Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

9/12 Teabaggers: Hypocrisy In Action

So, the Million Moron March went off without a hitch?

Oh joy.

You’ll have to pardon my lack of enthusiasm because, well, it’s really hard to see past all the hypocrisy and discern what, exactly, these people are protesting. I just have to ask, if they’re so hell-bent on “defending” principles of American Democracy, where were they for the past eight years?

Let’s start at the beginning, shall we? The Teabaggers get their name from the idea that they’re “Taxed Enough Already.” Ok, fine, I’ll grant them the fact that even though they want a strong military, they don’t want to pay for it, but are they protesting the tax cut they’re getting under Obama’s plan? Or are they protesting the 4% tax increase that their CEO might get?



Do you really want to go there, lady??

Yea, well I don't want Bush's either. How 'bout you take it, m'kay?


Then there’s the deficit issue (DEFECITS R EIVL!!! OMGLOLWTF!!?!??!1111). They burden future generations with debt that can never be repaid. Uh, yup. This is what “libruls” were saying about the years of deficit spending to fund the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Where were the teabaggers then? The national debt more than doubled under W and they were cheering his war efforts on (but, it’s not like the troops saw the benefits).

At least, that's what Glenn Beck tells me...

While we’re here, let’s talk about Iraq for a second. If the teabaggers wanted an opportunity to demand Presidential truth-telling, the lead-up to the war in Iraq was a prime opportunity. Bush and Co told almost 1000 documented lies about starting a war with Iraq. And, where were the teabaggers? Unfortunately, they’re in the group that still believes Saddam had something to do with 9/11 (which is absurd considering even Cheney admitted it’s not true).

You lost one election. Get a fucking grip...

This person should definitely be in therapy (covered by private insurance, of course)


Speaking of Cheney, let’s talk about freedoms. Apparently, Obama is going to take the teabaggers’ freedom (which one(s), they don’t say), but Cheney (along with Bush) succeeded in actually demolishing the Constitution (you know, that piece of paper). Freedoms like the right to be free from unlawful search and seizure, the right to be free from unlawful punishment and the right to know why you’re being detained. The PATRIOT Act and the Military Commissions Act were two of the greatest affronts to American freedoms and the teabaggers wholeheartedly supported their enactment (Remember "if you're not a terrorist, you don't have to worry?") . And, teabaggers today continue to work against the freedoms of individual choice that truly define America.

So, they don’t really understand taxes, don’t truly care about deficits, aren’t actually concerned with the truth, definitely not interested in freedom. Oh, yea, this was supposed to be about health care ("supposed to" being the key phrase). There was surprisingly little mention of health care. It was mostly an after thought:

I wonder what poignant thought could possibly be on the front of this sign.


They’re concerned that somehow the government is going to take over health care by proposing a competitive alternative to private insurance, and simultaneously be so ineffective as to cause long waits and poor care, yet also be so effective as to cause private insurance to go out of business? Is something like that even possible? But, I guess it makes sense to people who believe Obama can be both a socialist and fascist at the same time...

Call this kid's World History/Civics teacher. Retroactive FAIL.

Yea, I'm trying to add that all up and it comes out to, um...you're a dumbass


Maybe they’re concerned about the cost. But, were they concerned about the cost of Medicare Part D, which will probably be more expensive as comprehensive health insurance reform (ten year cost estimated at $1.2 trillion), yet all taxpayer dollars go directly to PhARMA? No, no they weren’t.

Ah, nothing like people on Medicare protesting government health care:



I understand that people may be wary of so much government action, but eight years of improper, unjustifiable and sometimes illegal action cheered on by these teabaggers have brought America to the breaking point. The fact is, all these people are complicit in the real destruction that has been wrought.

So, here is my message to all the sometimes-patriots out there: You lost an election because of the failure of your leaders. You are intellectually and politically bankrupt, and generally have no legs to stand on in this debate. You didn’t show up when it mattered most, instead choosing to cheer on heinous and extreme behavior. Everyone noticed and said “No More.” If you want to have a legitimate, policy-based debate, we’re here to listen. But know this: your demagoguery of villainous characters is actually what is tearing at the fabric of our democracy. Your hateful ways will be your undoing.

But, let's be honest, hate is the real reason you came to Washington.

And they say it's not about race...

Just because?

I'm sure whoever made this sign is absolutely gorgeous


But, really, it's not about race

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

SO Frustrated!

So, this is how democracy works, huh? Eight years of presidential ass-kissing and now, now, you want to ask "questions?" Oh, that's right, you're all so afraid of being labeled as part of the "liberal media" that you'll embarrass yourselves on national teevee.

I started off tonight fine. I was going to watch the press conference and then do some cleaning...no big deal. But, one dumbass "reporter" and one dumbass question later, I'm pissed and needing to vent.

Q (paraphrased): Mr. President, WTF are you doing proposing a budget that's not balanced? Are you trying to ruin America?

I figure that's the gist of the question. It's what I heard, at least. And I'm sure others heard it, too. All of a sudden, people are concerned about what federal spending is doing to the deficit. Well, here's what I have to say:

Part 1: CBO (and really any) long term budget projections are bullshit. As we all remember, Clinton inhereted a deficit and ended with a surplus. Bush, famously, inhereted a sirplus and crapped out a ridiculous deficit. Not to mention the fact that the National Debt has DOUBLED in the past 8 years.

So, yea, budget projections are essentially irrelevant. The fact is, responsibility (or the lack thereof) can have an impact on how the projections change. All you critics were so quiet as the deficit projection was growing under Bush, why do you decide to be loud now?

Part 2: Enough already! I'm shocked that people are saying spending on education, health care, and energy are irresponsible. Are they high? Look! Look at where we are! Look at what we've become! America is no longer the place to bring your family to build a better life (unless you're already rich). Irresponsible is starting wars that should never have been started! Where's the outrage? Where were the questions?

It's too late for that now because it's already happened, and we're trying to fix it. Obama is here to undo all the damage so you hypocritical, lying, perverted Republicans can drive a wedge into this nation and use your absurd, underhanded tactics to play to people's fears.

Well, you Republicans had your chance. Remember? You were in power for six years. You did whatever you wanted for six years, and THIS is the outcome. And, what do you do? You filibuster. You don't help. You don't bring solutions. You just bitch and moan and whine and complain. You know what? You're not going to get your way. Your time came and went, and we're picking up the pieces.

If Congressional Republicans actually, truly cared about America and its future, they'd be working towards solutions. But, they listen to people like Rush and Bill-O, and continue this charade of "protecting" America. They foment hate and fear and mistrust, when they are the ones to be feared and mistrusted.

With friends like these, who needs enemies? Take your ball. Go home. America doesn't need people like you.

Monday, March 2, 2009

Bush Enron-ed America

There's really no other way to put it. And it's essentially that simple.

Bush as been committing accounting fraud since we went to war with Afghanistan. It only got worse with Iraq. How much have these wars cost? Well, we have estimates of what Congress has authorized, but that's not where the accounting fraud has come in. The fact is that most of the money for Iraq was not included in the formal budget proposals from Bush. Sure, he requested some money. But then he requested more. And more. And eventually, most of the war funding requests came outside of the formal budget process. So, Bush dug us into debt with his budgets, and further with his wars. His accounting of our country's expenses was not honest, and it undermined our economic system. Like Enron, America appeared more solvent than it really was. See the similarity between Enron stock and the Dow recently?

