Came across this article while scanning Sully. Here's a snippet:
"For those who, with good reason, worry about the solvency of transfer programs in an age of population decline, replacement immigration looks like a partial solution, and therefore xenophobia is part of the problem. But for many if not most of the people preoccupied by fertility rates, immigration is no solution at all. The question isn’t about whether the United States, Singapore, or France will be without people in 2100; it’s about what kind of people will populate those countries: what they will look like, what they will teach in their schools, what God they will bow before. Mark Steyn’s America Alone warns that within a few generations Europe will be a Muslim continent. When Pat Buchanan discusses depopulation in The Death of the West, he does not proceed to suggest we replace children of European descent with Mexican laborers. Pro-natalist policies in Quebec, Singapore, and until recently Israel implicitly target a preferred ethnic group, attempting to fill the future with the demographics desired by the current political class."
Megan & Wilkinson & Ross discuss. I haven't reviewed the whole article so I'm reserving criticism of it, but I have a few off the cuff opinions regarding this entire issue. First off, as someone who has read Buchanan's Eurocentric books, I immediately draw away from this topic mostly because the issue skirts the fine line between seriously sociology and xenophobic racism. Yeah, of course I love western style liberalism and trade (which ironically is the reason why we're not exactly eager to have babies), but as a black man when I think the high price minorities have had to pay to create that system I'm at odds whether to encourage it or to let it stand on it's own merits. And really isn't that what the discussion should be about? Any cultural change in America would have to be done relatively slowly, meaning that the more ingrained, and, in my opinion, more important aspects of western liberalism would be the slowest to be overcome, but yet they should be the least likely to go since it's the reason that most people want to come to America in the first place. Indeed it's the reason the founding fathers developed the experiment. So in my eyes I'm less concerned what religion this country takes on, or what music they listen to, or what food they eat, or even what language they speak (of course, as a English teacher, I hope they wait till I die to take away my industry), than in maintaining the laws and traditions that allow them to respect the freedom of others to maintain their independence from the cultural standard.
So basically I guess I'm alright with Mexico taking over America as long as they keep the ACLU. How do you say 'civil liberties' in Spanish?
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
A Piece of Advice to the Lakers
You'd be better off drafting Rocco Mediate for your bench. He showed more heart then your squad did last night. 131-92? Some one came to win, the others came to watch.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
MORE OUTRAGE!!!!
Richard Clarke is outraged that McCain charged Obama with a "September 10th mindset". Grrr, how dare he!
Personally, I'm more outraged that McCain is now left to co-op Rudy Giuliani slogans. Maybe he should take him as VP, because, you know, Rudy's a great campaigner.
Personally, I'm more outraged that McCain is now left to co-op Rudy Giuliani slogans. Maybe he should take him as VP, because, you know, Rudy's a great campaigner.
Insert Snark Here
Israel negotiates peace with Hamas.
What a bunch of wine sipping, The Wire watching, low-fat eating, book reading, college educated, no God worshiping, gay marriage endorsing, pansy liberals.
What a bunch of wine sipping, The Wire watching, low-fat eating, book reading, college educated, no God worshiping, gay marriage endorsing, pansy liberals.
Obama Wants to Give the Poor Money
While McCain wants to make the Rich, richer. Could it be that simple? It just might.
The best way I can read this chart is that Obama seems to have bigger bars than McCain, and bigger is better, so there you go.
Is Guantanamo the New Iraq?
We'd all known that Iraq was becoming Al-Qaida U., but now Guantanamo seems to be the latest breeding ground for terrorists:
"A McClatchy investigation found that instead of confining terrorists, Guantanamo often produced more of them by rounding up common criminals, conscripts, low-level foot soldiers and men with no allegiance to radical Islam — thus inspiring a deep hatred of the United States in them — and then housing them in cells next to radical Islamists."
"A McClatchy investigation found that instead of confining terrorists, Guantanamo often produced more of them by rounding up common criminals, conscripts, low-level foot soldiers and men with no allegiance to radical Islam — thus inspiring a deep hatred of the United States in them — and then housing them in cells next to radical Islamists."
Oil 2.0--A Couple of Questions
1) If this is true, then why the F_CK isn't Bush on the air right now throwing every free cent he's got on it like it's a stripper at Scores?2) If this is true, then why the hell did I first hear about it from friggin Crooks & Liars? Is it a liberal plot? M$M step up your friggin game!
3) If this is true then whoever is working on it better invest in some body armor--stat.
4) If this is true, Al Gore must have an Enviro-boner.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Tiger Wins...Finally
It took 19 holes over regulation, but in a classic match up Woods beat Mediate by a stroke to win the US Open, his 14th major.While I'm sure all the talk will be about Woods (deservingly so), I'd like to give a shout out to Rocco for displaying temerity and grace under fire. It was easy to see why so many other players like golfing with him.
All in all, I can think of worse ways to spend a Monday.
Catch That Tiger...
Oh my. This last weekend has been owned by Tiger, who in the last two days put on a classic show snowballing into a 15 foot birdie putt that sent the US Open into a playoff between him and underdog Rocco Mediate today. For Mediate, it's a win-win situation. As 158th player in the world Rocco's obviously not expected to win, but he was all smiles at the possiblity of playing Tiger for a piece of golf history. And as far as Tiger...well he's just the man:
And About R. Kelly
Kiko (who finally took his blog to the next level) has his faults here. As for me, the pied pisser of R&B deserved jail. Period.
Friday, June 13, 2008
More on Russert...
Erza has some nice words:
"Whatever my issues with Russert's coverage, he was there, week after week, night after night, playing the bulldog against politicians in the way he thought best. It was quite a commitment to American politics, and over the years, gave rise to some remarkable moments. Because I think folks should be remembered for their best work, here's a transcript of his September 2002 interview with Dick Cheney. If the press had been as skeptical and aggressive in the run-up to the war as Russert was on that morning, sitting next to the vice president, we never would have invaded Iraq. But for now, it's going to be strange indeed to turn on the TV on Sundays and not hear his voice. Presumably, he's up somewhere beyond the cloudline, hectoring God about His inconsistencies. "But Lord, in Exodus 6:12, you clearly said...""
It's really weird. I never met the guy, and his style was mostly grating, but I'm really, really miss him. And in all honesty, while he wasn't Cronkite or anything, there's plenty of hacks around who weren't worthy of carrying his jockstrap.
"Whatever my issues with Russert's coverage, he was there, week after week, night after night, playing the bulldog against politicians in the way he thought best. It was quite a commitment to American politics, and over the years, gave rise to some remarkable moments. Because I think folks should be remembered for their best work, here's a transcript of his September 2002 interview with Dick Cheney. If the press had been as skeptical and aggressive in the run-up to the war as Russert was on that morning, sitting next to the vice president, we never would have invaded Iraq. But for now, it's going to be strange indeed to turn on the TV on Sundays and not hear his voice. Presumably, he's up somewhere beyond the cloudline, hectoring God about His inconsistencies. "But Lord, in Exodus 6:12, you clearly said...""
It's really weird. I never met the guy, and his style was mostly grating, but I'm really, really miss him. And in all honesty, while he wasn't Cronkite or anything, there's plenty of hacks around who weren't worthy of carrying his jockstrap.
Damn...
Over the years I've added my two cents to the criticism of the host of Meet The Press, and I've been cruel. And yet with all of his faults I can add that he's always seemed to truly love the field that he's worked in, and brought vitality and energy to what can often be a dull subject. As a character and an icon, he will be missed by yours truly.
A Policy All Men Can Rally Behind
In an obvious ploy to get me to vote for him, NY Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Republican, is endorsing a bill to make it easier for hot women to come to the US.Yes we can.
UPDATE: I made a mistake in saying that Weiner was a Republican. He is a Democrat which is further proof that we're all morally bankrupt perverts. Course with a name like 'Weiner' I should have known. Thanks Cros.
Not Hyped for The Hulk
The critics are apathetic and so am I. I don't get too amped about The Hulk in the same way I don't get amped about Superman. Why? Because you're dealing with two 'superheros' that are more super than hero. I mean really? Who the hell challenges the Hulk? Hell, he doesn't even have a kryptonite of his own? His biggest weakness? His girlfriend, Betsy Ross, who, let's face it, isn't all that hot. His biggest foe? The Abomination who's really just The Hulk with alot of spikes. Hell, at least Bizzaro said really stupid (yet funny) stuff. You wanna see The Hulk and The Abomination fight? Might was well watch a Kimbo Slice backyard brawl.
The really kick in the pants is that the real drama of The Hulk's character lies in his psychology, that battle between his superego (Banner) and his Id (Hulk), and that's why I really didn't mind Ang Lee's adaptation. At least it was honest. But psychological dramas aren't exactly the stuff of summer blockbusters and that's why The Hulk will always be a loser film. Ultimately people will come in to watch The Hulk tear shit up, but being that there's no challenge it'll be 90 minutes of violent masturbation.
Collateral Damage
Looks like the Jim Johnson story might have teeth, but they won't be ripping Obama . Instead the hounds of war have found a couple of other Democrats to gnaw on:
"Senators Christopher Dodd, Democrat from Connecticut and chairman of the Banking Committee, and Kent Conrad, Democrat from North Dakota, chairman of the Budget Committee and a member of the Finance Committee, refinanced properties through Countrywide’s “V.I.P.” program in 2003 and 2004, according to company documents and emails and a former employee familiar with the loans."
My God, who would have ever thought that people in public office might recieve graft! Let the outrage begin.
What are you outraged by today?
"Senators Christopher Dodd, Democrat from Connecticut and chairman of the Banking Committee, and Kent Conrad, Democrat from North Dakota, chairman of the Budget Committee and a member of the Finance Committee, refinanced properties through Countrywide’s “V.I.P.” program in 2003 and 2004, according to company documents and emails and a former employee familiar with the loans."
My God, who would have ever thought that people in public office might recieve graft! Let the outrage begin.
What are you outraged by today?
Lie of the Day
Let's review:
1) Obama is not a Muslim
2) The CIA did not cause 9/11
3) The Chinese are not drilling for oil off of Cuba. No matter what Dick Cheney says.
1) Obama is not a Muslim
2) The CIA did not cause 9/11
3) The Chinese are not drilling for oil off of Cuba. No matter what Dick Cheney says.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Ugly
Tiger makes 2 double bogeys and scores a 72 in the opening round of the US Open. Mickelson sucks only a little less with his 71.
