A comment left at HuffPo talking about dissecting McCain's marriage:
Good Lord. This matters why? Did Roosevelt have a great marriage? Did JFK, the womanizer? And let's not forget LBJ, who claimed to have more women by accident than JFK did on purpose.
I'm not saying a lyin' whorin' bastard is preferable to an honest man, but I am saying that dissecting someone's marriage as indicating his/her fitness for office is a waste of time and brainpower.
The article redeemed itself somewhat talking about Nixon, and stretching McCain's involvement in the Keating scandal. Sure it would be great if Regan had stood up and talked honestly about AIDS and Iran-Contra. Did he have a good marriage? Irrelevant. The Bushes Plural lie when telling the truth would serve them better. Have we dissected their marriages?
Consciousness is a good thing to have and foster. If a side effect of consciousness is a happy looking marriage, great. I'd rather have an effective bastard in office than a faithful twit.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
Madness
Folks on the Right have been hinting for years that the 'feminization' of the Democratic party (read: there are more than a few pro-woman feminists here) has made them a team of wussies.
Well, I'm right proud that we seem to have rubbed off on the Republicans, as all they can talk about nowadays are make up and jewlery.
Come on now, you have to admit, it does feel good sometimes to drop all the serious talk and chatter about unimportant things.
Now that we're done with that, I'd like to ask: who in his right mind gas-bombs women and children in a mosque? For that matter, who tosses any kind of bomb at any house of worship?Give yourself a gold star if you said "terrorist".
Many of these people were here after escaping the disaster that is Iraq - the disaster we created.
Here's the part I love - according to officials, "So far there is no indication that the incident was the result of a hate crime."
I would sure love to know what Dayton officials would consider a hate crime, but I'll certainly call this a hateful, shameful thing.
Some of those paying attention to this have blamed the incident directly on the distribution of the hateful movie "Obsession", a movie that's about as truthful and useful as "The Turner Diaries" or "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion". It's not meant to be informative, but to spread fear and hate and dissention. I'm not ready to go that far, but the Clarion Fund, the originator and distributor of this "film" is on record as supporting John McCain, a clear violation of their non-profit standing.
This is not what America stands for. Religious freedom is religious freedom. The founding fathers set it up that way and we need it to continue that way. Some of them were Christians, some of them were Atheists, some were Deist, but they all agreed that the establishment of one religion over another would be a huge step on the way to tyranny.
These thugs need to be brought to justice. Now.
Friday, September 12, 2008
At times like this I wonder what Molly Ivins would do
Lipstick.
Well, I'll give the R's points for consistency: an issue is an issue, no matter how small.
I say, "Thanks, but no thanks." You go on and play. The grownups are talking now.
Folks, it's the same rotten fish wrapped in fresh newspaper. We've seen it before, and we'll see it again. Obama isn't worried, or, if he is, he didn't show it in his great appearance on David Letterman the other night. He called it the "silly season", and that's all that needs to be said.
Let's focus now. It's less than 60 days to the election, and we still need to be busy. Both campaigns are making their last chess moves, pulling money here, making buys there. People are understandably nervous.
We can expect shrillness from both sides. We can expect overreactions from everyone. We can sure expect some fools in the media to eat up all the controversy they can, or to make it up when they can't find any. You know who you are.
I wasn't going to vote for Hillary Clinton, but I'll be the first to say she's been a trooper. She has been pulling out the stops, and the word is that Bill is going to hit the trail, too. Those of you who remember his inspiring speeches on behalf of his wife ought to be thrilled that he'll be doing the same for Obama. He understands how grown ups behave, and he knows how to get the crowds rolling.
Biden has been doing his part, too. He's fired up people on the trail, but since he's not calling anyone names, it hasn't made the news.
This is a team effort. Howard Dean started this ball rolling four years ago with his 50 state plan. It paid off in 2006 and is fixing to pay off in 2008.
But enough of that. It's time for some serious talking.
We are the deciders. We are the ones who run the country. We are the government. What the government does every day affects you, whether you want to think so or not. It controls the water quality, the air quality, the food quality. The current mess we call the Bush White House has been dismantling that infrastructure, and we've seen the results: worse air, worse water, more and more children left behind.