Ok, I'll give you the fact that Bush didn't set up offshore accounts that moved money in generally illegal and improper ways (I think). But, his system of budgeting was a smoke and mirrors act. And the mirrors have come crashing down. Obama's commtiment to honest budgeting may not be pretty. But at least it's real. We can rebuild on real. We can cut back once we know what's actually being spent (and where it goes).

But, here's the real lesson from Enron: The Republican financial gambit makes it impossible to run an honest business in the long run. It was never about establishing long-term security and stability. It was about propping up the house of cards long enough to get yours and get out. So, no, Republicans we don't want your opinion on Obama's budget. You don't know WTF you're talking about, you're not fiscally conservative. You're liars and thieves and you haven't learned your lesson from Enron.

Bush, Cheney, DeLay: here's your next job option.

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

More Questions Than Answers

This administration has definitely done some great things so far. Closing of Gitmo, Fair Pay Act, and just generally freezing all Bush-era (I love saying that) policies for review are great. But, his political appointments, not so great. I'm one of the "STFU Republicans," but I understand that Obama wants more than revenge. However, it's making him look stupid. It's making all of us look stupid (I think).

So, my question is: Are all politicians and lobbyists corrupt? I was under the distinct impression that the answer is no. I've actually been a big defender of lobbyists in the past. But, increasingly, it's seeming that the answer is: eh, maybe. At least they're all as confused by the tax laws as the rest of us. Do we take these tax errors as errors or "errors"?

And what level of corruption is unacceptable? I mean, how many Bush appointees have been called out and/or punished for their significantly worse actions and misdeeds? Are these errors ("errors"?) a result of the Bush-era political atmosphere?

I've got to be honest, I want Obama to know better. He knows so many of these appointees personally or professionally or both. Shouldn't these things be known before they blow up like landmines? I want him to. Even worse, I expect him to. I'm afraid our high expectations are like sabotaging this whole Change deal. Ok, not afraid, not concerned, wary. Wary of the weight of high expectations.

Is it just coincidence that appointees are making "errors" (errors?) or do we have a real epidemic on our hands? Are these errors ("errors"?) symptoms of the 24-hour news cycle or the result of deep background checks?

I'm so confused!!

Who's good? Who's bad? WTF is going on and how can we fix it?

Sunday, January 25, 2009

The Regular Person's Inauguration Weekend

Don't believe what you see in all those press pictures. This is what real people did Inauguration Weekend (hint: it involved lots of waiting). Was it worth it? Hell Yes!


So, I managed to convince my mom to come to Baltimore to see Obama's "whistle stop." The sun was out, but the temperatures were still arctic. Literally, I could count all the Fahrenheit degrees on one hand. At least we only have four more hours to wait.



I was visiting from San Diego and failed to anticipate the FREEZING cold. It's too cold to smile. I spent about $90 at Sport Chalet purchasing survival gear (but that hat is sweet, right?).


Baltimore arranged for a Billy Blanks wannabe to come out and lead some aerobics. The funny thing was, we actually did it. It was really that cold.


I just thought this guy was cool. He was all about the peace sign.


My first shot of Obama. Of course the teleprompter is blocking his face.


That's better. You can't really tell, but we're pretty close. It was awesome!



You'll notice there are no pictures of the concert on the Mall. That's because it was (again) freezing cold and I can really only tolerate so much. So, I visited friends in VA instead. But, on Monday, I was returning my rental car to the airport (parking in DC is hopeless at best anyways), and I was treated to a preview of some of the parade floats. The cops literally blocked off the intersection right in front of me. Not sure what the Cinderella carriage is all about...







Code Pink looking good. Keep it up!


I decided to walk around the Capitol Monday afternoon. I figured it would be as close as I would get (I was right). Apparently a lot of other people had the same idea.


Ok, let's get to the good part. Inauguration Pics!!

Sunrise on the Capitol. This was about two hours after we headed out. At least we got in (some were not so lucky). AND, you have to have a ticket to get this close (yea, I got hookups!). This is the view from the silver section. I figured that only gold and platinum would be ahead of us. Wrong. Purple, yellow, blue and orange were ahead of us. Apparently the color designators don't know their rankings. I think this should have been renamed the puce or "flesh tone" section.


Inauguration Weekend friends. You can't tell how excited I am because I look like I'm dying from exhaustion. I was trying hard to make facial expressions, but apparently my face was frozen.


OMG!! It's Obama! Can't you see him?!?! Hahaha


Thank God for the Jumbotrons. He got it right in this shot, but for some reason, the teleprompter typist kept typing "threat ring" instead of "let freedom ring." Weird...

After the sun rose higher in the sky, it cast a shadow on the jumbotron and I gave up trying to get any good pics. I wanted to be there and absorb the moment. Besides, other people got way better shots than I ever could.

The official moment. It was incredible (and I'd like to point out that all those people were farther back. See the tickets were good).


The second biggest cheer came when Bush flew over for the last time. One guy yelled, "Take him to Guantanamo!" Most people gave him the finger. Good riddance!!


And, of course, after a shower and a nap, we celebrated like all young, urban professionals. Sushi and sake bombs!!




I do wish I was able to get better pictures on my own, but I was just so thrilled to be a part of this incredible weekend. People ask, where were you when Kennedy was killed? When the Challenger blew up? When the towers came down? And when people ask, "where were you when Obama became president?," I can say: I was there. Simply amazing.

Ok, back to work!

Thursday, December 18, 2008

What are you doing here?

That is probably the second most common question I'm asked. People come to my cubicle, see my Obama buttons (two, I'm tasteful) and my picture of Obama and Biden from the convention (not as tasteful, but cool to me), and they immediately forget what they came to talk about, instead asking me "You're a liberal? What are you doing here?"

See, I'm in the Navy and apparently, being a liberal in the military makes me a total freak. I usually just let it slide, but with the new year, and the impending inauguration, I've decided to change my attitude. No more shrugging it off. No. From now on, I'm going to take on these douchebags (nicely,if they out-rank me). As far as I can tell, the only people that have actually defended the Constitution in the past eight years have been liberal. Torture? Conservatives. Wiretapping? Conservatives again? I mean, Bush was the one who said the Constitution is "just a piece of paper." So, fuck conservatives. They suck at defending the Constitution.

I'd like to say that I have no idea why conservatives have felt that they own the military, but that's not exactly true, and this article does a pretty good job of explaining what drives the conservative mind ("fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity"). Well, I'd say that pretty much sums up the military. That, and they can be protected from "the gays." I guess it makes sense that conservatives would be attracted to the military environment. And there's guns, so many guns!!!

The past eight years have been a Bush love-fest. It's gross. He can do no wrong and I've endured way too many "discussions" about how going into Iraq was the right thing to do. But, I can feel the pendulum swinging back in the other direction. For people that have taken the "support the president or fuck off" attitude, they're surprisingly ready to shed that mentality. Ok, it's not surprising, but it's so hypocritical, it makes my head spin!

Well, I've been supporting the Constitution all along. It's not about the President, and it never should have been. So, you want to know what I'm doing here? The same thing I've always been doing here: exercising my right to serve my country and defend the Constitution. If you don't like that, well, fuck off.

Monday, November 3, 2008

Make no mistake, tomorrow is not the end. It is the beginning.

I would just like to start out an say that I am so proud of the Democrats this year. We always knew we could run a better campaign, that we didn't need Karl Rove and fear tactics to win. We haven't won yet. I'm not counting those chickens. But, we are on the offensive, fighting Republicans on "their" turf. We are going into this ahead, in the best position we've seen in years.

