find it immoral when, for example, a government leader orders a first-strike invasion of some tin pot dictator’s country and baldly lies about having "slam dunk" evidence of weapons of mass destruction and ties with a terrorist group that carried out an attack on U.S. soil that rivaled Pearl Harbor. That’s the kind of thing that provokes yawns from our Puritan elders, most of whom are members of that leader's political party. I have the same apathy: I just can’t work up any outrage over where Elliot Spitzer put his dick.
I’m not saying he didn’t break any laws, but for now it appears he resigned because he got his rocks off with someone who wasn’t his wife. No, I don’t live in New York, but I do live in the U.S., and I’m wondering if prosecuting adultery is really the best use of federal law enforcement resources. If it turns out Spitzer used public funds or campaign money for these trysts, well that’s something entirely different. But that has yet to be determined. With any luck, the FBI will spend thousands of man-hours and millions of tax dollars finding out.
Apparently, it wouldn’t be the first time. I once heard that during the height of the Clinton impeachment, up to 200 FBI agents were investigating the President’s infidelities. I don’t know if that’s really true, but it certainly sounds true. After all, it may have been Clinton’s Justice Department but Congress controlled the money, and that particular Congress had only one priority: Get Bubba. This was uncomfortably close to the time we know that Al-Qaeda members were in the U.S. setting up cells and laying the groundwork for the 9-11 attacks. How many FBI agents were investigating that situation? Were they even aware of that situation, or were they concentrating on other top priorities?
The last time I checked, names like Osama Bin Laden and Whitey Bulger still sit near the top of the FBI’s most wanted list. I guess that’s the equivalent of the “wish list” option you find on shopping websites; you put the diamond necklace and the 60 inch flat-screen on the wish list, but the reality is that you’re going to order the vacuum cleaner. And it’s not going to be the deluxe model you wish you could buy. The Emperors Club VIP is the FBI’s second-rate vacuum cleaner, and catching its madams and Johns is the best they can do for now.
I think Bruce Springsteen summed it up best (as he often does) during a concert I saw in October 2005. The Boss was joking about his recent travels, telling us he’d just spent some time in the Twin Cities partying on a boat with members of the Minnesota Vikings. He was talking about a scandal involving players who had brought prostitutes from other states onto a charter boat for a little more sightseeing than the brochure promised. Bruce was clearly mystified that charges were being brought. “I’m just not sure what those young men are being prosecuted for,” he said. “When did fucking become illegal?”
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
There's no "us" in US Capitol
Have you noticed how Congress has done nothing to secure the borders of this country yet they have spent untold millions of YOUR tax dollars building the U.S. Capitol property (the Capitol and approximately 16 surrounding city blocks) into a hardened facility with access control and Capitol Police in patrol cars and on foot everywhere? So they won't do what the public demanded for the public, but they'll take care of themselves within that area they fail to make safe. I think that's just about what I'd expect from Congress. Niiiiice.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Not for Nothing....
I have to make this prediction: Obama sweeps all four contests tonight. It is a reach, and I am nervous about the call, but the high levels of turnout just can not be explained by a sudden infatuation with Hillary. There are not that many new women of a certain age, or of labor, and Hispanic votes will not have as much bang-for-the-buck (the Texas system) as they should.
Maybe I just "have a crush on Obama".
Maybe I just "have a crush on Obama".
Friday, February 22, 2008
Huckabee got his Wish
When I heard that McCain is being accused of sleeping with a lobbyist (talk about sleeping with the enemy), the first thing I thought of was what Huckabee said a week or so ago when asked why he is staying in the race despite the statistical impossibility of winning enough delegates to receive the Republican nomination.
CBS reported that Huckabee said, “We understand in terms of the conventional process, barring something could happen along the way [to] the campaign with Senator McCain, or if he doesn’t acquire enough delegates – that’s really the possibility – that it could go to the convention...While it may be mathematically impossible to see it could play out right now, I know this: right now nobody has the 1,191 delegates and therefore it would be a little premature to quit until the game has actually come to a conclusion.”
Hmmm...amazing coincidence, no?
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Words Are Important, Words Matter
I feel that the debate was a bit like marriage counseling. Hillary and Obama really used to like each other... I hate to side with the man. But I have to. Ho hum.
Silly Matters
It's been a long time since I posted - hey, I've been trying to keep my business running, eating to keep warm for the winter, and learning guitar (add f*cking up my relationship, getting drunk, and other things to the list and you'll see why I've been too busy to comment).
There is SO much to say now though.... Look at this photo. I love it. Obama has grown that spine that I've been begging for since Day 1. Makes me so proud. I love that he inhaled. I love that he stands for something. And damn it, I love that he's pointing. He's been my favorite since the start, but now I'm joined by the masses. (Perhaps for the first time ever, I feel like I'm on the winning side. Yay!)
It felt good to vote for him. And that's a first in my 22-odd years.
Moving on. My feathers are a bit rumpled about this NYT article. I mean, if you're going to break a story, then break a story. But if it takes 5 people to report that John McCain is a slimebag - then I'm disappointed in the Times. An unethical politician? A staff trying to advise the guy to remain moral so they can get into office and make a lot of money? That's front page news these days? As if allegations of slimy behavior and political favors from a lifelong politician are front-page newsworthy? Please! The only thing I can see that that article did is give something legitimate for Rush to complain about (a waste of ink)... He could have been complaining about Fidel Castro and pumping up the Cubans in Miami, and instead he got to rail on the Times. With reason.