Good news for Tiger fans? The leader is only 5 shots ahead.
Good news for Tiger fans? The leader is only 5 shots ahead.
Honestly, I Never Even Thought of it That Way
From Cros; how Obama's African popularity could change the region should he become president:
"Sen. Obama is a superstar in Africa, and should he become President, his popularity in Africa will continue to skyrocket, and his first official visit to the continent will be huge. I wonder what effect it would have if he, while speaking to a stadium full of thousands of people, in a speech broadcast worldwide, called out dictators like Mugabe, Omar Al-Bashir of the Sudan, and lesser known but nearly as bad apples such as Eritrea's Isayas Afewerki or Equitorial Guinea's Teodoro Obiang Nguema, and told them, and more importantly, told Africans and African leaders in no uncertain terms that they were hurting their nations and their continent, and that it was past time for them to go. Obama's used strong words when speaking about Mugabe before, but speaking as the President would go a lot farther than speaking as a Senator from Illinois.
"What could such a speech provoke? Could it provoke open revolt? Maybe in Zimbabwe, which is getting close to that already, less likely in a place like Eritrea where the government has more of a stranglehold on the media. Hopefully it would first provoke leaders to finally tell Mugabe that the game was up, and his best option would be to hightail it out of Zimbabwe as fast as possible.
"Whether or not Obama would make such a bold statement is, of course, an open question. As President, he might just use his first trip to Africa to offer praise to reformists and promise bucketloads of foreign aid - less controversial stances that wouldn't jeopardize his popularity. It is apparently asking a lot of a President to take such a stance - after all, nobody believes President Bush is terribly shy about confronting dictators, and he, despite being fairly well-liked in Africa, hasn't confronted Mugabe and his ilk the way one might expect. But regardless of how you feel about his stance on any other issue, the truth is Obama would start his Presidency with influence in Africa that John McCain (or even Bush, for that matter) will never be able to match.
"And if you thought he'd really do it, you'd have to think a little harder about just maybe even voting for him."
Props to Cros on this one, and for discussing Mugabe and other global issues on his site. I've been so immersed in seeing Obama through the lens of what he can do for the US as president (including pulling us out of Iraq) that I really haven't thought about what kind of change his presidency could make in Africa (or the rest of the world for that matter) other than perception. Of course a part of this has to do with the little coverage Africa gets in the M$M, and another part has to do with liberal reluctance to think about foreign intervention post-Bush, but the argument Cros makes about Obama's potential soft power is awfully persuasive if effecting change in Africa is an issue on your radar. I can't seeing this argument playing much of a role in the general election, but if Clooney, Cheadle, the Pitts and the Celeb crew endorsed him and phrased their argument for him in this way it might snowball and have the added bonus of forcing a President Obama to take more direct and sincere action in Africa other than just, 'offer praise to reformists and promise bucketloads of foreign aid'.
You know, the more I think about it, the more I feel that his presidency would affect an entire paradigm shift between Africa and other non-white countries and the West. Much as Obama's candidacy threatens to destroy much of the dynamic of race politics in America, so could it potentially threaten the racial and post-imperalist politics that helps maintain dictatorships across the globe, from Mugabe to Chavez. But let me not jump the shark here; needless to say Cros has given me alot to think about.
"Sen. Obama is a superstar in Africa, and should he become President, his popularity in Africa will continue to skyrocket, and his first official visit to the continent will be huge. I wonder what effect it would have if he, while speaking to a stadium full of thousands of people, in a speech broadcast worldwide, called out dictators like Mugabe, Omar Al-Bashir of the Sudan, and lesser known but nearly as bad apples such as Eritrea's Isayas Afewerki or Equitorial Guinea's Teodoro Obiang Nguema, and told them, and more importantly, told Africans and African leaders in no uncertain terms that they were hurting their nations and their continent, and that it was past time for them to go. Obama's used strong words when speaking about Mugabe before, but speaking as the President would go a lot farther than speaking as a Senator from Illinois.
"What could such a speech provoke? Could it provoke open revolt? Maybe in Zimbabwe, which is getting close to that already, less likely in a place like Eritrea where the government has more of a stranglehold on the media. Hopefully it would first provoke leaders to finally tell Mugabe that the game was up, and his best option would be to hightail it out of Zimbabwe as fast as possible.
"Whether or not Obama would make such a bold statement is, of course, an open question. As President, he might just use his first trip to Africa to offer praise to reformists and promise bucketloads of foreign aid - less controversial stances that wouldn't jeopardize his popularity. It is apparently asking a lot of a President to take such a stance - after all, nobody believes President Bush is terribly shy about confronting dictators, and he, despite being fairly well-liked in Africa, hasn't confronted Mugabe and his ilk the way one might expect. But regardless of how you feel about his stance on any other issue, the truth is Obama would start his Presidency with influence in Africa that John McCain (or even Bush, for that matter) will never be able to match.
"And if you thought he'd really do it, you'd have to think a little harder about just maybe even voting for him."
Props to Cros on this one, and for discussing Mugabe and other global issues on his site. I've been so immersed in seeing Obama through the lens of what he can do for the US as president (including pulling us out of Iraq) that I really haven't thought about what kind of change his presidency could make in Africa (or the rest of the world for that matter) other than perception. Of course a part of this has to do with the little coverage Africa gets in the M$M, and another part has to do with liberal reluctance to think about foreign intervention post-Bush, but the argument Cros makes about Obama's potential soft power is awfully persuasive if effecting change in Africa is an issue on your radar. I can't seeing this argument playing much of a role in the general election, but if Clooney, Cheadle, the Pitts and the Celeb crew endorsed him and phrased their argument for him in this way it might snowball and have the added bonus of forcing a President Obama to take more direct and sincere action in Africa other than just, 'offer praise to reformists and promise bucketloads of foreign aid'.
You know, the more I think about it, the more I feel that his presidency would affect an entire paradigm shift between Africa and other non-white countries and the West. Much as Obama's candidacy threatens to destroy much of the dynamic of race politics in America, so could it potentially threaten the racial and post-imperalist politics that helps maintain dictatorships across the globe, from Mugabe to Chavez. But let me not jump the shark here; needless to say Cros has given me alot to think about.
Follow Up on Webb
I mentioned this story about Webb's 'affinity' for the Conferdacy, but Fallows thinks it's more about an 'affinity' for being a solider:
"By the way, here is what the inscription at the Confederate Memorial says, in words Webb quoted in his 1990 speech (courtesy of Alex Massie):
"NOT FOR FAME OR REWARD, NOT FOR PLACE OR FOR RANK, NOT LURED BY AMBITION OR GOADED BY NECESSITY, BUT IN SIMPLE OBEDIENCE TO DUTY AS THEY UNDERSTOOD IT, THESE MEN SUFFERED ALL, SACRIFICED ALL, DARED ALL, AND DIED.
"Perhaps this "has the potential" to alienate people? If so, they're not understanding what it says. As Webb put it at the time, "this simple sentence spoke for all soldiers in all wars, men who must always trust their lives to the judgment of their leaders.." The cause of the Confederacy was unjust and deserved defeat. That didn't make all its soldiers bad."
In a way I think that beyond being a foil against McCain, it's this attitude of Webb's that can really benefit the Democratic party. As MY brings up in his latest book, historically (or at least in recent history) the GOP has been the party of defense, and Democrats the party of domestic issues. But I've always felt that the GOP has been the party of the military-industrial complex while the Democrats are the party of the solider (just like they're supposed to be the party of any blue collar worker). Yet somehow that phrasing of the issue has gotten lost in our debate. Webb is just the right man to shift that paradigm.
"By the way, here is what the inscription at the Confederate Memorial says, in words Webb quoted in his 1990 speech (courtesy of Alex Massie):
"NOT FOR FAME OR REWARD, NOT FOR PLACE OR FOR RANK, NOT LURED BY AMBITION OR GOADED BY NECESSITY, BUT IN SIMPLE OBEDIENCE TO DUTY AS THEY UNDERSTOOD IT, THESE MEN SUFFERED ALL, SACRIFICED ALL, DARED ALL, AND DIED.
"Perhaps this "has the potential" to alienate people? If so, they're not understanding what it says. As Webb put it at the time, "this simple sentence spoke for all soldiers in all wars, men who must always trust their lives to the judgment of their leaders.." The cause of the Confederacy was unjust and deserved defeat. That didn't make all its soldiers bad."
In a way I think that beyond being a foil against McCain, it's this attitude of Webb's that can really benefit the Democratic party. As MY brings up in his latest book, historically (or at least in recent history) the GOP has been the party of defense, and Democrats the party of domestic issues. But I've always felt that the GOP has been the party of the military-industrial complex while the Democrats are the party of the solider (just like they're supposed to be the party of any blue collar worker). Yet somehow that phrasing of the issue has gotten lost in our debate. Webb is just the right man to shift that paradigm.
If You're A Real Radiohead Fan...
...and not just some dude who only knows 'Creep' when they're sitting at a bar crying into their beer at 4am, then this will be sheer genius.
If you're not, then this will be complete liberal elite BS.
Big Ideas (don't get any) from James Houston on Vimeo.
If you're not, then this will be complete liberal elite BS.
Big Ideas (don't get any) from James Houston on Vimeo.
Somewhere Between The Two
So Jim Johnson stepped down. Personally, I was more upset when Sam Power was forced out of her post, but my opinion and a metrocard might get you on the train (or thrown off). However, if I rate my thoughts between two real bloggers I think I'm somewhere in the middle. From Sully:
"Ambers:
If Obama's choice of Johnson was a mistake in the first place, then that's one thing. But if the campaign doesn't believe they made an error -- and they don't -- why give the Republicans a trophy head?
John Cole:
If prior to reading this post, you had no clue who Jim Johnson was, don’t worry, you are not alone. In fact, if you polled the country, about half of them would ask if you were talking about the former Cowboys coach, the other half would have no clue. Which is to say this is a story about nothing."
It's not quite a story about nothing, and yet its not that important either. Look, McCain at this point is looking for anything to blunt Obama's momentum, and the Johnson story was a great foil against Obama's 'outside the beltway' image and they pushed it enough to get Johnson to step down. Ambers does make the point though that he really didn't have to--and in a way Obama conceded the point. If the question is about lobbyists working on campaigns then McCain should be under much more scrutiny, considering some of his friends, but it doesn't seem that Obama wants to mix it up with him yet. I'm always down for a good fight, but considering Team Obama's track record, who am I to argue with their judgement?