And, thank you, all of those that have volunteered these past 20 months. Not just to those that have volunteered for Obama. Personally, I began this political season in the Edwards camp. But, from the beginning, we have been charged up. We have been ready to put our hearts and souls into electing a Democrat. We have put our divisions behind us and come together around Senators Obama and Biden.

When the votes are counted tomorrow (or next week), we will have our next president, and I believe we will have President Obama.

But, please, don't think the fight is over tomorrow.

This election is round one. The next four years will see an organized, vocal and aggressive Republican minority. They will push back against every plan we have for fixing America. They will not yield to our majority as so many Democrats yielded to them.

Make no mistake, tomorrow is just the beginning. We will need all of our strength, all of our grassroots networks to continue to be mobilized. We need to continue to speak out and support everything we have worked so hard for. After tomorrow, we will have the chance to see our dreams become reality. Fox and Rush and Bill-O will be feeding the fires of their followers. We must continue to outshine them. We must drag them kicking and screaming into the 21st Century. They will hate it and us for it, but it is the only way to fix America.

Barack Obama could not have gotten this far without us. He will not get any further without us. Please, celebrate tomorrow, relax on Wednesday and come back ready for round two on Thursday.

Monday, September 29, 2008

Is There Anything Left To Say?

I have to admit, I was kind of excited (hm, I don’t know if that’s the right word) on September 15th. It was really a turning point in this election. Finally, we were able to stop talking about pigs and lipstick and feigned sexism. We had real problems on our hands, and the candidates were given a chance to speak on real issues. I didn’t want to be one of those people using negative economic events to Democratic advantage, but there I was.

In the generic polls, Democrats had a lead in economic issues, and Obama was able to capitalize on that. He was smart, thoughtful and presidential. McCain looked schizophrenic, unsteady, totally unsure, and definitely not presidential. We were back on top and I felt so good. It’s entirely possible that I spent a lot of time gloating to my Republican coworkers. After all, it was their stupid greed and legislation that put the grease in that fire.

And then the bailout came along. Oh the free for all; hardcore capitalists and libertarians now begging for a big government band-aid. What irony. Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. Admittedly, I was undecided on the bailout. I saw both sides of the issue, and, while I’d rather give $2,300 of my tax money for universal health care than bailing out Wall St, I don’t want to see America slip into a depression.

So, now the bill failed. Are Republican hurt feelings to blame? Was it a bad plan? Will the economy survive without the bailout?

But, I’m not feeling so good about this now. Obama’s got a strong lead, but how will this affect the next presidency? After January 20th, all the fingers are going to be pointing at that administration. I don’t think that Republicans can clean up this mess, considering how their policies and greed got us here, but the opportunity for a brilliant Democratic administration has been stolen by this crisis. Of course, I think a McCain administration would be far worse for America. I’m just sad for the fact that a Democratic President will be harangued by the blunders of a disastrous Republican administration. I believe that Obama will prevail, but it won’t be easy. And the Republicans will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future. It’s going to be ugly.

This is just a really fucking depressing situation.

At least we can still be sure of one thing. John McCain is a complete joke. First of all, the suspension of his campaign (that was not actually a suspension) was probably the most absurd thing that’s happened in modern politics (except for the choice of Palin as a running mate). Who does that? Obviously it was a stunt, but maybe he should have double-checked the choreography. And even though McCain has been for and against and for the bailout, he was busy taking credit for its passage…before it failed. Maybe he shouldn’t have counted those chickens. So now is he taking the blame for the failure? Obviously he didn’t secure Republican support. But, it continues the image of his campaign as a circus. That, and Douglas Holtz-Eakin (he’s a moron…not even the high-functioning type).

Should have put my money under my mattress…

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Enough! This Election Is NOT About Obama

Is America regressing? Seriously. What is going on with this election?

In our personal lives we change jobs, dump boyfriends and return products when they don’t live up to our expectations. Why don’t we do the same when it comes to our politics?

This election is not about Barack Obama. It is about whether or not we as Americans want to turn our backs on the failures of the past eight years and make positive progress towards a better future. It’s about reining in the corporate interests that have poisoned our economy and restoring trust in America both at home and abroad.

The past eight years have been fraught with lies, destruction, and greed. Like a cheating spouse that begs for forgiveness yet again, John McCain pleads with the American people that he is the agent of change. McCain holds Sarah Palin aloft as evidence that he is different now, different than “those” Republicans. He swears it won’t happen again because he’s learned his lesson. No matter that, since his crushing defeat at the hands of Karl Rove in 2000, his voting record shows that he votes with Bush Administration more than a majority of the time (when he manages to show up). And make no mistake, Sarah Palin isn’t a pitbull in lipstick, she’s Dick Cheney in drag…and probably a better shot.

John McCain may not think you’re stupid (that’s the purview of Karl Rove and Steve Schmidt), but he thinks you’re forgiving. He thinks that if he pleads long enough and hard enough, you’ll forgive his transgressions and give him and his friends (because, let’s be honest, John McCain is bought and paid for) just four more years. Of course, John McCain’s friends also think that your suffering is part of a mental recession and that because Americans can go to an emergency room, there's no such thing as an uninsured American.

Reality provides a different look at the situation for Americans. McCain knows this so he wants to shift the debate (and thanks to our spineless media, he’s been able to). He doesn’t want this election to be about the issues or the problems that Americans are facing. He doesn’t want to talk about the economy or the war in Iraq (the Surge is ok though); he doesn’t want to talk about renewable energy or the soaring deficit. Because he knows he will lose if Americans demand an explanation for the last eight years. He knows he will lose when people ask him “How will you help us?” and he has no answer. No, John McCain wants to make this election about Barack Obama. Just look at his ads. Doesn't look like the "respectful campaign" he promised, does it? A majority of McCain’s ads focus on Obama because McCain is attempting to force the debate away from the real issues of this election. The fact that these ads are largely based on falsehoods is lost on most Americans (thanks again, “journalists”).

Now, conservatives will point to the fact that Democrats have been in control of Congress since January 2007 and, by that simple fact, it means that they are somehow responsible for our current situation. But, until one of those yammering heads can point to what legislation, exactly, the Democrats have passed that would have caused this, their argument is moot. Unfortunately, the Dems in Congress have capitulated on every issue. They haven’t forced an end to the war in Iraq, they haven’t repealed the Bush tax cuts or ended oil subsidies, they caved on FISA. And they took impeachment off the table, right up front.

Now, in the rare instance where Congress manages to pass meaningful legislation that would actually help Americans, such as Children’s Health Insurance or enforcing the Eighth Amendment by banning torture or improving the Medicare system, Bush goes and vetoes it. So, next time your child has to go without medical care or you hear of Americans being tortured as retaliation for the torture at Guantanamo, don’t look at this Congress. Cast your disapproving eye to the Republicans who refuse to actually help Americans.

So, in the words of Barack Obama: Enough!

Enough with this fake-outrage BS. Enough with the circus and non-issues. I don’t care who is wearing lipstick or which side can feign outrage faster. This has crossed the line from tedious to ridiculous. This election is not about Barack Obama. It’s about the crises that have been created in the last eight years and what we are going to do to reverse the damage. If you think the Constitution can stand one more pass through the shredder, then go ahead and vote for the old guy who keeps changing his positions and his fundamentalist sidekick. I, personally, like the First Amendment and want to keep it around. After these last eight years, I’m going with the Constitutional Law professor and the Senator with the history of real progress.