The Times has been tarnished. Again.
(Look at her face. She doesn't look too supportive, eh?)
More soon. I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.
There is SO much to say now though.... Look at this photo. I love it. Obama has grown that spine that I've been begging for since Day 1. Makes me so proud. I love that he inhaled. I love that he stands for something. And damn it, I love that he's pointing. He's been my favorite since the start, but now I'm joined by the masses. (Perhaps for the first time ever, I feel like I'm on the winning side. Yay!)
It felt good to vote for him. And that's a first in my 22-odd years.
Moving on. My feathers are a bit rumpled about this NYT article. I mean, if you're going to break a story, then break a story. But if it takes 5 people to report that John McCain is a slimebag - then I'm disappointed in the Times. An unethical politician? A staff trying to advise the guy to remain moral so they can get into office and make a lot of money? That's front page news these days? As if allegations of slimy behavior and political favors from a lifelong politician are front-page newsworthy? Please! The only thing I can see that that article did is give something legitimate for Rush to complain about (a waste of ink)... He could have been complaining about Fidel Castro and pumping up the Cubans in Miami, and instead he got to rail on the Times. With reason.
The Times has been tarnished. Again.
(Look at her face. She doesn't look too supportive, eh?)
More soon. I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Eric the Huckabee?
Eric The Half A Bee Lyrics
Artist: Monty Python (Buy Monty Python CDs)
A one... two-- A one... two... three... four...
Half a bee, philosophically,
Must, ipso facto, half not be.
But half the bee has got to be
Vis a vis, its entity. D'you see?
But can a bee be said to be
Or not to be an entire bee
When half the bee is not a bee
Due to some ancient injury?
Singing...
La dee dee, one two three,
Eric the half a bee.
A B C D E F G,
Eric the half a bee.
Is this wretched demi-bee,
Half-asleep upon my knee,
Some freak from a menagerie?
No! It's Eric the half a bee!
Fiddle de dum, Fiddle de dee,
Eric the half a bee.
Ho ho ho, tee hee hee,
Eric the half a bee.
I love this hive, employee-ee,
Bisected accidentally,
One summer afternoon by me,
I love him carnally.
He loves him carnally,
Semi-carnally.
The end.
Cyril Connelly?
No; semi-carnally!
Oh.
Cyril Connelly.
[whistling]
Artist: Monty Python (Buy Monty Python CDs)
A one... two-- A one... two... three... four...
Half a bee, philosophically,
Must, ipso facto, half not be.
But half the bee has got to be
Vis a vis, its entity. D'you see?
But can a bee be said to be
Or not to be an entire bee
When half the bee is not a bee
Due to some ancient injury?
Singing...
La dee dee, one two three,
Eric the half a bee.
A B C D E F G,
Eric the half a bee.
Is this wretched demi-bee,
Half-asleep upon my knee,
Some freak from a menagerie?
No! It's Eric the half a bee!
Fiddle de dum, Fiddle de dee,
Eric the half a bee.
Ho ho ho, tee hee hee,
Eric the half a bee.
I love this hive, employee-ee,
Bisected accidentally,
One summer afternoon by me,
I love him carnally.
He loves him carnally,
Semi-carnally.
The end.
Cyril Connelly?
No; semi-carnally!
Oh.
Cyril Connelly.
[whistling]
Friday, February 8, 2008
According to MSN
Pledged delegates in Barack's favor.
Democrats | Polls
Candidate Delegates
won to date Super delegates committed Delegates needed
Barack Obama 861 0 1,164
Hillary Clinton 855 0 1,170
John Edwards 26 0 1,999
Democrats | Polls
Candidate Delegates
won to date Super delegates committed Delegates needed
Barack Obama 861 0 1,164
Hillary Clinton 855 0 1,170
John Edwards 26 0 1,999
Thursday, February 7, 2008
And the Mormon Tabernacle Choir might have sang the national anthem at every major sporting event. How cool would that have been?
Last week’s Boston Phoenix (Beantown’s equivalent of the Washington City Paper) reported a rumor from unnamed political observers that “large numbers” of Massachusetts Democrats had re-registered in order to vote in Tuesday’s Republican primary. Ostensibly, the goal was to once and for all terminate Mitt Romney’s presidential hopes by piling on votes for the competition and denying the former absentee governor the delegates from his occasional former state. Although it was an inspired idea, as plans hatched out of pure spite often are, it hardly seemed worth the bother. Assuming anyone actually went through it, they were not going to prevent Mitt’s one primary slam dunk. But more to the point, Romney’s chances of winning the nomination were always about as likely as his claim that he “saw” his dad march with Martin Luther King while all three, Little Rom, Big Rom, and MLK, were in different cities.