"Ambers:
If Obama's choice of Johnson was a mistake in the first place, then that's one thing. But if the campaign doesn't believe they made an error -- and they don't -- why give the Republicans a trophy head?
John Cole:
If prior to reading this post, you had no clue who Jim Johnson was, don’t worry, you are not alone. In fact, if you polled the country, about half of them would ask if you were talking about the former Cowboys coach, the other half would have no clue. Which is to say this is a story about nothing."
It's not quite a story about nothing, and yet its not that important either. Look, McCain at this point is looking for anything to blunt Obama's momentum, and the Johnson story was a great foil against Obama's 'outside the beltway' image and they pushed it enough to get Johnson to step down. Ambers does make the point though that he really didn't have to--and in a way Obama conceded the point. If the question is about lobbyists working on campaigns then McCain should be under much more scrutiny, considering some of his friends, but it doesn't seem that Obama wants to mix it up with him yet. I'm always down for a good fight, but considering Team Obama's track record, who am I to argue with their judgement?
Excellent News...If You're a Democrat
This NBC poll:
"Among all women, Sen. Obama has a big advantage: 52% to 33% over Sen. McCain. Among all men, Sen. McCain's lead is 49% to 41%, less than half his edge among white men only. Sen. Obama leads among independent voters, 41% to 36%."
This is even better:
"By 62% to 28%, Hispanic voters support Sen. Obama. "That does not bode well for Republicans" in the Southwest, the Republican pollster added, in swing states such as Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado, where Hispanic voters are numerous enough to tip the result. Sen. McCain, who comes from a state with a large Hispanic population and has favored liberalizing policies toward illegal immigrants, has hopes of matching Mr. Bush's record of winning more than 40% of Hispanic voters."
And only because I'm a bitter, vindictive bastard:
"To Sen. Obama's advantage, the Journal/NBC poll results seem to debunk two widely held conclusions from the Democrats' nomination contest. Exit polls of Democratic voters suggested many of Sen. Clinton's supporters wouldn't vote for Sen. Obama in November if he is the Democratic nominee. In particular, pro-Clinton Hispanics were generally thought to be cold to Sen. Obama.
"In the poll, however, voters who chose Sen. Clinton in the primaries said by a 3-to-1 ratio, 61% to 19%, that they plan to vote for Sen. Obama over Sen. McCain in November."
What do you say about that Nelson?
"Among all women, Sen. Obama has a big advantage: 52% to 33% over Sen. McCain. Among all men, Sen. McCain's lead is 49% to 41%, less than half his edge among white men only. Sen. Obama leads among independent voters, 41% to 36%."
This is even better:
"By 62% to 28%, Hispanic voters support Sen. Obama. "That does not bode well for Republicans" in the Southwest, the Republican pollster added, in swing states such as Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado, where Hispanic voters are numerous enough to tip the result. Sen. McCain, who comes from a state with a large Hispanic population and has favored liberalizing policies toward illegal immigrants, has hopes of matching Mr. Bush's record of winning more than 40% of Hispanic voters."
And only because I'm a bitter, vindictive bastard:
"To Sen. Obama's advantage, the Journal/NBC poll results seem to debunk two widely held conclusions from the Democrats' nomination contest. Exit polls of Democratic voters suggested many of Sen. Clinton's supporters wouldn't vote for Sen. Obama in November if he is the Democratic nominee. In particular, pro-Clinton Hispanics were generally thought to be cold to Sen. Obama.
"In the poll, however, voters who chose Sen. Clinton in the primaries said by a 3-to-1 ratio, 61% to 19%, that they plan to vote for Sen. Obama over Sen. McCain in November."
What do you say about that Nelson?
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Tutu Stands Up...
...against Mugabe. That's good news, cause crap with him has really gotten out of hand.
What about you Mandela?
PS: ...hate...agreeing with...grrr...Hitchens....
What about you Mandela?
PS: ...hate...agreeing with...grrr...Hitchens....
I'm All About This
Impeaching Bush:
"Ohio Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich spent some 290 minutes on the House floor Monday, reading Articles of Impeachment against President George Bush. Not that you would notice, as there was a virtual media blackout on the story, but Keith Olbermann ran with it right out of the gate on Tuesday’s Countdown."
Maybe if we did at least hold hearings we could get past this discussion. Sorry if it takes up too much of your precious time Glenn.
"Ohio Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich spent some 290 minutes on the House floor Monday, reading Articles of Impeachment against President George Bush. Not that you would notice, as there was a virtual media blackout on the story, but Keith Olbermann ran with it right out of the gate on Tuesday’s Countdown."
Maybe if we did at least hold hearings we could get past this discussion. Sorry if it takes up too much of your precious time Glenn.
More Webb Complications?
Smell the irony:
"Senator Jim Webb, touted by many as a vice presidential candidate who would help shore up Barack Obama with Southerners and those uncomfortable with his lack of national security experience, has an “affinity” for the Confederacy..."
I agree with Joyner's ideological point here, which to me would allow the coupling of Obama and Webb:
"In a complex world, one can simultaneously admire Robert E. Lee’s character, J.E.B. Stuart’s generalship, and the courage of those who charged up Little Round Top while damning the institution of slavery."
Plus it would make a great narrative to boot.
"Senator Jim Webb, touted by many as a vice presidential candidate who would help shore up Barack Obama with Southerners and those uncomfortable with his lack of national security experience, has an “affinity” for the Confederacy..."
I agree with Joyner's ideological point here, which to me would allow the coupling of Obama and Webb:
"In a complex world, one can simultaneously admire Robert E. Lee’s character, J.E.B. Stuart’s generalship, and the courage of those who charged up Little Round Top while damning the institution of slavery."
Plus it would make a great narrative to boot.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
What A Surprise
Senate GOP blocks windfall tax on oil companies:
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the record gasoline prices that have the nation fuming.
"GOP senators shoved aside the Democratic proposal, arguing that punishing Big Oil won't do a thing to lower the $4-a-gallon-price of gasoline that is sending economic waves across the country. High prices at the pump are threatening everything from summer vacations to Meals on Wheels deliveries to the elderly."
You know, this probably would have been just as useless as the holiday tax that Clinton and McCain endorsed, but jezz wouldn't it have been nice to nip at big oil for a change? I mean throw a dog a bone will ya?
On second thought, if the windfall tax had of been put in place then I'm sure the oil companies would have just raised up prices to offset that, so basicly we're screwed either way.
Unless you ride a segway that is.
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the record gasoline prices that have the nation fuming.
"GOP senators shoved aside the Democratic proposal, arguing that punishing Big Oil won't do a thing to lower the $4-a-gallon-price of gasoline that is sending economic waves across the country. High prices at the pump are threatening everything from summer vacations to Meals on Wheels deliveries to the elderly."
You know, this probably would have been just as useless as the holiday tax that Clinton and McCain endorsed, but jezz wouldn't it have been nice to nip at big oil for a change? I mean throw a dog a bone will ya?
On second thought, if the windfall tax had of been put in place then I'm sure the oil companies would have just raised up prices to offset that, so basicly we're screwed either way.
Unless you ride a segway that is.
Finally--A Drink For Heroin Addicts!
Drank:
"At first I thought this was some fake product that someone came up with, but apparently it's fairly popular in the south (coming to other parts of the country later this year). It's called Drank, and it takes a different track than all of the energy drinks that are on the market now. In fact, it has the opposite result: it makes you relaxed!
"The press release says that it's made with melatonin, rose hips, and valerian, and is being pushed as the "anti-energy drink." The slogan is "slow your roll," and the company encourages people to drink it for "extreme relaxation" and to have a "stress-free state of mind."
Note though, drinking this and smoking pot will lead you to take a Rumpelstiltskin type nap.
Hat Tip: Kiko
"At first I thought this was some fake product that someone came up with, but apparently it's fairly popular in the south (coming to other parts of the country later this year). It's called Drank, and it takes a different track than all of the energy drinks that are on the market now. In fact, it has the opposite result: it makes you relaxed!
"The press release says that it's made with melatonin, rose hips, and valerian, and is being pushed as the "anti-energy drink." The slogan is "slow your roll," and the company encourages people to drink it for "extreme relaxation" and to have a "stress-free state of mind."
Note though, drinking this and smoking pot will lead you to take a Rumpelstiltskin type nap.
Hat Tip: Kiko
Who's the Funniest?
You know, after watching this I'm starting to think that between Stiller and Black, Robert Downey Jr. is the funniest guy in the trio. Stiller is at his best in full length movies playing as zany characters, and Black...well I think he's completely overrated (Tenacious D? The D must be for Dull). But Downey totally kills.
"That's tight."
"That's tight."
Try Thinking
Sanchez is on the right track here:
[In regards to the supposite Michelle Obama "Whitey rant"] "The most remarkable thing about this rumor has always been that it somehow kept lurching along like some George Romero extra despite being utterly, completely, I’ve-got-a-Nigerian-bank-account-to-share-with-you unbelievable in about twelve different ways. The Ivy League educated wife of a half-white state senator (Hi Grandma! Hi Grandpa!), speaking fully three decades after the release of Cleopatra Jones, does a 30 minute rant about “whitey” with cameras rolling? Is there any element of this that doesn’t positively shriek “bullshit”? I have trouble fathoming how far gone down the ideological rabbit hole you’d have to be to even listen to it through once without giggling, never mind find it “believable”.
"Update: You know, that’s probably backward. What I should be asking is: What exactly have we heard out of Michelle Obama that makes this believable? There was her Princeton dissertation on race and assimilation, which folks tried desperately to mine for something controversial without much success. There was some utterly unremarkable Democratic boilerplate about “moving bars” that pundits like Hugh Hewitt made a profoundly lame attempt to cast as bitter and anti-American. But what has she said that makes it plausible that she’s actually a modern Malcolm XX?"
"Surveying some of these reactions, looks as though a lot of people regard standard leftish rhetoric that would pass without comment in a John Edwards speech as angry and threatening coming from a black woman. Which does suggest another possibility: Suppose there is some kernel of fact, some ur-tape, back at the source of this game of Chinese whispers. (Can one still say “Chinese whispers”?) If there is, I’ll wager that it consists of some uncomfortable but uncontroversial (or at any rate, true) observations about the history of race in America, in which the word “whitey” does not appear, but which nevertheless sound like racist hate speech to some observers. The reactions to Jeremiah Wright’s inflammatory sermons have, I think, shown that there are plenty of people out there who, above and beyond their antipathy to his incendiary mode of delivery, get extraordinarily touchy about any reminder that this country has a long and relatively recent history of treating black people badly."