(This pretty much sums it up)

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Dave Chappelle Was Right...

I’m having a hard time with this presidential campaign. Not that it’s unexpected, but this is such an outrageously lopsided debate that it makes me want to tear my hair out. Luckily, I’ve been busy with one of the local campaigns, but I’ve decided to come back and address some things.

I’ve heard many times that Barack Obama doesn’t “deserve” to be president. Honestly, no one deserves to be president; people have to earn it. Hillary Clinton thought she deserved to be the Democratic nominee and look what happened to her. Just because you’ve been around for a while doesn’t mean you’re entitled to anything. All achievement must be constantly earned. But, I interpret this comment against Obama two ways.

One, Barack Obama is too young to be president, like there’s some sort of line that every person is in based on age (so, I guess McCain (JSM3) would be at the head of the line). But, like the policy of promotions based on time instead of skill, you won’t end up with the most qualified candidate, just the oldest one. McCain’s been in DC for 26 years and has contributed more to the problems than the solutions, especially in recent years. JSM3 is so entrenched in DC that he’s blinded by reality. Perhaps he should just retire? But this “too young” argument really loses legs considering that Obama can join the AARP in three years. Let’s not act like he’s a child. He’s actually in the prime of his life, with the energy and enthusiasm necessary for the hardest job on earth.

Two, Obama is black. Yea, I’ll say it. Rush Limbaugh was thisclose to dropping the N-word on Obama yesterday (“little black man-child” is pretty damn close). And, every time the Republicans say they don’t want to make this about race, they bring up race and make it about race. So, somehow a Harvard-educated man who is actually of mixed-race cannot be president? Welcome to the 21st century Republicans. I know you’ve spent the past 60 years oppressing minorities, but some manage to slip through and succeed. Weird.

Of course, Dave Chappelle had it right. In my favorite political skit of all time, Chappelle imagines what would have happened if Bush was Black (ok, not just black, but the worst of all African-American stereotypes). It’s hilarious. But, sadly, it’s true. Obama is getting grilled, while McCain gets a free pass (I know I’ve mentioned this media study, but it’s quite shocking). So, race is an issue, and it’s clouding the real issues in this election.

But, on the flip side of the idea that Obama doesn’t deserve the presidency is the idea that somehow John McCain does. So, I thought it would be prudent to look at what JSM3 has done with the other entitlements in his life.

1) John McCain goes to the Naval Academy. Thanks to his father and grandfather, both admirals (or, as the Navy calls them DADmirals), John Sidney the Third was able to circumvent the application process (which is currently in the top 1% of selectivity). So, of course, with an opportunity like that, there’s nothing left to do but squander it. Which McCain did with flying colors. As we all know by now, JSM3 had to call on his father numerous times just to keep him at the Academy. And, we’re all familiar with the number 894 (as in, McCain’s rank out of 899 graduates). Super.

2) John McCain becomes a pilot. Being a pilot is cool. Most people will admit that. However, at the Naval Academy, it’s also well known that in order to become a pilot, one has to work hard an prove that they have respect for the Navy’s time and money. Well, almost everybody. Even though he graduated at the bottom of his class, McCain managed to be selected as a Naval Aviator (I imagine it had something to do with his DADmiral). And again, it was a squandered opportunity. McCain wasn’t just a poor pilot. He sucked. In his time, he crashed five airplanes. I graduated with a kid who was in flight school and came up short on the runway. Guess what? He’s not in flight school any more. He didn’t crash the plane, but he made a serious mistake. So serious that the Navy determined he was no longer eligible to be a pilot. This leads me to the belief that not only did JSM3 believe he was entitled to a prestigious aviation billet, but that nothing should keep him from continuing, even after repeated fuck ups.

3) John McCain cheats on his first wife. Apparently, in McCain’s world, he’s also entitled to a beautiful, wealthy wife. Good thing he married a model. Too bad she was in a devastating car accident. Even though she stayed with him and kept the vigil for him while he was a POW, that apparently doesn’t count. None of that “for better or worse” crap for JSM3. He just wanted better. So, he went out and got himself better. Thirty-four days after officially divorcing his first wife, JSM3 picked up the newer, faster model. I’m not going to judge the age difference, but I am going to judge the 34 days courtship. You know that saying, “once a cheater, always a cheater?” Is that the judgment we need (new slogan: JSM3=Me first)?

4) John McCain goes to the Senate. Ha, ok well, he was elected. Going to work is another question entirely. And, I know I’ve talked about his horrific attendance record before, but it’s very troubling to me. Why would someone who so blatantly shirked his responsibilities be deserving of the Presidency?

I’m really just disgusted with the way this campaign is being handled, though it’s really no different than any other. Unfortunately, we can’t just throw in the towel. We have to redouble our efforts to expose the truth about JSM3: he’s a temperamental hot-head who believes that he’s entitled to anything he wants. He may deride Obama’s ambition, but what of his own? Whatever JSM3 wants, someone in his family has given him. Where has his work been? What has he earned?

So, I’ll leave you with this quote (though from a non-traditional source): According to one classmate, "being on liberty with John McCain was like being in a train wreck." It is unclear what being with McCain during his presidency would be like for the nation. Unfortunately, America has no direct experience from which to draw with a president who was a temperamental son of a distinguished military man and who in college was a temperamental fuck-up who liked to party. What could possibly be so dangerous about that?

Hm, I wonder??

Monday, August 4, 2008

Be The Tidal Wave

Most people would assume that because I'm in the military, the War in Iraq/Global War on Terror (actually, I just wanted an excuse to use the acronym GWOT...G-WOT!!) is the most important issue to me in this election. And, honestly, I have been trying to pin down exactly what is the most important issue to me.

The War(s)? Possibly.

Energy? Also a good choice.

The Economy? Definitely in dire straits and in need of attention.

Health Care? The Right to Choose? Prosecuting the Wackos who've held this country hostage for eight years?

So, I mulled this over (and over again), and I finally came up with my answer. The most important issue in this election is...the election itself!

Surprised? I was, too. But, when you think about it, it makes sense. Here we are, talking about who's going to change (or not change, as the case may be) things around here, but nothing is going to happen if we don't have a successful election (by "we" I mean Democrats...and by extension, America). If we don't get the issues out there and talk about them in a way that's meaningful to Americans. If we don't honestly talk about what went wrong, what's still going wrong, and what could go wrong in the future. As well as what we are doing, and can continue to do, right.

You know, it's only August and already this campaign has taken a ridiculous turn. I suppose it's not unexpected, but it's completely unnecessary. John McCain (who is the worst candidate on earth) refuses to tell the truth about anythign, especially himself. He refuses to talk about the issues, adn instead, takes a road so low it's practically a tunnel.

And no one is going to stop him. The people should be pissed!! I'm completely insulted by McCain's campaign. To stoop so low and shirk the issues is NOT worthy of the American people's time or money. It's why American politics are a joke around the world, and why, if McCain is elected, America will continue to loose standing across the world (hard to imagine, but completely possible).

And, it's why we can't do enough this year. It's not enough to sit here and chat about it. It's not enough to send money (unless that's really all you can do). We all need to put our blood, sweat and tears into this election, from the top of the ticket to the bottom. WE need to be the force behind the change. Like Obama said, "he's just a symbol." The change has to come from us. We must demand that change. The people must be the ones who are driving this democracy. It's been hijacked and it's time for us to take back control.