If Democratic Luddites wanted to bring the Republican presidential machine to a grinding halt, it might have been better to try to disrupt (legally, in a non-Watergate way, of course) the McCain campaign. Derailing the Straight Talk Express™ this fall certainly promises great fun, but having Romney at the top of the GOP’s ticket would have been the real dream. The chance to elect a CEO President who could run the country like a corporation? Well sure, because it’s been working so very well these last seven years. Double Guantanamo? That’ll show the Islamofascists and the Geneva Convention what’s what. Constitutionally ban gay marriage? Let’s face it, if you don’t count divorce, it is the number one threat to traditional marriage, so we’ll need a president who can make it a top priority. Award our highest office to a guy who once stuck his dog in a pet crate and strapped it to the roof of his car for a long family road trip? Sounds like the kind of cruel-but-efficient problem solving we’re going to need to get this country back on track.
Oh, what a campaign it could’ve been.
If Democratic Luddites wanted to bring the Republican presidential machine to a grinding halt, it might have been better to try to disrupt (legally, in a non-Watergate way, of course) the McCain campaign. Derailing the Straight Talk Express™ this fall certainly promises great fun, but having Romney at the top of the GOP’s ticket would have been the real dream. The chance to elect a CEO President who could run the country like a corporation? Well sure, because it’s been working so very well these last seven years. Double Guantanamo? That’ll show the Islamofascists and the Geneva Convention what’s what. Constitutionally ban gay marriage? Let’s face it, if you don’t count divorce, it is the number one threat to traditional marriage, so we’ll need a president who can make it a top priority. Award our highest office to a guy who once stuck his dog in a pet crate and strapped it to the roof of his car for a long family road trip? Sounds like the kind of cruel-but-efficient problem solving we’re going to need to get this country back on track.
Oh, what a campaign it could’ve been.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Will Someone Please Wake Up Nancy Pelosi?
I kept drifting off into a state of unconsciousness last night as I watched the State of the UNion address. That's when I noticed Ms. Nancy. I think she was under the same spell I was. She looked so tranq'ed out that I was waiting for her to lose control of her head and slam it against the desk!
Focusing on this, of course, did not help bring me out of my stupor. Me focusing on Nancy just led to the inevitable half-eyed drooling which led to me passing out in gym clothes with a beer in my hand. So sad.
Mc-Old
OK folks, McCain seems to have pulled off Florida tonight which seems only appropriate since all the old people live there. So answer me this: when are people really going to start talking about how old this guy is? I mean, really. So what if his mother is 95. The dude is a grumpy old man. He should be fishing for walleye on a frozen lake in Wisconsin. Outdoors. In fact, the more I think about it, with that dishy wife of his, he's a cinch for the third in that series, Grumpiest Old Man. He can just yell down into his fishing hole and scare the fish to death with that snarl, temper, and holier-than-though pedantic bullshit he spews on the trail. Or he'll threaten to send them to Iraq for the next hundred years or so. Dick. Old, shriveled-up dick. The only reason he's in the race at all is because everyone else is worse. What a shining achievement. Where is the vaunted Republican party? Where is the feared, revered (even by Democrats) party that now can only come up with an oldy, a wacko preacher, a confused Mormon, a mean liberal, and a truly certifiable nut-job. Sorry you were a POW, man, seriously, but you shouldn't be president. Dick.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
pledged delegates
According to Chuck Todd of CNBC, in South Carolina Obama may pick up 25 to 26 delegates, Clinton 12 to 14, with a handful going to Edwards......
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Democrats | Polls
Candidate Delegates
won to date Super delegates committed Delegates needed
Barack Obama 38 0 1,987
Hillary Clinton 36 0 1,989
John Edwards 18 0 2,007
Joe Biden 0 0 2,025
Chris Dodd 0 0 2,025
Mike Gravel 0 0 2,025
Dennis Kucinich 0 0 2,025
Bill Richardson 0 0 2,025
2,025 delegates needed for nomination
Candidate Delegates
won to date Super delegates committed Delegates needed
Barack Obama 38 0 1,987
Hillary Clinton 36 0 1,989
John Edwards 18 0 2,007
Joe Biden 0 0 2,025
Chris Dodd 0 0 2,025
Mike Gravel 0 0 2,025
Dennis Kucinich 0 0 2,025
Bill Richardson 0 0 2,025
2,025 delegates needed for nomination
Billary's Adventures in Primaryland
By Colbert I. KingSaturday, January 26, 2008; Page A17
"Be what you would seem to be -- or, if you'd like it put more simply -- Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
-- The Duchess in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"
Which gets me to that superficially charming, self-absorbed couple Billary, ever so possessed with an outsize sense of entitlement. What else to call Bill and Hillary Clinton as they partner in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, tag-teaming Barack Obama with alternating blows both above and below the belt? It's an act the twosome plans to take all the way to the White House.
If they make it there -- a big if -- the only unanswered question is where Bill will choose to hang his hat. Will it be in her old space in the East Wing, or will he set up shop in the West Wing?
Smart money is on Billary settling in the Oval Office with "his" and "hers" desks.
Who would have thought, eight years ago, that the country might get back Billary, two people reeking of self-pity and spoiling for fights with anyone who has the temerity to stand in their way?
As with the Queen in "Alice," it's all about them. Witness their attempts to devalue Obama.
But don't point that out to the Clintons. They are always right and see no reason to apologize or take back anything they have said or done. And, as we have seen, Billary will say and do anything to come out ahead.