Even obviously false rumors can gain traction if they validate someone's world view. The only way to combat that is by thinking, and not just about the rumor, but about your world view. As someone against McCain I could easily fall into thinking that that crap out there about the Viet Cong putting a chip in his head is true. But I think I can still be opposed to McCain and be intelligent at the same time. In fact I'd like to think that being rational is more important that who wins the presidency, but maybe that's just me.
[In regards to the supposite Michelle Obama "Whitey rant"] "The most remarkable thing about this rumor has always been that it somehow kept lurching along like some George Romero extra despite being utterly, completely, I’ve-got-a-Nigerian-bank-account-to-share-with-you unbelievable in about twelve different ways. The Ivy League educated wife of a half-white state senator (Hi Grandma! Hi Grandpa!), speaking fully three decades after the release of Cleopatra Jones, does a 30 minute rant about “whitey” with cameras rolling? Is there any element of this that doesn’t positively shriek “bullshit”? I have trouble fathoming how far gone down the ideological rabbit hole you’d have to be to even listen to it through once without giggling, never mind find it “believable”.
"Update: You know, that’s probably backward. What I should be asking is: What exactly have we heard out of Michelle Obama that makes this believable? There was her Princeton dissertation on race and assimilation, which folks tried desperately to mine for something controversial without much success. There was some utterly unremarkable Democratic boilerplate about “moving bars” that pundits like Hugh Hewitt made a profoundly lame attempt to cast as bitter and anti-American. But what has she said that makes it plausible that she’s actually a modern Malcolm XX?"
"Surveying some of these reactions, looks as though a lot of people regard standard leftish rhetoric that would pass without comment in a John Edwards speech as angry and threatening coming from a black woman. Which does suggest another possibility: Suppose there is some kernel of fact, some ur-tape, back at the source of this game of Chinese whispers. (Can one still say “Chinese whispers”?) If there is, I’ll wager that it consists of some uncomfortable but uncontroversial (or at any rate, true) observations about the history of race in America, in which the word “whitey” does not appear, but which nevertheless sound like racist hate speech to some observers. The reactions to Jeremiah Wright’s inflammatory sermons have, I think, shown that there are plenty of people out there who, above and beyond their antipathy to his incendiary mode of delivery, get extraordinarily touchy about any reminder that this country has a long and relatively recent history of treating black people badly."
Even obviously false rumors can gain traction if they validate someone's world view. The only way to combat that is by thinking, and not just about the rumor, but about your world view. As someone against McCain I could easily fall into thinking that that crap out there about the Viet Cong putting a chip in his head is true. But I think I can still be opposed to McCain and be intelligent at the same time. In fact I'd like to think that being rational is more important that who wins the presidency, but maybe that's just me.
Finally!
Chess has finally moved up to the next level. Wu-Chess is here.
Cue Mystery of Chessboxing:
Tip: Sanchez
Cue Mystery of Chessboxing:
Tip: Sanchez
Veepstakes Line Up
Cros does the work for me. Though I'm still hoping that Obama chooses Webb.
Oh, and I noticed you didn't mention John "Tool" Edwards. An oversight Cros? :)
Oh, and I noticed you didn't mention John "Tool" Edwards. An oversight Cros? :)
Friday, June 06, 2008
RIP RFK
I forgot to mention that yesterday was the 40th anniversary of Robert Francis Kennedy's assassination. To honor him I figured I'd post this video, a tape of the speech he gave the night Martin Luther King Jr. was killed. I teach this speech in my English class and every time I read it, or hear it I get goosebumps. It reminds you that in your darkest hour the power of hope will overcome all. Enjoy:
Hat Tip: Swampland
Hat Tip: Swampland
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Clinton's Selfishness
Well Sully's been vindicated. All of his rhetoric over the months about Hillary's sociopathic tenancies has been proved by Hillary's tasteless, counterproductive, and creepy speech. Did she really encourage her supporters to continue campaigning for her and not support Obama even though, by just about any measure, he's won the race? Yes she did. What I can't get my head around is how third world this seems, as if she's taken a page out of some dictator's playbook. She is really hoping some one kills him and that's a new low in American politics, even during the GWB era.
Here's a few comments from around the web on her speech last night. My favorite quote was from Dowd:
"Whoever said that after denial comes acceptance hadn’t met the Clintons."
Here's a few comments from around the web on her speech last night. My favorite quote was from Dowd:
"Whoever said that after denial comes acceptance hadn’t met the Clintons."
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
A Re-cap
So what did we learn tonight? Well, we discovered that McCain is boring, Hillary Clinton is about as classy as a gangster Moll and Obama is the first black Democratic nominee for President of the United States.
All in all it was a good night.
Told Ya So
Hillary Camp: AP is wrong.
Two things are true in life: A) Freddy Kruger never dies. B) Hillary Clinton never quits. And both give you nightmares.
Two things are true in life: A) Freddy Kruger never dies. B) Hillary Clinton never quits. And both give you nightmares.
Could It Be True?
Is Hillary Clinton going to concede? DOOOONNNN'TTT YOOOOOUUUU BEEEELIEVE IT!
Anything to post up Tom & Jerry cartoons.
Anything to post up Tom & Jerry cartoons.
Story of the Day
NASA findings were politicized:
"An investigation by the NASA inspector general found that political appointees in the space agency's public affairs office worked to control and distort public accounts of its researchers' findings about climate change for at least two years, the inspector general's office said yesterday."
This should be a bigger story than it will undoubtedly be. NASA is supposed to be America's premiere agency in terms of scientific investigation, this investigation inherently linked to National Security (as anyone who ever saw Armageddon will tell you). Politicizing their findings and covering up the truth puts the US in danger. Perhaps not as much as lying us into war, but you get the drift.
PS: James Hansen WAS right.
"An investigation by the NASA inspector general found that political appointees in the space agency's public affairs office worked to control and distort public accounts of its researchers' findings about climate change for at least two years, the inspector general's office said yesterday."
This should be a bigger story than it will undoubtedly be. NASA is supposed to be America's premiere agency in terms of scientific investigation, this investigation inherently linked to National Security (as anyone who ever saw Armageddon will tell you). Politicizing their findings and covering up the truth puts the US in danger. Perhaps not as much as lying us into war, but you get the drift.
PS: James Hansen WAS right.
So Now He's Too Dumb
AL on the latest Obama narrative.
Ed. Note: I don't know why, but I feel like blogging Glenn Reynolds style today.
Ed. Note: I don't know why, but I feel like blogging Glenn Reynolds style today.
A Hangover By Any Other Name
A world guide to hangover names. I also like the Danes and their 'carpenters in the forehead'. Hell, with the amount I drink I should have IKEA in the forehead.
Hat Tip: Sully
Hat Tip: Sully
Saturday, May 31, 2008
What's Ambinder Smoking?
Usually I like Marc Ambinder's blog. When it comes to up the minute political news he's been the man, but sometimes--I think in his search to be unbiased--he makes some really weird contradictions. Just take a look at this post about McCain's 'gaffe' (I'm really starting to hate that word) about troop size in Iraq. In it he makes two arguments that completely fall apart:
"Some brigades have returned home, so in some areas of Iraq, US troops have been drawn down to pre-surge levels; but other unit are returning, and while the number of combat troops in Iraq is slowly returning to pre-surge levels but it's not there yet -- not there by 20,000 troops -- and might not be there for a while. In what way is he wrong? Is he wrong because he knows the truth and wants to obscure it? It requires a willful suspension of belief to assume that McCain would lie about the status of the withdrawals, just as it requires a leap of imagination to envision a scenario wherein the Democrats wouldn't have pounced on his error like Tom on Jerry." (Itz mine)
But then later he states:
"Politics abhors a middle ground: either Iraq is getting better or it isn't. McCain has every incentive to maximize the success stories and project forward; Obama has every incentive to maximize the chaos and project forward." (Itz mine)
So if it's to his advantage...why should it require a 'willful suspension of belief" to think that McCain's lying, especially since all his previous 'gaffes' correlate to the idea that the situation in Iraq is getting better? If they were really mistakes, shouldn't some of them go against his 'incentives?' After all, when Obama has made mistakes they have worked against his message--but McCain's mistakes always seem to help him make his argument. Seems to me that Ambinder's denial of this stems from the media's infatuation with the McCain narrative that he's a 'straight shooter' (After all he named his bus the 'straight talk express' right? That's some real Jedi mind trick shiz)
Here another one:
"The question for voters is: the present is almost as unknowable as the future, so whose vision do you trust more? Polls show that less than half of Americans trust McCain and less than half trust Obama. Obama has an advantage on policy -- Americans want troops home soon and consider the Iraq adventure a failure -- , but the advantage disappears when voters are asked to think about who should lead the policy, whatever it turns out to be. That's probably because McCain retains enough of the aura of a straight-talking, tell-it-like-is-is reformer whose words reflect reality."
I'm not sure if he's just selling the public stupid, or he really thinks this is the case. According to his numbers the public just about equally trusts McCain and Obama on Iraq, and the public happens to agree with Obama's message so...they're going to vote for McCain? I mean that just doesn't make any sense.
I know most of the M$M wants to make this thing a horse race, but call it as it is--don't just summon incoherent arguments to plead a case. We have enough of that BS with Hillary.