So, in the interest of the election, I've started volunteering for one of the local campaigns. We don't need another Republican to come in here and privatize the city government. We don't need another politician who's going to make a profit off of the suffering of others. On November 4th, I'm not going to be sitting at home (or in a bar) wishing I did more. I'm going to be celebrating, knowing I did all I could for this democracy.

A drop of water may be small on its own, but millions of drops combined can form a tidal wave. Obama is just the catalyst, we are the true force of change.

Monday, July 28, 2008

John McCain Needs Equal Media Coverage? Sounds Good To Me...

That John McCain is the worst candidate in this election is an axiom. There’s no way else to say it. Everything is says and does is confusing, wrong or false (or some combination of the three). And, yet, he keeps hanging on. Why? Well, as we’ve been made painfully aware, the media is essentially keeping him in this race by preventing any substantive discussion.

Don’t believe me? Well, let’s look at Exhibit A: The study released by the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University. This study shows that in the first six weeks of the general election, the “liberal media” was actually harder on Obama. Yea, you read that right. So all you “liberal media” conspiracy theorists can just throw that crap out the window. In the evening news broadcasts, a mere 28% of stories about Obama were positive and the whopping 72% remaining were negative. As for McCain, he faired much better, with an essentially equal 43% positive and 57% negative showing. So, any claim that the media is simply presenting stories, and not specific viewpoints, is not true.

And, for Exhibit B, we’ll look at the fact that in a recent interview, CBS covered for McCain when he made a glaring mistake, especially considering that “the surge” is his area of expertise, so to speak. Instead of airing the mistake and letting the people discuss this fact, CBS edited in an answer to a previous question, an answer where McCain impugns Obama’s motives with more lies.

But, John McCain still whines that the media is unfair to him. He’s not satisfied with significantly more positive coverage, he wants equal time, too. Well, John, in case no one has mentioned this to you, you actually have to do something newsworthy to make the news. So, while you’re opponent is meeting with cheering crowds of hundreds of thousands around the world (at your urging, none the less), you’re knocking over applesauce and checking your notes for a price of milk in Pennsylvania. And then you're complaining about unfair coverage. C’mon John, you’re supposed to be the candidate of “experience” and “wisdom,” yet you’re stomping and pouting like a child. Is this how you’re going to handle the presidency?

And then you go and run “the ad.” You know what ad I’m talking about, the ad that completely goes against the “clean campaign” you promised to run. And, shit, John, you didn’t even have a 527 do it. You approved these falsehoods all on your own. Wow! It’s the one that only aired on national TV like four times, but has been on loop on all the news networks today. But, were the talking heads debunking the falsehood-laced ad? Not a chance. MSNBC made a feeble attempt during the day, but it wasn’t until Countdown that the whole truth came out. Shall we speak those truths? Yeah, I think so.

1) First, and most importantly, Obama never planned to make the Landstuhl trip a media fanfare. It was simply going to be a trip to visit the soldiers, just as similar trips in Afghanistan and Iraq were. However, the Pentagon labeled Obama’s trip a campaign event and did not allow advisors. Or specifically, one advisor: retired Air Force Major General Gration. But please, feel free to look further into who the Pentagon official responsible for the trip blunder is. It’s hilarious…you’ll never see it coming!
2) The full Senate Foreign Relations Committee has held three hearings on Afghanistan, and Obama did attend one of those. Let’s also bear in mind that he’s a member, not a chair (and, please, McCainiacs, bring up your candidate’s attendance record. We’ll compare).
3) And, let’s clarify what kind of years we’re talking about. Decades? No. Try two and a half years. And, thanks to the wonders of modern technology, like email and “the google,” we can all know what’s going on there every single day.

And, then of course, there are the lies that McCain tells about himself…in the same ad! McCain claims he's always supported the troops, but his actual voting record shows something different:
1) In mid-2007, McCain had only shown up for four of the previous 14 votes on Iraq.
2) In 2008, that number is zero. In fact, McCain hasn’t cast a vote in the Senate since April 8th. Not for FISA, not for Medicare, and not even for the GI Bill (which he and Bush opposed).
3) April 2003, McCain tabled a motion to provide over $1 billion in National Guard and Reserve equipment (brings a new meaning to BYO).
4) October 2003, McCain tabled a motion to provide an additional $233 million for safety equipment.
5) March 2004, McCain voted. He voted against closing tax loopholes that would have provided an additional $1.8 billion in veterans’ care.
6) March 2004, McCain voted against closing corporate tax loopholes that would have provided and additional $1.5 billion for veterans’ care.
7) April 2006, McCain voted against an extra $430 million for veteran outpatient care.

Sensing a pattern here? Ok, well I’ll continue then.

8) May 2006, McCain voted against $20 million for veteran health care facilities.
9) March 2007, McCain did not show up to vote on a bill to redeploy troops from Iraq in 2008.
10) September 2007, McCain voted against an amendment for minimum rest time between deployments.

And that was pretty much the last time McCain showed up to vote on anything (scroll down for a post that discusses his attendance record in depth). Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a D on his voting record. Obama received an B+. Disabled American Veterans gave McCain a 20% rating on his voting record, while Obama received an 80% rating. There's a difference in being a veteran and actually supporting veterans.

So, John McCain wants more equal media coverage, and I think he deserves it. Let’s write to all the media outlets and demand that they cover McCain the same way they cover Obama. Let’s see the pundits hack apart McCain’s gaffes hour after endless hour. Let’s see them call for him to do something, and then when he does it, let’s see them call him presumptuous. Let’s see him handle the pressure of true political discourse. Actually, it’s hard enough watching him now, I don’t know if I could really stomach any more. But, I suppose I can, and gladly will, in the name of democracy.

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Elite? You Bet! And I Don't Care

I’ve been sitting on this idea for a little while. I just really didn’t know where to start, but “luckily” the neo-cons came to the “rescue.” I was thinking about elitism and how to handle it, when Karl Rove pathetically attempted to paint Obama as an arrogant elitist (“You know, he’s that guy at the country club…” No Karl, we don’t know people at the country club, you do.). Ha! Karl Rove, the mind behind the permanent campaign and the worst presidency in history. Maybe Karl should remember the old saying, “when you point a finger at somebody, three more point back to you.” In his attempt to brand someone as elitist, Rove demonstrated just how arrogant and elite the right wing has become. But, when you get right down to it, the people running for president are elite. What we’re really talking about these days is what kind of elite we want in power.

I’m not sure where this anti-elitist idea came from. Why do people want the “leader of the free world” to be just like the guy down the street? People understand that some people are not athletic, not everyone can sing or dance or draw. We happily chalk these up to “natural ability.” Why would politics be any different? I know, I know, politics is about the people, about ideas, and everyone can have those. Well, I’m going to lay out the truth: a lot of people are stupid. A lot of people (obviously) don’t understand the complexities of government, and even the smart ones get it wrong. It takes a special person, with a certain mix of smarts and savvy to be successful in America’s political jungle.

Here’s another secret that the GOP doesn’t want you to know: the men that founded America were highly educated, wealthy and intelligent. They weren’t the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker. They were lawyers, judges, scientists, physicians, plantation owners and financial giants. Many were known beyond their communities, a rare feat in that time. They were elite. Or, to put it another way, do you really think that the average person could write and lead the greatest experiment in individual freedom and self-determination in history? I thought not. I certainly don’t want Larry the Cable Guy writing (or rewriting) the Constitution.