Item: Hillary's claim to "35 years of experience." Subtract her years spent as first lady of Arkansas and in the White House, and her time working as a lawyer in the Rose Law Firm and in other jobs. As Reason Magazine's Steve Chapman reported in November, Hillary Clinton has "just under eight years of experience in elective office -- one more than John Edwards and four fewer than Obama." And, to boot, Hillary the Feminist has her man to fight her battles.
Item: Bill Clinton's jab at Obama's lack of experience. To elect Obama would be to "roll the dice," sniffed the former president. When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he was governor of a small state, had no foreign policy experience and didn't know how to salute. He got his on-the-job experience in the White House.
CONTINUED 1
Billary's Adventures in PrimarylandWhat else to call Bill and Hillary Clinton as they tag-team Barack Obama with alternating blows above and below the belt?
By Colbert I. KingSaturday, January 26, 2008; Page A17
"Be what you would seem to be -- or, if you'd like it put more simply -- Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."
-- The Duchess in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"
Which gets me to that superficially charming, self-absorbed couple Billary, ever so possessed with an outsize sense of entitlement. What else to call Bill and Hillary Clinton as they partner in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, tag-teaming Barack Obama with alternating blows both above and below the belt? It's an act the twosome plans to take all the way to the White House.
If they make it there -- a big if -- the only unanswered question is where Bill will choose to hang his hat. Will it be in her old space in the East Wing, or will he set up shop in the West Wing?
Smart money is on Billary settling in the Oval Office with "his" and "hers" desks.
Who would have thought, eight years ago, that the country might get back Billary, two people reeking of self-pity and spoiling for fights with anyone who has the temerity to stand in their way?
As with the Queen in "Alice," it's all about them. Witness their attempts to devalue Obama.
But don't point that out to the Clintons. They are always right and see no reason to apologize or take back anything they have said or done. And, as we have seen, Billary will say and do anything to come out ahead.
Item: Hillary's claim to "35 years of experience." Subtract her years spent as first lady of Arkansas and in the White House, and her time working as a lawyer in the Rose Law Firm and in other jobs. As Reason Magazine's Steve Chapman reported in November, Hillary Clinton has "just under eight years of experience in elective office -- one more than John Edwards and four fewer than Obama." And, to boot, Hillary the Feminist has her man to fight her battles.
Item: Bill Clinton's jab at Obama's lack of experience. To elect Obama would be to "roll the dice," sniffed the former president. When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he was governor of a small state, had no foreign policy experience and didn't know how to salute. He got his on-the-job experience in the White House.
CONTINUED 1
Billary's Adventures in PrimarylandWhat else to call Bill and Hillary Clinton as they tag-team Barack Obama with alternating blows above and below the belt?
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Dislike Huckabee for his faith?
Nah, we dislike you because you are a scary bigot (that means you're racist, yo, Mike)... enough comments on the Repubs for now...
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
There's enough rightwing hatred for two
I recently read a memorable and typical comment about Obama by some rightwingnutjob/putz named Debbi Schlussel, who apparently is enlisted on a semi-regular basis by lazy news outlets to, you know, add some “fair and balanced” insight to whatever media story is being glossed over. She posted a column in December on her website wondering why in the Lord Christ’s name we would want Barack Hussein Obama “as President when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?” Well, exactly! The man is the Manchurian Candidate, or Islamabadian Candidate, if you will, and once in the Oval Office those hidden commands hardwired into his brain by his Mullah overlords will come to the fore, directing his every freedom-hating move. Before you know it we’ll all be forced into Muslim re-learning centers, where all memories of bagels, Christmas, Elvis, pork ribs, and bikini-watching weekends on Dewey Beach will be Ajaxed. The only good news is that Target will have sales on burqas and prayer mats every single day.
The fact that people like Debbie Schluss-bag have detailed laughable scenarios like that, out loud and in public without fear of being tackled and strait-jacketed, raises a point I find curious about the Obama campaign. Some in his corner have touted that he's the only one who can bring the country together, the one who will get the Dems and Repubs to hold hands, in a completely non-gay way of course, and work together to restore America’s greatness, unlike Hillary Clinton, whose very name sends the misogynist neocon legions into frothing convulsions. To them she's the Queen of the Harpies, and their knee-jerk hatred of her every breath will stifle any hope of cooperation, resulting in eternal gridlock and making any progress on this nation’s pressing problems impossible. Therefore, the vitriol (I like that word) the rightwing will spew if she takes the nomination should be avoided at all costs.
The Obama Bunch’s theory that unity is not only desirable but essential for real progress is right on the money. Seven chokingly awful years of Bushdom, not to mention the one left to go, has sent America reeling against the ropes. Bringing red and blue-state minded people together may very well be the most important first step to launching an effective restoration. But don’t tell me Obama has the inside track on any of this because of some special immunity to rightwing bile. It was a full year ago that Fox News “reported” the Madrassa rumor, and attributed it to Clinton's campaign. And several conservative commentators, including L’il Debbie cited above, continue to refer to him by his full name. Hussein? Isn’t that the same name as the man who so many Americans still moronically believe helped attack America on 9/11? It sure is.