"Some brigades have returned home, so in some areas of Iraq, US troops have been drawn down to pre-surge levels; but other unit are returning, and while the number of combat troops in Iraq is slowly returning to pre-surge levels but it's not there yet -- not there by 20,000 troops -- and might not be there for a while. In what way is he wrong? Is he wrong because he knows the truth and wants to obscure it? It requires a willful suspension of belief to assume that McCain would lie about the status of the withdrawals, just as it requires a leap of imagination to envision a scenario wherein the Democrats wouldn't have pounced on his error like Tom on Jerry." (Itz mine)
But then later he states:
"Politics abhors a middle ground: either Iraq is getting better or it isn't. McCain has every incentive to maximize the success stories and project forward; Obama has every incentive to maximize the chaos and project forward." (Itz mine)
So if it's to his advantage...why should it require a 'willful suspension of belief" to think that McCain's lying, especially since all his previous 'gaffes' correlate to the idea that the situation in Iraq is getting better? If they were really mistakes, shouldn't some of them go against his 'incentives?' After all, when Obama has made mistakes they have worked against his message--but McCain's mistakes always seem to help him make his argument. Seems to me that Ambinder's denial of this stems from the media's infatuation with the McCain narrative that he's a 'straight shooter' (After all he named his bus the 'straight talk express' right? That's some real Jedi mind trick shiz)
Here another one:
"The question for voters is: the present is almost as unknowable as the future, so whose vision do you trust more? Polls show that less than half of Americans trust McCain and less than half trust Obama. Obama has an advantage on policy -- Americans want troops home soon and consider the Iraq adventure a failure -- , but the advantage disappears when voters are asked to think about who should lead the policy, whatever it turns out to be. That's probably because McCain retains enough of the aura of a straight-talking, tell-it-like-is-is reformer whose words reflect reality."
I'm not sure if he's just selling the public stupid, or he really thinks this is the case. According to his numbers the public just about equally trusts McCain and Obama on Iraq, and the public happens to agree with Obama's message so...they're going to vote for McCain? I mean that just doesn't make any sense.
I know most of the M$M wants to make this thing a horse race, but call it as it is--don't just summon incoherent arguments to plead a case. We have enough of that BS with Hillary.
Does Scotty McCellan Have A Death Wish?
Obviously he never heard of the saying, Snitches get Stitches:
"WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said Friday he would be willing to comply with a rumored congressional subpoena to discuss the administration’s handling of pre-war intelligence, telling CNN’s Wolf Blitzer he’d be “glad to share my views” if asked to testify."
You know, if you substitute 'Scotty' for 'Curtis' then this is quite fitting:
"WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said Friday he would be willing to comply with a rumored congressional subpoena to discuss the administration’s handling of pre-war intelligence, telling CNN’s Wolf Blitzer he’d be “glad to share my views” if asked to testify."
You know, if you substitute 'Scotty' for 'Curtis' then this is quite fitting:
I Thought It Was Over...
But the debate continues:
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The fate of nearly 2.3 million Democratic presidential primary votes belongs to 30 party activists.
"The activists sit on the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee, which was to meet Saturday to decide what role Michigan and Florida should play at the national convention in August."
She keeps going, and going, and going, and going...
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The fate of nearly 2.3 million Democratic presidential primary votes belongs to 30 party activists.
"The activists sit on the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee, which was to meet Saturday to decide what role Michigan and Florida should play at the national convention in August."
She keeps going, and going, and going, and going...
Thursday, May 29, 2008
The Buck Stops Here
Did George W. Bush authorize the Plame Leak? According to Scott McCullen's interview with the Today Show this morning, he all but pointed the finger:
"Scottie McC: But the other defining moment was in early April 2006, when I learned that the President had secretly declassified the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq for the Vice President and Scooter Libby to anonymously disclose to reporters. And we had been out there talking about how seriously the President took the selective leaking of classified information. And here we were, learning that the President had authorized the very same thing we had criticized.
"Viera: Did you talk to the President and say why are you doing this?
"Scottie McC: Actually, I did. I talked about the conversation we had. I walked onto Air Force One, it was right after an event we had, it was down in the south, I believe it was North Carolina. And I walk onto Air Force One and a reporter had yelled a question to the President trying to ask him a question about this revelation that had come out during the legal proceedings. The revelation was that it was the President who had authorized, or, enable Scooter Libby to go out there and talk about this information. And I told the President that that's what the reporter was asking. He was saying that you, yourself, was the one that authorized the leaking of this information. And he said "yeah, I did." And I was kinda taken aback."
Can we finally impeach Bush? I mean seriously...
"Scottie McC: But the other defining moment was in early April 2006, when I learned that the President had secretly declassified the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq for the Vice President and Scooter Libby to anonymously disclose to reporters. And we had been out there talking about how seriously the President took the selective leaking of classified information. And here we were, learning that the President had authorized the very same thing we had criticized.
"Viera: Did you talk to the President and say why are you doing this?
"Scottie McC: Actually, I did. I talked about the conversation we had. I walked onto Air Force One, it was right after an event we had, it was down in the south, I believe it was North Carolina. And I walk onto Air Force One and a reporter had yelled a question to the President trying to ask him a question about this revelation that had come out during the legal proceedings. The revelation was that it was the President who had authorized, or, enable Scooter Libby to go out there and talk about this information. And I told the President that that's what the reporter was asking. He was saying that you, yourself, was the one that authorized the leaking of this information. And he said "yeah, I did." And I was kinda taken aback."
Can we finally impeach Bush? I mean seriously...
Now Her Own Party's Against Her
...or so she'll undoubtably say:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's prospects of persuading Democratic officials to override party rules and recognize all delegates selected in the Florida and Michigan primaries suffered a setback yesterday after lawyers for the party ruled that no more than half of those delegations could be legally recognized.
Glad to see that's over, but she'll still continue to run, and run, and run, all the way into an Energizer commercial.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's prospects of persuading Democratic officials to override party rules and recognize all delegates selected in the Florida and Michigan primaries suffered a setback yesterday after lawyers for the party ruled that no more than half of those delegations could be legally recognized.
Glad to see that's over, but she'll still continue to run, and run, and run, all the way into an Energizer commercial.
Top 10 Pics from Seattle
1) Wok & Roll is AWESOME
2) The view as we ate massive amounts of clam chowder at the Public Market
3) View from the top of the Space Needle
4) Hiding behind the Great Wall at Shorty's:
5) The Worse Band Ever:
6) The Album Cover:
7) The Beautiful Bride and Groom:
8) No One Will Ever Believe This is Seattle:
10) Meeting New Friends
Until Next Time!
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
More Lobbyist Woes For McCain
Another crooked wheel on the Straight Talk Express:
"For months, John McCain has been bragging on the fact that he's got fmr. Sen. Phil Gramm as his key economics advisor. That's scary enough as it is, if you're familiar with Gramm's policy predilections and legislative history. But now it turns out that Gramm, who advised McCain on his mortgage relief policy and speech, was also a registered lobbyist for the Swiss bank UBS, which is obviously heavily concerned with the mortgage crisis. According to MSNBC, which has just broken the story, UBS only deregistered Gramm on April 18th of this year, which I'm pretty certain was after McCain rolled out the policy that Gramm had a hand in crafting."
But wait, it gets sexier:
"On the McCain/Gramm/UBS front...it seems that not only is Sen. McCain's top economics advisor, fmr Sen. Gramm, lobby and work for UBS, but according to today's Financial Times the company is advising members of its private banking team not to step foot in the United States in order to avoid indictment."
Well, at least Gramm can work with McCain via the Net--ain't technology great!
"For months, John McCain has been bragging on the fact that he's got fmr. Sen. Phil Gramm as his key economics advisor. That's scary enough as it is, if you're familiar with Gramm's policy predilections and legislative history. But now it turns out that Gramm, who advised McCain on his mortgage relief policy and speech, was also a registered lobbyist for the Swiss bank UBS, which is obviously heavily concerned with the mortgage crisis. According to MSNBC, which has just broken the story, UBS only deregistered Gramm on April 18th of this year, which I'm pretty certain was after McCain rolled out the policy that Gramm had a hand in crafting."
But wait, it gets sexier:
"On the McCain/Gramm/UBS front...it seems that not only is Sen. McCain's top economics advisor, fmr Sen. Gramm, lobby and work for UBS, but according to today's Financial Times the company is advising members of its private banking team not to step foot in the United States in order to avoid indictment."
Well, at least Gramm can work with McCain via the Net--ain't technology great!
And It's Banal Too!
MY makes a perfect point to collaborate what I said, here:
"On the one hand, it's a huge deal that former White House press secretary Scott McClellan is now out there admitting that the Iraq War was a mistake sold with lies. But on the other hand, it's sort of banal. We've known this for years. It's a shocking truth about our current state of affairs, but not a truth that any longer has the capacity to shock me, On the other hand, this from Byron York was interesting:
"One of the main reasons John McCain is facing such an tough job today is that we are now in the sixth year of a war that the president of his own party started by mistake. That's a major headwind when you're running for president; an error of that magnitude will exact a political price. Would anyone be surprised if voters say that they've had enough?
"That all seems reasonable enough to me, but what York is missing is that McCain doesn't think it was a mistake. One would think the virtue of nominating a guy who doesn't have close personal ties to the Bush administration would be that McCain could say something like "hey, I think liberalism is wrong and conservatism is good, but that doesn't mean I'm a sociopath who loves war so much that he still thinks the invasion of Iraq was a good idea." But he doesn't say that, presumably because he doesn't believe it. At even a time when the chief propagandists of the Bush administration are willing to admit that there BS was BS, he's a true believer."
That ultimately, that's what makes him (and possibly Hillary, for a reason that will be soon shown) even scarier that Bush. Remember this simple equation: True Believer = Fanatic = Bat shit crazy. For McCain he's a true believer in not just the Iraq War, but in the righteousness of military dominance by the United States over the world--everyone else be dammed. Hillary on the other hand is a true believer in the power of herself, the voting public and the rules of the DNC be dammed. Either one doesn't seem to be the option of sane people.
"On the one hand, it's a huge deal that former White House press secretary Scott McClellan is now out there admitting that the Iraq War was a mistake sold with lies. But on the other hand, it's sort of banal. We've known this for years. It's a shocking truth about our current state of affairs, but not a truth that any longer has the capacity to shock me, On the other hand, this from Byron York was interesting:
"One of the main reasons John McCain is facing such an tough job today is that we are now in the sixth year of a war that the president of his own party started by mistake. That's a major headwind when you're running for president; an error of that magnitude will exact a political price. Would anyone be surprised if voters say that they've had enough?
"That all seems reasonable enough to me, but what York is missing is that McCain doesn't think it was a mistake. One would think the virtue of nominating a guy who doesn't have close personal ties to the Bush administration would be that McCain could say something like "hey, I think liberalism is wrong and conservatism is good, but that doesn't mean I'm a sociopath who loves war so much that he still thinks the invasion of Iraq was a good idea." But he doesn't say that, presumably because he doesn't believe it. At even a time when the chief propagandists of the Bush administration are willing to admit that there BS was BS, he's a true believer."