And yet, this election year, the charges of elitism are already flying. Multi-millionaires each claiming that the other is “out of touch” with the cares of the average Americans. It’s ludicrous! But, more importantly, it’s a superficial waste of time. The question shouldn’t be who is more elite, but instead, who will work for the elite and who will work for the average citizen. And, with W as our guide, it’s quite obvious that Republican policies are geared towards the wealthy. Well, “geared towards” may not be strong enough. “Specifically written for and solely benefiting the wealthy” is a better way to describe these failed policies.

I guess the question you should be asking is: What kind of elitist do you want? Do you want someone who was born into privilege, handed the best off all worlds and then married into millions? Someone who feeds of the wealth of his wife’s father? Someone who acts for the rich because they made him who he is now? Or, do you want someone who came from humble beginnings, worked his way to success, and is the epitome of the American dream? Someone continues to work for the people and continues to protect the American dream? Being elite and caring about the average American are not mutually exclusive. Let’s ensure we elect a president who believes in the dream because he is living the dream.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Going The Distance

I'm not a distance runner, but I know a few things about endurance. And, I'm pretty sure everyone knows the first rule of competing in a long race: Pace Yourself! You might have a lot of energy in the beginning, you might think that adrenaline can carry you, but when you get halfway there and the novelty has worn off, what is going to make you push on? Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), I did not pace myself for this race. And I know I'm not the only one.

Now, I like to consider myself a die hard politico, but I'm starting to rethink that assessment. In my defense, I had a lot going on in my personal life and with my job, but don't we all? Maybe it was the six week break in which we only heard about Reverend Wright, "guns and bitter", and learned new and different ways Hillary can fudge the math to make it work for her. Those six weeks were the longest of my political life. Nothing changed, but you would have thought that people were battling it out in the polls every night. The talking heads said the same things over and over and over. Luckily, I haven't had a TV for the past seven weeks or so and I've been spared the worst of it (on the flip side, I miss KO like crazy).

And then the races started again. Pennsylvania and Clinton's on the upswing, North Carolina and Indiana put Obama back on top, but can he win the racists and rednecks? (Note: not a particular state, but maybe a particular demographic). And still, nothing's changed. I'm starting to envy the campaign limits of Britain and France.

I think the biggest problem in this campaign is the information itself. Well, not the facts, but the 24-hour news cycle. Or more precisely, the 30 minute news cycle. I had MSNBC on today for about five hours, and except for the Obama speech, the other four hours were the same 20-30 minutes of news rehashed over and over. Enough already! If there's no news, don't pretend that there is. It just makes the TV stations look like morons (or they already are and it's showing) and it frustrates the crap out of Americans. Or, even better, report on the rest of the world. Americans are, for the most part, largely ignorant of the geography of anything past North America. Let's branch out and see what's going on with the other 5.7 billion people on this planet. Oh, that's depressing? Poverty, genocide, and famine? Better turn back to Clinton and Obama.

But, if I could thank one person for making me come back day after day, I'd have to thank John McCain. Almost more than I want a Democrat to win, I want John McCain to lose. I want him to lose embarrassingly. I want him and the rest of his Republican neo-con liars to go down in flames at the hands of 'We the People." I want Americans to stand up and say "Hell no I'm not voting for a lying, hypocritical, old fool who doesn't know crap about the economy and tries to pass off a corporate health care plan under which even he wouldn't be covered! Hell no I'm not voting for a man that didn't vote for Bush but now kisses his ass daily! Hell no I'm not voting for more of the same failed policies! But, mostly, I'm not voting for you because I do actually love America, and not just those with money. Hell no John McCain!"

So, thank you John McCain for reminding me every day of what we're fighting for in this election. I may not have paced myself, but you are the wind on my back, pushing me to victory. We are running away from your failed policies and towards One America!

Saturday, April 12, 2008

You Can't Teach An Old Dog New Tricks

When we were younger, there was no such thing as “too much of a good thing.” How could we have too much candy or ice cream? But, as we grew older, we realized that even the good things in life can backfire, and that we must try to achieve balance. We balance the good with the bad and the mundane. If we don’t, we loose sight what makes the good valuable. This election has often come to the question of experience and whose has the most and/or the best. And for me, and many other voters, it’s not the size of the experience, but the quality, that counts.

John McCain is a Cold Warrior. He came of age in a militaristic time and he was a POW in a hot war of cold war principles. He was raised to believe in idea that there are only two sides to any issues; the US versus the Soviet Union, Democracy or Communism, War or peace. This is his fatal flaw. He is simply not equipped to deal with the modern world. He has not honed his skills in discerning shades of gray, and the geopolitical situation today is anything but clearly defined. He will constantly fail, as he has already begun to do, when he tries to dilute complex issues into two sides.

I overheard a political advisor on the Bill-O circus the other day (don’t think I make a habit of watching that clown show) say that all McCain has to do to make Obama look weak on Iraq is hold his “stay the course” stance. The advisor stated that when Obama tries to explain his position, he will appear to “flip flop.” I vehemently disagree with this position (but, I encourage McCain to keep it). The longer that McCain sticks to the black and white situation, the more people will realize that he’s not equipped to deal with the complex issues facing the next president. Just as Bush has gooned everything up because of his refusal to address multi-faceted situations, McCain will be a monumental failure when he continues that policy.

And for the past two days, we’ve been shown what “experience” can give us. Obama speaks the truth about people’s opinions of Washington and points out wedge issues for what they are, and then the “experienced” politicians try to jump in and tell us that we don’t feel bitter, that we’re being condescended towards. If anything, it is condescending to tell us how we feel. If their experience has taught them anything, they would be listening to us, reading our letters and realizing that we are bitter. We don’t want to hear a pretty picture of how they will make it all better. We want someone who is willing to address the issues truthfully.

Because the world is complex, we need a president who is willing to face that reality head on (hell, we need a president who’s willing to face reality head on). No more of this doctored intelligence crap or the politicizing of every issue. We need a leader who has the mental agility to absorb many points of view while keeping the best interest of America, not his checking account, in mind.

So, McCain especially, but increasingly Clinton, have failed my experience test. Too often they have shown themselves to be entrenched in the past, stuck in their old ways. And, all I can see is that their experience will not move us forward. Their experience is only good for how things used to be, not what they are or what they will be. They have not shown themselves to be open to the change we need. McCain and Clinton are the old dogs, and right now, we need some new tricks.

Thursday, April 3, 2008

McCain the Next 'Honest Abe'? Highly Doubtful.

John McCain claims that he is a proud to be a Republican in the tradition of “Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan.” Knowing what I do about Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Reagan, I am more than skeptical of McCain’s claim (except for the Reagan part). And, knowing what I do about McCain’s general level of knowledge (low), I am assuming that if someone were to ask him to compare himself to Lincoln and Roosevelt, he would have no clue where to start. And, just a note for his speech writers: before you write something for your candidate, make sure he can back it up when you’re not there.

Since this is kind of long, I’m going to have to do it in two parts. I’ve decided to leave Reagan out because we can all remember his policies, and Reagan was no Lincoln or Roosevelt either. I’ve highlighted some governing philosophies of Lincoln, and we’ll see if McCain is following his “tradition.”

It’s important to note that Lincoln was a Washington outsider. Lincoln spent only two years in the House of Representatives and took a ten year hiatus before he ran for President. Lincoln also had no military experience. Abraham Lincoln highlights:

  • In 1846, he spoke out against the Mexican-American, which he attributed to President Polk's desire for "military glory."
  • Lincoln did not support war for personal gain or presidential legacy. McCain has solidly supported Bush’s war and delusions of military glory.