Would an Obama candidacy provoke less political shit-flinging by the loyal opposition? Maybe. But don't fool yourself: the Democratic nominee in 2008, no matter who it is, will face a staggering amount of opposition, and much of it promises to be of the Swiftboat variety. GOP campaign operatives, schooled in the Tao of Rove, must be wetting themselves from laughter at the level of in-fighting between Clinton and Obama, because it’s pure amateur hour. Wait until they get their crack at the nominee. The lies and stupidity they're cooking up right now will not only be jaw-droppingly unfair but also highly effective with voters, especially the rank-and-file Republicans who cannot bring themselves to research the issues any deeper than what they hear on talk radio. And when it comes to pulling the lever on Election Day, they are the ones who will still opt for the status quo – perpetual war, waste, greed, bigotry, etc. – no matter how much they claim they want “change.” Change?? They fear change, for fuck’s sake. What they want most of all is the continued illusion promised by most GOP candidates that they can have all the services and security the American government can provide without actually having to pay for any of it. So what if that burden remains on them, to one degree or another depending on their tax bracket and the skill of their accountants? A vote for Mitt Romney lets them keep pretending otherwise.
Not every Republican feels that way, of course, and those who think more realistically about patriotism and responsibility, and realize that problems such as pollution, inflation, mortgage defaults, and crumbling stock portfolios are not caused by gay marriage or flag burning, are the very souls Democrats must court, along with independents, if they are to take the White House this fall. And I haven’t seen a poll that shows conclusively that Clinton is incapable of swaying those voters. Nor is there any evidence that a President Clinton II couldn’t reach those people effectively enough to enact real change. Personally, I have no preference between Clinton and Obama (yes, there are still others running for the nomination, but get real), and I’m very disturbed by the occasional nastiness, or pettiness, of their campaigns, because their race should be a win-win for the party (as well as for the progressive movement). Both deserve the nomination. Both promise to make excellent presidents, even without the bar being as low as it currently sits. However, for those who do have a preference and are actively supporting one over the other, I can only hope it’s based on genuine policy differences and not some idea that either one can win the most stubborn conservative hearts and minds, either pre- or post-election. Republicans on the fence and independents are the ones whose support will count when the long, arduous reconstruction begins. But the Schlussels among us are unlikely to ever be turned, because like the scorpion in Forest Whitaker's “Crying Game” parable, it’s in their nature to sting, even if it’s fatally against their best interests. Or ours.
The fact that people like Debbie Schluss-bag have detailed laughable scenarios like that, out loud and in public without fear of being tackled and strait-jacketed, raises a point I find curious about the Obama campaign. Some in his corner have touted that he's the only one who can bring the country together, the one who will get the Dems and Repubs to hold hands, in a completely non-gay way of course, and work together to restore America’s greatness, unlike Hillary Clinton, whose very name sends the misogynist neocon legions into frothing convulsions. To them she's the Queen of the Harpies, and their knee-jerk hatred of her every breath will stifle any hope of cooperation, resulting in eternal gridlock and making any progress on this nation’s pressing problems impossible. Therefore, the vitriol (I like that word) the rightwing will spew if she takes the nomination should be avoided at all costs.
The Obama Bunch’s theory that unity is not only desirable but essential for real progress is right on the money. Seven chokingly awful years of Bushdom, not to mention the one left to go, has sent America reeling against the ropes. Bringing red and blue-state minded people together may very well be the most important first step to launching an effective restoration. But don’t tell me Obama has the inside track on any of this because of some special immunity to rightwing bile. It was a full year ago that Fox News “reported” the Madrassa rumor, and attributed it to Clinton's campaign. And several conservative commentators, including L’il Debbie cited above, continue to refer to him by his full name. Hussein? Isn’t that the same name as the man who so many Americans still moronically believe helped attack America on 9/11? It sure is.
Would an Obama candidacy provoke less political shit-flinging by the loyal opposition? Maybe. But don't fool yourself: the Democratic nominee in 2008, no matter who it is, will face a staggering amount of opposition, and much of it promises to be of the Swiftboat variety. GOP campaign operatives, schooled in the Tao of Rove, must be wetting themselves from laughter at the level of in-fighting between Clinton and Obama, because it’s pure amateur hour. Wait until they get their crack at the nominee. The lies and stupidity they're cooking up right now will not only be jaw-droppingly unfair but also highly effective with voters, especially the rank-and-file Republicans who cannot bring themselves to research the issues any deeper than what they hear on talk radio. And when it comes to pulling the lever on Election Day, they are the ones who will still opt for the status quo – perpetual war, waste, greed, bigotry, etc. – no matter how much they claim they want “change.” Change?? They fear change, for fuck’s sake. What they want most of all is the continued illusion promised by most GOP candidates that they can have all the services and security the American government can provide without actually having to pay for any of it. So what if that burden remains on them, to one degree or another depending on their tax bracket and the skill of their accountants? A vote for Mitt Romney lets them keep pretending otherwise.