That ultimately, that's what makes him (and possibly Hillary, for a reason that will be soon shown) even scarier that Bush. Remember this simple equation: True Believer = Fanatic = Bat shit crazy. For McCain he's a true believer in not just the Iraq War, but in the righteousness of military dominance by the United States over the world--everyone else be dammed. Hillary on the other hand is a true believer in the power of herself, the voting public and the rules of the DNC be dammed. Either one doesn't seem to be the option of sane people.
No Salvation For Darth Vader
From Sully:
"It would be easy to think of Scott McClellan's new book as a piece of dish, designed for sales, pitched for controversy, packed with juicy detail. And it is that, of course. But it is also something more. It is an argument by a man very, very close to the president, and deputed to be his spokesman for many years, that the president deliberately deceived the country about the reasons for going to war. We're not talking mistakes here; we're talking about a deliberate shading of the truth to hide the real motivation for risking the lives of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians:
"In Iraq, McClellan added, Bush saw "his opportunity to create a legacy of greatness," something McClellan said Bush has said he believes is only available to wartime presidents.
The president's real motivation for the war, he said, was to transform the Middle East to ensure an enduring peace in the region. But the White House effort to sell the war as necessary due to the stated threat posed by Saddam Hussein was needed because "Bush and his advisers knew that the American people would almost certainly not support a war launched primarily for the ambitions purpose of transforming the Middle East," McClellan wrote.
"Rather than open this Pandora's Box, the administration chose a different path — not employing out-and-out deception, but shading the truth," he wrote of the effort to convince the world that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, an effort he said used "innuendo and implication" and "intentional ignoring of intelligence to the contrary."
"President Bush managed the crisis in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option," McClellan concluded, noting, "The lack of candor underlying the campaign for war would severely undermine the president's entire second term in office."
"If this is true, if the president intentionally ignored data refuting the existence of Saddam's WMDs, he should be impeached."
Well duh. If you haven't woken up to this fact by now, if you haven't seen the Downing Street Memo, Bob Woodward's books, Richard Clarke's warnings, Fahrenheit 911, and the rest of the evidence of incompetency and maleficence, then you deserve George W. Bush as your President. But beyond the obvious guilt of George W. Bush, I am also pretty sick of guys like McClellan and George Tenet who think their deathbed confessions will lead them to some type of salvation. Both of them in various ways have admitted that they consciously and unconsciously, willingly and unwillingly, have aided and abetted GWB's various war crimes. In the Star Wars saga we see a native and gullible Anakin Skywalker get seduced and corrupted by the dark side of the Force and the charismatic Emperor Palpatine. Even before Ani turns into Darth Vader he, just like McClellan and Tenet, helps his "master" break both legal and natural law to consolidate power for various ends. He gets his salvation through sacrifice, killing his boss to save his son. This is great in a Sci-fi movie, and perhaps does make a great metaphorical and spiritual conclusion, but in the real world justice for war crimes, mass murder, and theft on a grand level isn't made with symbolic shows of rebellion and sacrifice--it's made with trials, investigations and finally the submission of the law breakers to face the punishments that the people that they have oppressed and maligned find fair and just. If these men really want to atone for their actions they should submit themselves to the Hague to await trial. Anything less than that, like writing confessional novels who's goal is self-absolution, is meaningless and insulting.
"It would be easy to think of Scott McClellan's new book as a piece of dish, designed for sales, pitched for controversy, packed with juicy detail. And it is that, of course. But it is also something more. It is an argument by a man very, very close to the president, and deputed to be his spokesman for many years, that the president deliberately deceived the country about the reasons for going to war. We're not talking mistakes here; we're talking about a deliberate shading of the truth to hide the real motivation for risking the lives of thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians:
"In Iraq, McClellan added, Bush saw "his opportunity to create a legacy of greatness," something McClellan said Bush has said he believes is only available to wartime presidents.
The president's real motivation for the war, he said, was to transform the Middle East to ensure an enduring peace in the region. But the White House effort to sell the war as necessary due to the stated threat posed by Saddam Hussein was needed because "Bush and his advisers knew that the American people would almost certainly not support a war launched primarily for the ambitions purpose of transforming the Middle East," McClellan wrote.
"Rather than open this Pandora's Box, the administration chose a different path — not employing out-and-out deception, but shading the truth," he wrote of the effort to convince the world that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, an effort he said used "innuendo and implication" and "intentional ignoring of intelligence to the contrary."
"President Bush managed the crisis in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option," McClellan concluded, noting, "The lack of candor underlying the campaign for war would severely undermine the president's entire second term in office."
"If this is true, if the president intentionally ignored data refuting the existence of Saddam's WMDs, he should be impeached."
Well duh. If you haven't woken up to this fact by now, if you haven't seen the Downing Street Memo, Bob Woodward's books, Richard Clarke's warnings, Fahrenheit 911, and the rest of the evidence of incompetency and maleficence, then you deserve George W. Bush as your President. But beyond the obvious guilt of George W. Bush, I am also pretty sick of guys like McClellan and George Tenet who think their deathbed confessions will lead them to some type of salvation. Both of them in various ways have admitted that they consciously and unconsciously, willingly and unwillingly, have aided and abetted GWB's various war crimes. In the Star Wars saga we see a native and gullible Anakin Skywalker get seduced and corrupted by the dark side of the Force and the charismatic Emperor Palpatine. Even before Ani turns into Darth Vader he, just like McClellan and Tenet, helps his "master" break both legal and natural law to consolidate power for various ends. He gets his salvation through sacrifice, killing his boss to save his son. This is great in a Sci-fi movie, and perhaps does make a great metaphorical and spiritual conclusion, but in the real world justice for war crimes, mass murder, and theft on a grand level isn't made with symbolic shows of rebellion and sacrifice--it's made with trials, investigations and finally the submission of the law breakers to face the punishments that the people that they have oppressed and maligned find fair and just. If these men really want to atone for their actions they should submit themselves to the Hague to await trial. Anything less than that, like writing confessional novels who's goal is self-absolution, is meaningless and insulting.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
A Quick Note
From MY's blog:
T"his weekend veterans from around the country paraded through the streets of DC on motorcycles, but last week the Senate passed massive Webb-Hagel GI Bill reform legislation with a veto-proof majority. While the bill on the national level is still in the works, it looks like some states are starting to step in and attempt to repair the GI Bill legislation on their own. New Jersey's proposed legislation is particularly generous, limiting the amount that a veteran or veteran's widow to pay only $50 per credit for a public in-state college or university. Other states that are offering free or reduced-fee tuition are Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana. The worry, of course, is that states will pass the legislation without compensating for the added cost. This could end up causing higher tuition among non-veteran students." (Italics mine)
Speaking for myself--I see no problem with this, assuming that the extra charge isn't too substantial and agreed to by state boards. (I say this by the way with the belief that state education should be free for everyone, but assume that that policy is far in the future) Our vets make a great sacrifice for our nation and we should all chip in to give them the benefits they deserve. It's about time we started acting like a team rather than a bunch of whining divas. Here's an idea, maybe we should tie their benefits into what ever retirement benefits congressmen get. If they want wars that create veterans maybe linking their pensions to their decisions will make these chickenhawks a bit wiser in their use of military force.
T"his weekend veterans from around the country paraded through the streets of DC on motorcycles, but last week the Senate passed massive Webb-Hagel GI Bill reform legislation with a veto-proof majority. While the bill on the national level is still in the works, it looks like some states are starting to step in and attempt to repair the GI Bill legislation on their own. New Jersey's proposed legislation is particularly generous, limiting the amount that a veteran or veteran's widow to pay only $50 per credit for a public in-state college or university. Other states that are offering free or reduced-fee tuition are Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Louisiana. The worry, of course, is that states will pass the legislation without compensating for the added cost. This could end up causing higher tuition among non-veteran students." (Italics mine)
Speaking for myself--I see no problem with this, assuming that the extra charge isn't too substantial and agreed to by state boards. (I say this by the way with the belief that state education should be free for everyone, but assume that that policy is far in the future) Our vets make a great sacrifice for our nation and we should all chip in to give them the benefits they deserve. It's about time we started acting like a team rather than a bunch of whining divas. Here's an idea, maybe we should tie their benefits into what ever retirement benefits congressmen get. If they want wars that create veterans maybe linking their pensions to their decisions will make these chickenhawks a bit wiser in their use of military force.
Another Reason I Was Glad To Be In Seattle
Because I missed this nonsense:
"Hillary Clinton today brought up the assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy while defending her decision to stay in the race against Barack Obama.
"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it," she said, dismissing calls to drop out."
I mean seriously? Seriously? Beyond the crassness of bringing up the issue, as an actual tactic this is the best you can come up with? You're pinning your hopes on someone killing him? I am actually at a loss for words. Just when you think she can't get any lower she does. What an embarrassment.
PS: By the way, considering that Hillary is a smart woman it seems pretty apparent that she's putting this idea, not just out there, but in play. May God help her if a Clinton supporter, even a tangential supporter, kills Obama because...I literally get sick at the thought.
"Hillary Clinton today brought up the assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy while defending her decision to stay in the race against Barack Obama.
"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it," she said, dismissing calls to drop out."
I mean seriously? Seriously? Beyond the crassness of bringing up the issue, as an actual tactic this is the best you can come up with? You're pinning your hopes on someone killing him? I am actually at a loss for words. Just when you think she can't get any lower she does. What an embarrassment.
PS: By the way, considering that Hillary is a smart woman it seems pretty apparent that she's putting this idea, not just out there, but in play. May God help her if a Clinton supporter, even a tangential supporter, kills Obama because...I literally get sick at the thought.
Dang This is Good
From Obama's commencement address at Wesleyan:
"Each of you will have the chance to make your own discovery in the years to come. And I say “chance” because you won’t have to take it. There’s no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care. You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy. You can choose to narrow your concerns and live your life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America’s.
"But I hope you don’t. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, though you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all those who helped you get here, though you do have that debt.
"It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in writing the next great chapter in America’s story."
Is this the new "Ask what your country can do for you." speech? Only time will tell, but it's encouraging to see a politician challenging the public.
"Each of you will have the chance to make your own discovery in the years to come. And I say “chance” because you won’t have to take it. There’s no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care. You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy. You can choose to narrow your concerns and live your life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America’s.
"But I hope you don’t. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, though you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all those who helped you get here, though you do have that debt.
"It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in writing the next great chapter in America’s story."