That's not even counting our standing in the world now. Russia has no fear of us, China has no fear. I wouldn't mind so much except that we don't even have their respect. Even our allies take a while to return our calls. And if you think that what a bunch of foreigners thinks of us doesn't matter, I'll remind you that we import most of our oil (and even Palin knows ANWR will only buy us a month's worth of oil 15 years from now). We're in massive debt to China, and the sinking value of the dollar is what's keeping gas prices up, with a little help from OPEC.
You don't have to beleive that Obama spits rainbows. You don't have to beleive that Barry and Joe are going to ride in on white horses and clean up this old town. The same old rules are going to apply, and the Republicans will not have any reason to cooperate, in fact quite the opposite. What will be different is the attitude in the White House, and that in itself can have a tremendous impact all over. You've already seen it play out in how all of our candidates react to each other and the world around them. Actions speak louder than words, boys and girls.
You don't even have to vote for Obama or McCain - if you know how it's going to go in your state, it might be worth voting for the Greens or Libs, just to give it that much more impact.
There's no reason to "give in" to anyone else's ideas of who we are. We are the deciders. We are the government. We are the people. God Bless America.
Well, I'll give the R's points for consistency: an issue is an issue, no matter how small.
I say, "Thanks, but no thanks." You go on and play. The grownups are talking now.
Folks, it's the same rotten fish wrapped in fresh newspaper. We've seen it before, and we'll see it again. Obama isn't worried, or, if he is, he didn't show it in his great appearance on David Letterman the other night. He called it the "silly season", and that's all that needs to be said.
Let's focus now. It's less than 60 days to the election, and we still need to be busy. Both campaigns are making their last chess moves, pulling money here, making buys there. People are understandably nervous.
We can expect shrillness from both sides. We can expect overreactions from everyone. We can sure expect some fools in the media to eat up all the controversy they can, or to make it up when they can't find any. You know who you are.
I wasn't going to vote for Hillary Clinton, but I'll be the first to say she's been a trooper. She has been pulling out the stops, and the word is that Bill is going to hit the trail, too. Those of you who remember his inspiring speeches on behalf of his wife ought to be thrilled that he'll be doing the same for Obama. He understands how grown ups behave, and he knows how to get the crowds rolling.
Biden has been doing his part, too. He's fired up people on the trail, but since he's not calling anyone names, it hasn't made the news.
This is a team effort. Howard Dean started this ball rolling four years ago with his 50 state plan. It paid off in 2006 and is fixing to pay off in 2008.
But enough of that. It's time for some serious talking.
We are the deciders. We are the ones who run the country. We are the government. What the government does every day affects you, whether you want to think so or not. It controls the water quality, the air quality, the food quality. The current mess we call the Bush White House has been dismantling that infrastructure, and we've seen the results: worse air, worse water, more and more children left behind.
That's not even counting our standing in the world now. Russia has no fear of us, China has no fear. I wouldn't mind so much except that we don't even have their respect. Even our allies take a while to return our calls. And if you think that what a bunch of foreigners thinks of us doesn't matter, I'll remind you that we import most of our oil (and even Palin knows ANWR will only buy us a month's worth of oil 15 years from now). We're in massive debt to China, and the sinking value of the dollar is what's keeping gas prices up, with a little help from OPEC.
You don't have to beleive that Obama spits rainbows. You don't have to beleive that Barry and Joe are going to ride in on white horses and clean up this old town. The same old rules are going to apply, and the Republicans will not have any reason to cooperate, in fact quite the opposite. What will be different is the attitude in the White House, and that in itself can have a tremendous impact all over. You've already seen it play out in how all of our candidates react to each other and the world around them. Actions speak louder than words, boys and girls.
You don't even have to vote for Obama or McCain - if you know how it's going to go in your state, it might be worth voting for the Greens or Libs, just to give it that much more impact.
There's no reason to "give in" to anyone else's ideas of who we are. We are the deciders. We are the government. We are the people. God Bless America.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Absolutely Fascinating
Or should I say Fabulous?
Anyway, Obama shouldn't say a word. Don't answer the attack. Just let everyone else do it. McCain's "he's just a celebrity" ad isn't a bad take, and doesn't say anything anybody else hasn't said (including me) about Obama. McCain's charge about playing the race card, well, if you stop lying about him, maybe he'll stop telling the truth about you.