  • After declaring "God of Heaven has forgotten to defend the weak and innocent, and permitted the strong band of murderers and demons from hell to kill men, women, and children, and lay waste and pillage the land of the just," Lincoln became a political liability and chose not to run for re-election.
  • Lincoln spoke out against injustice, regardless of the consequences. McCain used to speak out, but now he only says what the party tells him to say.


  • However, in 1854, Lincoln returned to politics in response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which expressly repealed the limits on slavery's extent as determined by the Missouri Compromise.
  • Lincoln was involved in politics to promote justice and the ideas of the founders, not for personal gain. McCain does not support equal rights for all Americans.


  • Lincoln is well known for ending slavery in the United States. In 1861 – 1862, however, he made it clear that the North was fighting the war to preserve the Union, not to abolish slavery. Freeing the slaves became, in late 1862, a war measure to weaken the rebellion by destroying the economic base of its leadership class.
  • When Lincoln had to fight a war, he had sound principles. He did not fight war based on personal feelings or philosophy. Again, McCain supports endless crusades based on the mistaken ideas of a few.


  • In 1863, when Lincoln saw support for his war wavering, and people were disturbed by the draft, he knew he had to make a statement to win back the people. Hence, his decision to go to Gettysburg and urge the Union to highly resolve that the dead there "shall not have died in vain" was Lincoln's way of saying that if the Copperhead peace democrats get their way, then the men who there gave the "last full measure of devotion" will have done so for no reason at all. In the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln was proposing this question: what would these men who died for this cause want us to do--quit now or finish the job? How the country answered this question would determine the 1864 election.
  • Public support in a time of war is always hard to maintain in the face of high casualties. And, we’ve heard Bush say that the soldiers who’ve died in Iraq will not die in vain. And that giving into calls for peace would make the whole effort in vain. So what’s the difference? Well, for starters, Lincoln was fighting a war to protect the integrity of American, and it had a clear definition of success: The southern states return to the United States of America. In Bush’s war and with McCain’s support, the Global War on Terrorism has become a quagmire with no clear goals or definition of success. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, so all those that have died have died in vain because Bush and McCain have chosen not to pursue the real terrorists who harmed America.


  • Even before the war ended, Lincoln was actively pursuing a reconstruction strategy. Determined to find a course that would reunite the nation and not alienate the South, Lincoln urged that speedy elections under generous terms be held throughout the war in areas behind Union lines. His Amnesty Proclamation of December 8, 1863, offered pardons to those who had not held a Confederate civil office, had not mistreated Union prisoners, and would sign an oath of allegiance.
  • Lincoln understands that a solid strategy needs to be in place if the region is going to rebuild. He did not tear down the system of government and replace it with partisans. He allowed the people to continue to govern themselves. McCain has supported the complete destruction of Iraq and the installation of Bush partisans, which has not helped the reconstruction effort.


  • Besides the war, Lincoln took a hands-off approach to legislation, where he allowed Congress to write the legislation and he vetoed only those bills that threatened his war powers. Thus, he signed the Homestead Act in 1862, making millions of acres of government-held land in the West available for purchase at very low cost. The Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act, also signed in 1862, provided government grants for agricultural universities in each state. The Pacific Railway Acts of 1862 and 1864 granted federal support for the construction of the United States' First Transcontinental Railroad, which was completed in 1869. Other important legislation involved economic matters, including the first income tax and higher tariffs. Also included was the creation of the system of national banks by the National Banking Acts of 1863, 1864, and 1865, which allowed the creation of a strong national financial system. Congress created and Lincoln approved the Department of Agriculture in 1862, although that institution would not become a Cabinet-level department until 1889.
  • In his legislation, Lincoln showed that he supported a strong government. He supported the first income tax and higher tariffs. I don’t know if McCain could be more of a polar opposite on this issue. Lincoln also supported government grants for education, and large federal projects for infrastructure. McCain, like Bush, supports only private, for-profit industry. Additionally, Lincoln supported a growing federal government, but supported by the higher taxes and tariffs. This is where I believe McCain is more like Reagan; he says he supports small government, so he reduces taxes, but continues to expand the federal government without the necessary funds. Lastly, Lincoln did not meddle in legislative affairs or veto based on his personal beliefs. McCain has promised more Bush leadership: Approve only what he personally believes in, make no compromises or attempts to see an issue from the majority’s point of view. From what McCain has promised, he could not be more opposed to Lincoln’s governing style.


  • Lincoln largely relied on the Calvinistic "doctrine of necessity" and not organized religion to guide his beliefs. Lincoln’s religious skepticism was fueled by his exposure to the ideas of the Lockean Enlightenment and classical liberalism, especially economic liberalism. Consistent with the common practice of the Whig party, Lincoln would often use the Declaration of Independence as the philosophical and moral expression of these two philosophies.
  • This may be the most important point because it talks to governing and leadership style. Lately, the Republicans have come to be dominated by the Christian Fundamentalists, but this was not what the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln intended. Lincoln based his beliefs on Enlightenment-era philosophies, not religion. The Declaration of Independence was his guiding document. Lincoln believed that America’s destiny was to be shaped by the principles of its founding, not by the Bible. McCain has promised to turn this nation over to the Christian Extremists, which is not something Lincoln would ever do.


    From these ideas, I can only conclude that Lincoln was a man of great principle. He believed in truth, justice, and enlightenment. When he had to fight, he did it judiciously, and based in solid principle. When he led America, he thought about what was best for the nation, not just for his supporters. Lincoln guided this nation through a time of great turmoil, and while he was not perfect, he was thoughtful. McCain promises to be none of these. McCain is a war monger who will continue the harmful, un-Constitutional policies of President Bush and the Christian extremists. If any candidate in this race is like Abraham Lincoln, it is Barack Obama, which these highlights make very clear. McCain should be ashamed for trying to degrade the memory of a good president for his own political gain!

    Coming soon: Is McCain a Roosevelt “Rough Rider?”

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Republicans Are the REAL Terrorists

Everybody prepare to run to the hills! If Obama wins the nomination, the terrorists will certainly celebrate in the streets by slaughtering thousands!

Please, this is such a line of crap that the GOP has managed to sell. And truly, they are the ones who are terrorizing the world (feigned shock). They have engaged in an illegal war on false pretenses. They’ve caused the death of hundred of thousands of Iraqi civilians, millions of refugees, and they knowingly send young Americans to die a horrific death in a foreign land. They have turned an admittedly suppressed nation into a battle ground between god knows how many players. They demand that other people conform to their idea of democracy while they desecrate the democracy of their own country. They spread lies about their opposition and attempt to stifle any free speech and debate.

The thing that makes the least sense in the whole Republican fear mongering machine is that they equate liberals to terrorists. Now, the Islamic extremists that Bush is fighting are religious CONSERVATIVES! They’re conservative! They’re religious nut-bags like Hucakbee, Buchanan, Falwell, Haggard, etc. There is no liberal Islamic terrorist wing! So, for Republicans to imply that liberalism is a threat to world peace takes a complete suspension of reality and facts. But, apparently, they’re very good at that.

The terrorists would be more apprehensive of a Democratic administration because they know that the Democrats are interested in catching the actual terrorists, like Osama bin Laden, who is still roaming free somewhere between Afghanistan and Pakistan. They know that the moderate Muslims would have a backing in the formation of a new government in Iraq. They know that they will receive welfare from Bush. That forming a new government would actually be up to them and that the US won’t back their civil war. Bush continues to egg them on by being obstinate, pugnacious, and wrong.