Is this the new "Ask what your country can do for you." speech? Only time will tell, but it's encouraging to see a politician challenging the public.
I'm Back
Even though I bet you didn't notice I was away.
This weekend I went to a friend's wedding in Seattle and it was amazing. The city is clean and friendly and when I post up some of the wedding pics you'll won't believe how beautiful they were.
Shoutouts to Ani (my friend who was married) and her new husband Mario, they made an adorable couple, and their families and friends, and to Shorty's which turned out to be the coolest bar outside of 1020.
Needless to say, Seattle is Obama country--suck it Hillary!
More pics to come, but in the meantime I need to refresh myself about the news of the world. I'm pretty sure something happens when I'm not around.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Monday, May 19, 2008
Something Nice To Say About John McCain
Yeah I know I'm usually downing Mr. Keating 5-Bomb-Bomb-Bomb-McCain, but I have to say this was particularly funny:
Funniest line? "Crazy? Crazy exciting!" HA!
Note to Democrats--every joke has a hint of truth; time to wrap this thing up. Thank you.
Funniest line? "Crazy? Crazy exciting!" HA!
Note to Democrats--every joke has a hint of truth; time to wrap this thing up. Thank you.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Ironic...Don't You Think
So the Tennessee Republican Party has a new ad attacking Michelle Obama because of her "first time proud of her country" statement. The ad flashes Michelle saying that key line against several "regular" Tennessee Republicans who talk about some of the times they were proud of their country. What's ironic about all this? Well it's pretty apparent, at least to me, that the context of her comment was based on the African-American experience, which as well all know, hasn't been one of the best experiences in America, full of institutionalized racism and discrimination. So how did the Tennessee Republicans answer this?
By having four white people and a really light skinned Latino testify how much they love this country. And according to them, every thing's great! Especially when they all tell us that anyone can come to this country and make it, 'if they work hard enough." Glad they reminded me of that!
I personally love the old white dude playing pool, with his super-duper gun rack in the back. He totally doesn't scare me.
By having four white people and a really light skinned Latino testify how much they love this country. And according to them, every thing's great! Especially when they all tell us that anyone can come to this country and make it, 'if they work hard enough." Glad they reminded me of that!
I personally love the old white dude playing pool, with his super-duper gun rack in the back. He totally doesn't scare me.
How Would Republicans Like It If...
You know, I think Chait makes an even more profound point than he thinks when he says:
"President Bush's thinly-veiled shot at Barack Obama was, in the words of Obama's spokesman, "an unprecedented political attack on foreign soil." Jamie objects, "Bush has every right to criticize" his political opponents. I think Jamie's missing the point of the last three words -- "on foreign soil." Obviously, it's not unprecedented for a president to criticize his political opponents. What's unprecedented is for a president to do so before the legislature of a foreign country."
Not just is it unprecedented, but it's really in bad taste. Can you imagine if Obama went to Germany or France and made a speech dissing Bush? The FOX News building would literally blow up from the power of their holier-than-thou indignation, and Bill O'Reilly...well we know what he would do:
"President Bush's thinly-veiled shot at Barack Obama was, in the words of Obama's spokesman, "an unprecedented political attack on foreign soil." Jamie objects, "Bush has every right to criticize" his political opponents. I think Jamie's missing the point of the last three words -- "on foreign soil." Obviously, it's not unprecedented for a president to criticize his political opponents. What's unprecedented is for a president to do so before the legislature of a foreign country."
Not just is it unprecedented, but it's really in bad taste. Can you imagine if Obama went to Germany or France and made a speech dissing Bush? The FOX News building would literally blow up from the power of their holier-than-thou indignation, and Bill O'Reilly...well we know what he would do:
Lovin Chris Matthews...
Yeah, yeah I know. He's not exactly professional, he makes very dubious statements, and he's got issues with women, but I'll be damned if occasionally he does get to the heart of the issue. This time around--do conservatives even know what the hell they're talking about? Apparently not:
By the way, the Nazi references got tiring 3 years ago from the left, and they're even more invalid from the right. But hey, when you're trying to demonize, you go to the biggest demon in the world.
By the way, the Nazi references got tiring 3 years ago from the left, and they're even more invalid from the right. But hey, when you're trying to demonize, you go to the biggest demon in the world.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
A Little Late I Know
But John Edwards just endorsed Obama yesterday.
Not for nothing but I sorta thought that this was a bigger story than it should have been. If you have been following the race it should be no surprise that Edwards' ideology was more in like with Obama than Clinton. The biggest impact of all this is going to be in the Veepstakes, and Edwards I think has now put himself into play.
PS: Also something to remember; thought they aren't obliged to, Edwards' delegates are now pretty much given to Obama. This takes the lead even farther out of Clinton's hands.
Not for nothing but I sorta thought that this was a bigger story than it should have been. If you have been following the race it should be no surprise that Edwards' ideology was more in like with Obama than Clinton. The biggest impact of all this is going to be in the Veepstakes, and Edwards I think has now put himself into play.
PS: Also something to remember; thought they aren't obliged to, Edwards' delegates are now pretty much given to Obama. This takes the lead even farther out of Clinton's hands.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Obama's Opposition
Just straight up lying:
"John Boehner's surrogate has still not retracted his bald-faced lie about Obama allegedly calling Israel a "sore." Now here's Mark Levin:
"Obama made a point of not wearing the flag pin, knowing that a point would be made of it, just as he makes a point of not placing his hand over his heart during the playing of the National Anthem."
Obama did not make a point of the flag pin. His opponents did. Obama simply did what millions of others did: express their patriotism more intensely after 9/11, and return to less demonstrative gestures thereafter. As for the National Anthem, here's Snopes.com. The evidence is that Obama has placed his hand on his heart during the national anthem and not, depending on the occasion, as is the modern custom. He has never "made a point" about it.
These are lies, smears, untruths. Both Boehner and NRO need to issue corrections. And the Obama team needs to be more aggressive in countering these deliberate lies. "
"John Boehner's surrogate has still not retracted his bald-faced lie about Obama allegedly calling Israel a "sore." Now here's Mark Levin:
"Obama made a point of not wearing the flag pin, knowing that a point would be made of it, just as he makes a point of not placing his hand over his heart during the playing of the National Anthem."
Obama did not make a point of the flag pin. His opponents did. Obama simply did what millions of others did: express their patriotism more intensely after 9/11, and return to less demonstrative gestures thereafter. As for the National Anthem, here's Snopes.com. The evidence is that Obama has placed his hand on his heart during the national anthem and not, depending on the occasion, as is the modern custom. He has never "made a point" about it.
These are lies, smears, untruths. Both Boehner and NRO need to issue corrections. And the Obama team needs to be more aggressive in countering these deliberate lies. "
59th Sign Of The Last Days
From Ben Smith, Chris Matthews on Hillary Clinton:
"I even hate saying things like 'white working-class voters.'"
Matthews, 21 seconds later:
"It's almost like she's the Al Sharpton of white people."
I...I just don't know what to say. Thanks?
"I even hate saying things like 'white working-class voters.'"
Matthews, 21 seconds later:
"It's almost like she's the Al Sharpton of white people."
I...I just don't know what to say. Thanks?
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Guess No One's Immune...
To the temptation of pandering:
"WASHINGTON — Barack Obama, who labeled discussion of whether he wears a flag pin in his lapel a false issue in a debate with Hillary Clinton, was wearing one Monday as he campaigned in West Virginia ahead of Tuesday's primary vote there.
Obama made no reference to the pin, which could be clearly seen in television images and through telephoto lenses as he spoke in Charleston, W. Va., about veterans issue. There was no public comment from his campaign."
Sanchez has this bit of snark for those who think the world of the pin:
"The group that’s supposed to be offended here are those so dull-witted that they (1) get bent out of shape over a lapel pin, and (2) couldn’t wrap their brains around Obama’s explanation for foregoing the pin. Which is to say… simpletons. The overlap between that group and those “clever enough” to regard the pin’s appearance as cynical pandering is probably pretty thin."
Oh damn he called people who are pin obsessed "simpletons" damn elitists! Well at least they won't know he's pandering to them. This leads us to an interesting question: if Obama panders in a forest and no one is there to hear him--is it a pander? Discuss.
"WASHINGTON — Barack Obama, who labeled discussion of whether he wears a flag pin in his lapel a false issue in a debate with Hillary Clinton, was wearing one Monday as he campaigned in West Virginia ahead of Tuesday's primary vote there.
Obama made no reference to the pin, which could be clearly seen in television images and through telephoto lenses as he spoke in Charleston, W. Va., about veterans issue. There was no public comment from his campaign."
Sanchez has this bit of snark for those who think the world of the pin:
"The group that’s supposed to be offended here are those so dull-witted that they (1) get bent out of shape over a lapel pin, and (2) couldn’t wrap their brains around Obama’s explanation for foregoing the pin. Which is to say… simpletons. The overlap between that group and those “clever enough” to regard the pin’s appearance as cynical pandering is probably pretty thin."
Oh damn he called people who are pin obsessed "simpletons" damn elitists! Well at least they won't know he's pandering to them. This leads us to an interesting question: if Obama panders in a forest and no one is there to hear him--is it a pander? Discuss.
Answering Old Questions With New Foolishness
An anonymous reader asked me the following question following this post:
"Do you think videos like Tisa's "Vote Obama" video ft. Chris Brown, Kanye WEst, and Jay-Z, are a help or a hindrance for Obama?"
Here's the video:
The obvious answer is, this is a hinderance, it does not help; not because of the celebrity endorsement but because the song and video is just plain wack. Unlike the somewhat elegent Will. I. Am video (Did I just use Will. I . Am. and the word 'elegant' in the same sentance?) the TI$A joint looks like something Boy George dreamed up in the 80s while tripping on 'Shrooms, and the song has the verbal skills of a PSA done by Vanilla Ice. "Be cool, be votin?" Really?
"Do you think videos like Tisa's "Vote Obama" video ft. Chris Brown, Kanye WEst, and Jay-Z, are a help or a hindrance for Obama?"
Here's the video:
The obvious answer is, this is a hinderance, it does not help; not because of the celebrity endorsement but because the song and video is just plain wack. Unlike the somewhat elegent Will. I. Am video (Did I just use Will. I . Am. and the word 'elegant' in the same sentance?) the TI$A joint looks like something Boy George dreamed up in the 80s while tripping on 'Shrooms, and the song has the verbal skills of a PSA done by Vanilla Ice. "Be cool, be votin?" Really?