Not every Republican feels that way, of course, and those who think more realistically about patriotism and responsibility, and realize that problems such as pollution, inflation, mortgage defaults, and crumbling stock portfolios are not caused by gay marriage or flag burning, are the very souls Democrats must court, along with independents, if they are to take the White House this fall. And I haven’t seen a poll that shows conclusively that Clinton is incapable of swaying those voters. Nor is there any evidence that a President Clinton II couldn’t reach those people effectively enough to enact real change. Personally, I have no preference between Clinton and Obama (yes, there are still others running for the nomination, but get real), and I’m very disturbed by the occasional nastiness, or pettiness, of their campaigns, because their race should be a win-win for the party (as well as for the progressive movement). Both deserve the nomination. Both promise to make excellent presidents, even without the bar being as low as it currently sits. However, for those who do have a preference and are actively supporting one over the other, I can only hope it’s based on genuine policy differences and not some idea that either one can win the most stubborn conservative hearts and minds, either pre- or post-election. Republicans on the fence and independents are the ones whose support will count when the long, arduous reconstruction begins. But the Schlussels among us are unlikely to ever be turned, because like the scorpion in Forest Whitaker's “Crying Game” parable, it’s in their nature to sting, even if it’s fatally against their best interests. Or ours.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Subject: Deanna Favre
In a news conference Deanna Favre announced she will be the starting QB for the Packers this coming Sunday. Deanna asserts that she is qualified to be starting QBbecause she has spent the past 16 years married to Brett while he played QB for the Packers. During this period of time she became familiar with the definition of a corner blitz, and is now completely comfortable with other terminology of the Packersoffense. A survey of Packers fans shows that 50% of those polled supported the move.
Does this sounds idiotic and unbelievable to you? Well, Hillary Clinton makes the same claims as to why she is qualified to be President and 50% of democrats polledagreed. She has never run a City, County, or State.
When told Hillary Clinton has experience because she has 8 years in the white house,Dick Morris stated "so has the pastry chef".
Does this sounds idiotic and unbelievable to you? Well, Hillary Clinton makes the same claims as to why she is qualified to be President and 50% of democrats polledagreed. She has never run a City, County, or State.
When told Hillary Clinton has experience because she has 8 years in the white house,Dick Morris stated "so has the pastry chef".
Hope you've all been saving
I was in a discussion yesterday (with someone who supports Ron Paul, if that gives you a clue on their economic standpoint), and the conversation ended with nods of agreement that we were, indeed, worse off than a third world country. Forget our economic indicators that put us into the ranks of Argentina in its plunge. Forget that we have a political dynasty upon us, and our civil liberties are being infringed upon every day. Forget all of that. Let's just look at our portfolios.
The Federal Reserve, responding to an international stock sell-off and fears about a possible United States recession, cut its benchmark interest rate by three-quarters of a percentage point on Tuesday. The Federal Open Market Committee lowered its target for the federal funds rate on overnight loans between banks to 3.5 percent, from 4.25 percent. The move was unusual both in its scale and its timing: In recent years, the Fed has only rarely acted between scheduled meetings of the committee, and almost always in increments of one-quarter or one-half point. It was the biggest single cut since October 1984. (NYT front page)
Monday, January 21, 2008
The Game Changer - Tata's Nano
In the Nevada debate Hillary Clinton and John Edwards both jumped on Barack Obama for supporting the Energy Bill passed by Congress and signed by George Bush last year. “That’s Dick Cheney’s energy bill” screeched HRC. Edwards joined (smarmed?) in as being against nuclear power. Well, the bill supports many new green technologies and encourages conservation. It also revisits nuclear power plants.
Barack made a mistake in comparing his candidacy to Ronald’s. For one reason, though not relevant here, RWR initiated his successful run for the presidency in the town where three civil rights activists were killed and buried in an earthen dam. There he boasted of “states rights” – an overtly racial and disgusting play for southern votes of a bigoted kind.
But his real error was linking “new” ideas to Reagan. We have known of our serious issue with energy supply since the Seventies. Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter all addressed the issue. Remember Carter declaring the moral equivalent of war in order to secure our energy future? Symbolically he put solar panels on the White House (and other federal government buildings). In a fit of short sightedness, and generational selfishness, our sainted Reagan tore the panels off the White House and unleashed an era of laissez-faire that left issues such as looming shortages of oil to the “free markets”. The worst nine words in the English language, he said, were “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”.
With that our civilization has gone on a thirty year oil binge. This orgy of consumption has led to gyrating, and incorrect, price “signals”. It has left us woefully unprepared in terms of alternatives to oil. Private industry has been unwilling to make the huge investments required while oil prices plummeted. This is where government investment and incentives should have been used.
The United States Federal Government had a role in preparing us for what is coming. It did not. From Reagan, through Bush 41, (yes) Clinton, and, Bush the government has done nothing. It has been business as usual. This is, it seems, what a new Clinton administration may well be judging by her debate answer above.
But we have run out of time for business as usual.
Imagine a standard distribution curve. The world is at the top of that curve in terms of oil production. The world currently “produces” approximately 82.5 million barrels a day of oil. It consumes 81 million barrels. (This all depends on definitions. Some of that production may just be dipping into existing stocks). These are rough numbers. And, now, the world faces declining supplies of oil. It was fun on the way up the slope as supplies outstripped demand. By the way, the US of A, with 2% of the world’s reserves and 5% of its population consumes roughly 25% of that number. We are the world’s largest consumer of oil. It is the basis of our growth and our “American Dream”.
The other side of the curve will be treacherous. As production declines (by as much as 6% per year), demand is set to soar. These declines will be irreversible - picture the standard deviation curve.