Now, McCain, Rove and the rest of the neo-conservatives would be right about one thing. Terrorists would celebrate the end of the fake justice of the military tribunals, Guantanamo, and the secret CIA prisons. Of course, so would most of America and the rest of the civilized world. So, between a return to justice and an end to the hostilities in Iraq, the terrorists would be back to fighting themselves instead of America.

Bush has single-handedly done more to create terrorists and breed hostilities towards Americans than any Islamic extremist could have ever hoped to do. Aside from the lies that got us into Iraq (and that’s a big aside), look at how poorly he continues to handle Afghanistan. The training ground of and host to the planners and perpetrators of 9/11 has largely been ignored. And, surprise, the Taliban are resurgent. But, for some reason, that’s NATO’s problem? I’m not following that logic. And then there’s his bellicose rhetoric on Iran. Even after the NIE determined Iran had stopped enriching uranium years ago, he and his cronies continue to push the idea that Iran is developing weapons to destroy humanity (I suppose Bush thinks that’s his domain, so he’s offended by anyone else who might want to do that). They say, “may be,” when they should really say “probably not” and “we have no evidence of.”

And now we have McCain, who used to be semi-independent. But, he continues to sell the lies that were manufactured by the neo-cons. He continues to champion Republican terrorism, and will continue to make America a target for future terrorist attacks. The best policy for America is one where we help the world, not destroy it.

Monday, March 10, 2008

WTF, Hillary?

Ok Hillary, we all know you want to be president. You want to be president really, really bad. But, don’t you think it’s gone just a little too far? I do. But, I just want to let you know, before I get started on this, that if you win the nomination, I’ll still vote for you. It will be like this post never happened.

In the beginning, you were doing so well. Personable, composed, nice. Ok, well maybe nice isn’t the word I’m looking for. Maybe mature or reasonable is more like it. Anyways, the point is, you seemed like a good candidate, like someone who was really about change and a turning over a new leaf. I even wrote an entry for you about why it would be good for America if you were president. I mean, even though I was an Edwards supporter, I was urging people in your direction, AND I always made a point to call you Clinton (calling women by their first names and men by their last is a common occurrence that I believes makes people take women less seriously).

Lately, though, I’m less than thrilled. What’s going on? People are calling you a “monster.” That’s pretty serious. Bush might be a monster; Cheney and Rove definitely are definitely monsters. But, you? This isn’t what we need. Remember the whole “change” and “healing” and “uniting” thing that we had going on? Thought so…

I can imagine that it would be hard to watch this dream slip away. Actually, no I can’t. This is really big! And, you have great policies. Ok, your policies are, for the most part, more progressive than your opponents. So, great might have been strong, good is sufficient. Definitely better than what we’ve got now.

Then things started to turn, I’d say around South Carolina. That’s when the “surrogates” started to come out. First it was Bill (“the first African American president”). I’ll be honest, the name-calling drew some criticism. And, it turned some people off. But it didn’t stop. And, I think we’ve gotten to a fever pitch here with the negative ads and negative speeches. Ok, you aren’t the only one doing it, but I think you started it. So, it’s time for you to end it. The whole “milking the cow” thing was way too much (and you know it. What did that even mean?).

The best thing about this primary was the fact that we had narrowed the field to two great candidates who could possibly work together in the future? Just so you know, you’ve totally ruined that. People are very drawn to a message of hope, change and doing things differently. You’ve been showing that you’re not so serious about this. I know, you’ve got experience, which I still haven’t figured out exactly how to measure. I’m not so convinced that your experience, is all that we need. We need the people to be mobilized, to care, to want to participate in politics. Obama is getting this done. He’s drawn new people and independents to the party (Bush and company have done a great job pushing people away, stepping on their heads, stabbing them in the back, etc.).

So, this will be my message to you. I’m sure you’re familiar with the saying “fail boldly.” Well, mine is a little different: Fail gracefully. If it does come to that, in April, June or August, please, put the good of the nation over your own desires. Remember that no good will can come of this. All these things that have been said cannot be stricken from the record. They are fair game in the general election. So, think carefully before that next negative statement comes out. If you want to be the leader, start right now. Get back to your original message; give us that dignity that we crave. That’s where you came from, and it was working, so get back to what works. Please.

Monday, February 18, 2008

What We're Fighting For

I know that the debate of Clinton or Obama is occupying people's minds, but I thought we could use a reminder of what we're fighting for. Set to the song Fighter by Christina Aguilera, a brief summary of the past seven years. Enjoy!



Thursday, January 24, 2008

How The Mighty Are Falling

Has it really come to this? Is the Democratic Party, aided by the mainstream media, going to implode before the general election? Why have we let ourselves get caught up this media frenzy? Honestly, I have mostly ignored the Clinton/Obama fray. In part, it has to do with the fact that I am an Edwards supporter. I don’t make a point of reading anything that these candidates do or say that is outside of the scope of the issues. But, more importantly, I believe that people should not let themselves get drawn down into this media frenzy. It is petty and it does not add to the election process. It actually detracts from the professionalism and electability of the Democratic Party in the general election and it needs to stop. In today’s polls, McCain is leading Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. This is not where we need to be, and it’s all of our faults.

Why are people so unwilling to compromise? Specifically, Obama supporters. It has been shown that likely Hillary Clinton voters would vote for Obama, but the reverse is not true. Why? This idea is absurd and irritating, and it has a hint of reverse racism to it. Many of the Clinton detractors use extremely offensive and racist language when describing her. Where were these protests when she was First Lady and Bill was President? When you look at the three remaining Democratic candidates, you will see that not much separates their positions. When you look at the way our government is supposed to work, you will see that a President cannot single handedly run this country (note that I said “supposed to”). So then, what we need is a candidate who will direct Congress, lead the country, and act diplomatically abroad. All of the Democratic candidates are capable of fulfilling this role. The personal preference is in the details, and as we all know, details are subject to change.

Why are African Americans so firm in the idea of “Obama or bust”? There seems to be some sort of idea that Obama is entitled to the nomination because he is black, or at least this is how I interpret their comments. I have a hard time believing that people who are so mobilized to vote in the primary would just abandon the general election. I have a hard time believing that people would be so selfish in such an important election. Correct me if I’m wrong, but haven’t the Republicans done more that enough damage in the past seven years? How could a supporter of Obama believe that a vote for a Republican, or no vote at all, would be better for America?

Will John Edwards be the beneficiary of this bickering? It’s interesting that for the first time, a white male is at a disadvantage in an election. The media frenzy surrounds the successful minority candidates, but it also drags them down. As Clinton and Obama continue to bicker, Edwards is gaining independent and crossover support, simply because he looks increasingly like the only adult in the room. And it has nothing to do with looks. It has everything to do with attitude. Of course, having the strong message doesn’t hurt. We need a president with attitude to stand up to special interests and those that have systematically driven this country further right.

So here’s my bottom line: This race is about restoring America. It is about Iraq, the economy, education, protecting the Constitution and our personal rights. It is not about race or gender. Unfortunately, some people just can’t let that go. They continue to bring up these issues and perpetuate racism and sexism. To me, the white male candidate is the best not just because he has the best ideas, but because he has risen above the despicable bickering. And to all those that continue to sling mud in the form of racism and sexism: “Stop. It makes you look bad.”