But as bad as that is, this is even worse:
Believe it or not this came with an endorsement by Willamette Week. Who's that? Not sure, but they must really, really, REALLY like Obama. Wasn't this the cover of a Rick James album in the 70s? Earth, Wind, and Fire just got a fourth.
In Other News
I know for the last couple of months or so my blog's been dominated by presidential campaign politics. I'll be trying to extend my coverage in the future. Scout's honor.
New Obama Tactic
Over at Politico, Jonathan Martin claims Obama's now taken to 'repudiating boomers' to woo the older vote. But it just seems like he's talking sense:
"One of the saddest episodes in our history was the degree to which returning vets from Vietnam were shunned, demonized and neglected by some because they served in an unpopular war. Too many of those who opposed the war in Vietnam chose to blame not only the leaders who ordered the mission, but the young men who simply answered their country’s call. Four decades later, the sting of that injustice is a wound that has never fully healed, and one that should never be repeated."
One of the memes floating around Obama's canidacy from insiders is that Obama's adjusting his message to conform to weaknesses in his demographic, but for anyone who's read his book, or listened to the man for more than 10 seconds could see, the only adjustment is against the stereotypes of how 'liberals' are supposed to be talking. Not sure how many, if any, Democratic politicians ever went around 'demonizing' soliders. Sure some wack off anti-war protesters did it, but since when do wack offs become mainstream?
"One of the saddest episodes in our history was the degree to which returning vets from Vietnam were shunned, demonized and neglected by some because they served in an unpopular war. Too many of those who opposed the war in Vietnam chose to blame not only the leaders who ordered the mission, but the young men who simply answered their country’s call. Four decades later, the sting of that injustice is a wound that has never fully healed, and one that should never be repeated."
One of the memes floating around Obama's canidacy from insiders is that Obama's adjusting his message to conform to weaknesses in his demographic, but for anyone who's read his book, or listened to the man for more than 10 seconds could see, the only adjustment is against the stereotypes of how 'liberals' are supposed to be talking. Not sure how many, if any, Democratic politicians ever went around 'demonizing' soliders. Sure some wack off anti-war protesters did it, but since when do wack offs become mainstream?
Friday, May 09, 2008
Did I Say By Next Week?
My prediction over at AllHipHop.com said that Obama would take the lead in Superdelegates by next week, but according to ABC he did it in two days. Guess that's not too surprising when Clinton's saying stuff like this.
Eat Your Heart Out Farrakhan!
Screw the Million Man March, Obama's team predicts that by election day they'll have a million volunteers. Ambinder:
"On election day, Obama might have more than a million individuals volunteering on his behalf. That should scare the beejeesus out of the McCain campaign and the RNC."
Yglesias takes it to the next level:
"One incredibly interesting question is to what extent the organizing tools Obama has put to good use thus far in the campaign can be made to work as tools of governance that put pressure on congress and so forth."
Power to the People? Hummm.
"On election day, Obama might have more than a million individuals volunteering on his behalf. That should scare the beejeesus out of the McCain campaign and the RNC."
Yglesias takes it to the next level:
"One incredibly interesting question is to what extent the organizing tools Obama has put to good use thus far in the campaign can be made to work as tools of governance that put pressure on congress and so forth."
Power to the People? Hummm.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Back in Black
Sunni Lebanese and Shiite Hezbollah take their beef to the streets. Video here......
....ok, that was in bad taste.
....ok, that was in bad taste.
Compounding Your Problems
So you're a Congressman (Republican of course), and you're caught in a DWI. Not too bad, go to rehab, take a pic with a minister, you should be alright, right?
Then you get your mistress to bail you out of jail.
Media finds out about that. Now you have to confess to that and...the three year old daughter you have with your mistress.
Welcome to Fossella's world.
Then you get your mistress to bail you out of jail.
Media finds out about that. Now you have to confess to that and...the three year old daughter you have with your mistress.
Welcome to Fossella's world.
Don't Rush to Judgement
Latest in the line of BS from police departments:
What kills it to me is the cop on the right hand side. If you notice he actually goes from group to group kicking dudes, as if he was Goldielocks looking for the perfect bed.
Hat Tip: MY
What kills it to me is the cop on the right hand side. If you notice he actually goes from group to group kicking dudes, as if he was Goldielocks looking for the perfect bed.
Hat Tip: MY
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Primary Wrap-Up
Before it hits the pages of AllHipHop.com, you can check it out here. Long story short--it's not a good day to be Hillary.
About two months ago it seemed apparent that Sen. Hillary Clinton’s run for the Democratic nomination was finished. Sen. Barack Obama led in elected delegates, races won, and popular vote. But, as the pundits called it, she moved the goal post further and further back. By the time the Pennsylvania primary rolled around the goal post was in the parking lot.
So last night, as Obama took a decisive victory in North Carolina and Clinton squeaked by in Indiana, her refusal to quit and face reality has a certain Bush-like quality of schizophrenia. The Daily News’ front page today has the headline ‘Hil Needs A Miracle’ and the NY Post proclaims ‘Toast!’ Even the entire MSNBC crew and Matt Drudge says it’s over, but if her speech last night was any clue to her future plans, Clinton remains committed to seeing this thing out to what will undoubtedly be the bitter end, pleading with her supporters to send her more money to top off her second self-loan of 6.4 million dollars.
Regardless, last night seemed to be the final nail in the coffin. With six more primaries to go, all of which are much smaller than North Carolina (I believe Puerto Rico is the largest in the rest of the season, with around 50 delegates to be decided), Clinton has zero shot of over taking Obama in elected delegates and popular vote under the Democratic rules of delegates by proportion. Not only that but it seems that now Super delegates are rallying to Obama who, according to George Stephanopoulos, are ready to come over ‘three, four, five at a time’.
Really though the story of last night, and ultimately, this Democratic nominating season is that, as Andrew Sullivan pointed out, the end of the Clintons came at the hands of black voters. While Hillary just narrowly picked up Indiana, Obama’s huge victory in NC is what shut the door for his opponent and that couldn’t have been possible save for the commanding turn out of black voters there. By the numbers blacks routed Clinton, giving Obama 91 percent of their vote compared to 6 percent for Clinton. Add that to the fact that whites voted by a much smaller margin for Clinton—59 to 36—and what you get is blacks, in a rare, rare event actually deciding on the Democratic nominee for President and maybe the President of the United States. Obviously, Obama historically had black support, but I think that Hillary’s complete lack of respect for blacks as shown in her interview with O’Reilly really brought out the black vote for Obama and on this end she tactically shot herself in the foot. Among all of the mistakes that a person makes, it’s always the last one that hurts the most and this time she’s going to look back and realize that when she gave away the black vote to Obama in NC, when she completely ignored that part of the Democratic constituency, she set herself up to lose. It’s a poetic end to what has been a miserably racially polarizing race. Hopefully we’ll get something of more substance in the general election…but then again, don’t bet on it.
About two months ago it seemed apparent that Sen. Hillary Clinton’s run for the Democratic nomination was finished. Sen. Barack Obama led in elected delegates, races won, and popular vote. But, as the pundits called it, she moved the goal post further and further back. By the time the Pennsylvania primary rolled around the goal post was in the parking lot.
So last night, as Obama took a decisive victory in North Carolina and Clinton squeaked by in Indiana, her refusal to quit and face reality has a certain Bush-like quality of schizophrenia. The Daily News’ front page today has the headline ‘Hil Needs A Miracle’ and the NY Post proclaims ‘Toast!’ Even the entire MSNBC crew and Matt Drudge says it’s over, but if her speech last night was any clue to her future plans, Clinton remains committed to seeing this thing out to what will undoubtedly be the bitter end, pleading with her supporters to send her more money to top off her second self-loan of 6.4 million dollars.
Regardless, last night seemed to be the final nail in the coffin. With six more primaries to go, all of which are much smaller than North Carolina (I believe Puerto Rico is the largest in the rest of the season, with around 50 delegates to be decided), Clinton has zero shot of over taking Obama in elected delegates and popular vote under the Democratic rules of delegates by proportion. Not only that but it seems that now Super delegates are rallying to Obama who, according to George Stephanopoulos, are ready to come over ‘three, four, five at a time’.
Really though the story of last night, and ultimately, this Democratic nominating season is that, as Andrew Sullivan pointed out, the end of the Clintons came at the hands of black voters. While Hillary just narrowly picked up Indiana, Obama’s huge victory in NC is what shut the door for his opponent and that couldn’t have been possible save for the commanding turn out of black voters there. By the numbers blacks routed Clinton, giving Obama 91 percent of their vote compared to 6 percent for Clinton. Add that to the fact that whites voted by a much smaller margin for Clinton—59 to 36—and what you get is blacks, in a rare, rare event actually deciding on the Democratic nominee for President and maybe the President of the United States. Obviously, Obama historically had black support, but I think that Hillary’s complete lack of respect for blacks as shown in her interview with O’Reilly really brought out the black vote for Obama and on this end she tactically shot herself in the foot. Among all of the mistakes that a person makes, it’s always the last one that hurts the most and this time she’s going to look back and realize that when she gave away the black vote to Obama in NC, when she completely ignored that part of the Democratic constituency, she set herself up to lose. It’s a poetic end to what has been a miserably racially polarizing race. Hopefully we’ll get something of more substance in the general election…but then again, don’t bet on it.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
How to Win Hearts and Minds: Lesson #342
Bomb hospitals:
"BAGHDAD - The U.S. military on Saturday fired missiles at a target about 50 yards away from the general hospital in Baghdad's Sadr City district, wounding more than 20 people and destroying ambulances, hospital officials said."
If there was only some way to tie this to Rev. Wright...
"BAGHDAD - The U.S. military on Saturday fired missiles at a target about 50 yards away from the general hospital in Baghdad's Sadr City district, wounding more than 20 people and destroying ambulances, hospital officials said."
If there was only some way to tie this to Rev. Wright...
Iron Man
Saw it last night. I think there's only one question that needs to be asked, Best Marvel movie ever? Discuss.
Big spoiler below...............................................
What's up with the dude at the end of the clip? "YEEESSSS!" Simmer down there blue chip.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Hillary on O'Reilly
My thoughts can be found over at AllHipHop.com. Long story short, it was a slap in the face to black America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