Should the Tata Nano (above), which sells for $2,500 US, catch on in India and, should China’s growth in automobile demand continue, there is trouble ahead. These countries have traditionally had little demand for gasoline. Should these two one billion plus populations achieve just a fraction of America’s auto ownership per capita, demand for oil could jump over 25 million barrels a day. In other words, the world would have to find another Middle East to supply the additional demand. This while the largest producing oil fields in the world are almost all in decline.
It -the new Middle East- is not going to happen.
Instead, we are going to be in competition for oil. War?
In that context, Obama’s decision to back the current energy plan, as a first step, is a testament to his judgment.
Hillary is business as usual. Obama represents the possibility of thinking anew. He also has the ability to inspire with words. A sea change is coming, whether we are ready or not, in energy availability. We need someone as president that can motivate our response.
Go Obama!
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Abe Lincoln She Aint
Tis the season for Dems to be against Dems, and I'm joining the bunch ~ with no intelligent commentary of my own, but just a NYT 'cut and paste':
What I don't understand is why Obama won't show her the door. SAY SOMETHIN, YO; smack her down. I'm tired of him leaving me hanging. It's like being on a third date and the guy still hasn't kissed you. (Well, almost like that because really, if the guy hasn't kissed you on the third date, you know he's actually gay. It really has nothing to do with him liking you or not. He's gay. Face it. Move on... )...
So Obama, we want a big phat wet smooch (and for you to pick up the tab). No, really, SHOW ME SOME SPINE, and yes, I'm still your biggest fan.
Really, though, go read Kristof's article, because it's the best ending line ever.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/opinion/20kristof.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
With all the sniping from the Clinton camp about whether Barack Obama has enough experience to make a strong president, consider another presidential candidate who was far more of a novice. He had the gall to run for president even though he had served a single undistinguished term in the House of Representatives, before being hounded back to his district.
That was Abraham Lincoln.
Another successful president scorned any need for years of apprenticeship in Washington, declaring, “The same old experience is not relevant.” He suggested that the most useful training comes not from hanging around the White House and Congress but rather from experience “rooted in the real lives of real people” so that “it will bring real results if we have the courage to change.”
That was Bill Clinton running in 1992 against George H. W. Bush, who was then trumpeting his own experience over the callow youth of Mr. Clinton. That year Mr. Bush aired a television commercial urging voters to keep America “in the hands of experience.”
It might seem obvious that long service in Washington is the best preparation for the White House, but on the contrary, one lesson of American history is that length of experience in national politics is an extremely poor predictor of presidential success.
What I don't understand is why Obama won't show her the door. SAY SOMETHIN, YO; smack her down. I'm tired of him leaving me hanging. It's like being on a third date and the guy still hasn't kissed you. (Well, almost like that because really, if the guy hasn't kissed you on the third date, you know he's actually gay. It really has nothing to do with him liking you or not. He's gay. Face it. Move on... )...
So Obama, we want a big phat wet smooch (and for you to pick up the tab). No, really, SHOW ME SOME SPINE, and yes, I'm still your biggest fan.
Really, though, go read Kristof's article, because it's the best ending line ever.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/opinion/20kristof.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
Saturday, January 19, 2008
This is a big day.
It looks to this writer that HRH HRC (that was my vitriol) has been astute. From the moment in New Hampshire that she implied that the boys were picking on her she has rallied. Women (of a certain age) -according to my quite unscientific poll of asking anyone I meet- have responded to this and do not like the implied sexism of the men attacking Hillary. To me, it explains the surge - not that one- of unexpected voters in New Hampshire.
The Nevada debate was disappointing. Obama and Edwards had to be nice or expect backlash. Her answer that her biggest weakness was being impatient for change was typical Hillary. And groan producing.
She hits hard, will imply anything (through surrogates), will take other campaigns' words as her own, - in short, she is out to win.
The question is: can a nice guy win? Obama is falling into Clinton's trap by not responding to her digs and blows. Instead, her replies to her overtures. I hope it works.
HRC has successfully moved the debate to race, sex, and experience. The choice now seems to be that we must have a female president (its time), can we trust a young man with dreams and words that "shuffles and jives" "did things back in the neighborhood",-we need a white president to implement good for minorities-, and experience (I'm ready from day one, 35 years of experience).
Not that sex or race should matter one whit.
Obama never brought it up.
But on the first: could you imagine the press around the world when the papers announce Obama as our president? The Bush years would wash away. Nay, they might flush away. Our standing as a nation of hope, individual aspiration, and freedom would be ascendant. Also, the very success of MLK, JFK&RFK, LBJ - and so many more- has made it possible for anyone to be president and help anyone else of any and all "colors".
On the second, women have been successful in politics. I know that there is a long way to go. I, for one, really like the third-in-line for the presidency, Nancy Pelosi. She has done a great job. The 13 or 14 senators that happen to be female are great too - except for the last one that ran for president - Liddy Dole (anyone vote for her because she was a woman?). But there is only one "black" senator. I would submit its just as much time for an African American president.
Having said all of the above on race and sex, it really is irrelevant to the policies and the person.
On experience: we have all had 35 years experience. That is not the point. At what? As best I can tell, Barack has more legislative experience (13.5 years) than Hillary (7.5 years) and neither has executive experience.
Solution: Edwards drops out. Then Obama can attack without seeming to "gang up" on a woman.
Prediction: If Bush attacks Iran (a year out of the news will be impossible for him to bear), and the Democratic nominee has not been selected, Hillary will be in big trouble with the left. Her signature on the Kyl/Lieberman amendment will sink her. "If I had known then what I know now........." (I knew then - who did not?)
Go Obama!
The Nevada debate was disappointing. Obama and Edwards had to be nice or expect backlash. Her answer that her biggest weakness was being impatient for change was typical Hillary. And groan producing.
She hits hard, will imply anything (through surrogates), will take other campaigns' words as her own, - in short, she is out to win.
The question is: can a nice guy win? Obama is falling into Clinton's trap by not responding to her digs and blows. Instead, her replies to her overtures. I hope it works.
HRC has successfully moved the debate to race, sex, and experience. The choice now seems to be that we must have a female president (its time), can we trust a young man with dreams and words that "shuffles and jives" "did things back in the neighborhood",-we need a white president to implement good for minorities-, and experience (I'm ready from day one, 35 years of experience).
Not that sex or race should matter one whit.
Obama never brought it up.
But on the first: could you imagine the press around the world when the papers announce Obama as our president? The Bush years would wash away. Nay, they might flush away. Our standing as a nation of hope, individual aspiration, and freedom would be ascendant. Also, the very success of MLK, JFK&RFK, LBJ - and so many more- has made it possible for anyone to be president and help anyone else of any and all "colors".
On the second, women have been successful in politics. I know that there is a long way to go. I, for one, really like the third-in-line for the presidency, Nancy Pelosi. She has done a great job. The 13 or 14 senators that happen to be female are great too - except for the last one that ran for president - Liddy Dole (anyone vote for her because she was a woman?). But there is only one "black" senator. I would submit its just as much time for an African American president.
Having said all of the above on race and sex, it really is irrelevant to the policies and the person.
On experience: we have all had 35 years experience. That is not the point. At what? As best I can tell, Barack has more legislative experience (13.5 years) than Hillary (7.5 years) and neither has executive experience.
Solution: Edwards drops out. Then Obama can attack without seeming to "gang up" on a woman.
Prediction: If Bush attacks Iran (a year out of the news will be impossible for him to bear), and the Democratic nominee has not been selected, Hillary will be in big trouble with the left. Her signature on the Kyl/Lieberman amendment will sink her. "If I had known then what I know now........." (I knew then - who did not?)
Go Obama!
Friday, January 18, 2008
Master Rebaters
It is a damn shame that the Bush-Cheney administration has fucked up so many things that it’s hard to get voters to focus adequately on any of them. Fuck-up Fatigue. Moreover, the problems they’ve created are often so bad that the solutions cause problems of their own. It’s like if you’re morbidly obese, and you do the right thing and start exercising, but then have a heart attack. Start taking troops out of
There’s all this talk about tax rebates. Give the Americans who most need it a few hundred bucks, and the idea is they’ll spend it and stimulate the economy, paying bills or whatever. Or they’ll go to Vegas or
Getting away from Iraq and on to economic issues must certainly help John Edwards, as he has had a consistent and compelling message about poverty in American and the plight of the middle class over this and his previous campaign. Hillary Clinton lately has also been doing well by urging voters to actually vote their economic interests.
HRC keeps talking about all the things she’s going to be ready to do on “Day One” when she becomes president. This is unrealistic. Day One is all parties. Day Two is a little hangover, maybe organizing the desk drawers. Days Three and Four are a Thursday and Friday and you’re still unpacking boxes and finding your way around. Then it’s the weekend. It’s really not until the following Monday that anything is going to happen, right? Get real, Hillary.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
No Vitriol in Ya?
... One of the co-authors just mentioned that he had to muster some vitriol before a beginning post.. PEOPLE, if you need vitriol, JUST LOOK AT THE STOCK MARKET.
The Dow Jones industrial average lost more than 300 points, or nearly 2.5 percent, and skidded to its lowest close since March 16. The Standard & Poor's 500, the index closely watched by market professionals, fell nearly 3 percent.
Are there any damn economists left in that thar administration?
The Dow Jones industrial average lost more than 300 points, or nearly 2.5 percent, and skidded to its lowest close since March 16. The Standard & Poor's 500, the index closely watched by market professionals, fell nearly 3 percent.
Are there any damn economists left in that thar administration?
Welcome
Let me start by being open. (Not that I've ever been accused of not being open, mind you...) Here goes: It would be anything less than fair to say that this is my blog. In fact, this blog is a group effort.... a group effort brought about by the fact that we have so much to say. That, and we'd like to find other people to talk to, hear from, and convince (we all agree with each other). We know we can do this on Match.com, but this seems more effective, cheaper, and we can do it in our underwear, so here we are.
Finally, I'd like to say that it is not our intent to represent a fair or balanced viewpoint here. We are not here to change our minds. We are here to change your minds. Thanks for visiting.
Finally, I'd like to say that it is not our intent to represent a fair or balanced viewpoint here. We are not here to change our minds. We are here to change your minds. Thanks for visiting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)