But when even other Republicans are raking him over the coals over it, you know something special is happening.They've both promised to run a "different" campaign. We hear that every time. Except now they're both being held to that by the media and maybe even the voters. That's what I find fascinating.
And fabulous.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Don't go in there! It's a trap!
Dec. 5th, 2007 05:20 am
No, really, it's a trap.
I spent the night wondering just what the angle was here, and it's sure not to help you, or Democrats, or dare I say, it America.
Now that Mr. Bush's time is winding down, and Mr. Rove can't pull any rabbits out his hat, here he is, purporting to tell you how to get elected.
No. He's a hatchet man for the right, and this article doesn't change that.He's introducing memes and concepts that can only hurt you and the Democrats. Hillarycare? Seriously? The big stink around that time was that her meetings were seeeekrit, and benefitted the healthcare industry.
Sound like anybody else in high office holding secret meetings that benefited a huge industry?
This is not about Hillarycare, a lot of the proposals weren't that bad, and some of them were implemented anyway (organizations getting together to form bargaining blocs, unless of course prevented by law - Medicare part D, anyone?) This is about promoting infighting that's distracting and worthless. He's the pig, and he loves it. You don't need it. America doesn't need it.
Then three paragraphs of "negative sells". It may sell but it doesn't govern. I remember watching Mr. Rove or one of his Imperial Army clones on C-SPAN after the 2000 elections. Someone hosted a seminar on "how we won the election" and the message was "we sold a better product. We showed Americans how our guy could help them." Then he compared and contrasted two cellphone commercials. One was the mom with three kids who begged her not to go into work today because all they'd do is watch TV with the babysitter. That she had a critical meeting at work, which fed those kids was apparently not something she could just tell them, so they all went to the beach and she had her meeting by cellphone. Nice happy ending.
To "compare and contrast" he put up the "can you hear me now?" guy. Irritating as hell, and the point was that selling positively wins elections.
Two things - the "mom" commercial wasn't about positive anything, it was about making mom guilty and wrong no matter what she did, and the message was "give in to what you want, don't think about consequences".
Also, they don't show that commercial anymore. "Can you hear me now?" guy still has a job. Their message was about stability, reliability, consistency, and more recently, faithfulness.
So Mrs. Clinton campaigned against welfare deform. Good for her. It was a bad idea, still is a bad idea, and it shows that she can think her own thoughts and wasn't being used as a pawn to get people to do what the hubby wanted, no matter how wrong. Unlike some other First Ladies. She stood by her man on personal matters*, but was independent otherwise.
What's next? Oh, yes "gently belittle". No, don't "attack" the poor woman, "gently belittle". Get over it, she's a big girl, attack. She'll attack you back. You're a big boy. Handle it. Good Lord.
And besides that, the blogosphere's doing that for you anyway. Why bother?
Now I quote: "Hillary comes across as cold, distant and conspiracy-minded, more like Richard Nixon than her sunny, charming husband."
I have nothing to say about Mr. Rove's woman issues. Calling Mr. Clinton charming isn't lying, it's just good policy not to piss off Mr. Bush Sr, and more importantly, Mrs. Bush, Sr. who reportedly loves Mr. C. like a son.
See what I mean, there are enough attacks already. Don't fall into the trap. Take the good stuff (be positive, clear about what you believe, explain the change you represent) and leave the rest behind as so much chaff. Just because he calls you "weak" if you don't win in Iowa doesn't mean he's giving you good advice.
It's not sound advice, and it's not even advice that sounds good.
DISCLAIMER: I've got nothing against Obama or Clinton personally, but I don't endorse either for the Job. I'm for Richardson/Edwards. I just can't let this go by.
*and before you start on that, I don't give a good goddamn what you think, it was their business.
No, really, it's a trap.
I spent the night wondering just what the angle was here, and it's sure not to help you, or Democrats, or dare I say, it America.
Now that Mr. Bush's time is winding down, and Mr. Rove can't pull any rabbits out his hat, here he is, purporting to tell you how to get elected.
No. He's a hatchet man for the right, and this article doesn't change that.He's introducing memes and concepts that can only hurt you and the Democrats. Hillarycare? Seriously? The big stink around that time was that her meetings were seeeekrit, and benefitted the healthcare industry.
Sound like anybody else in high office holding secret meetings that benefited a huge industry?
This is not about Hillarycare, a lot of the proposals weren't that bad, and some of them were implemented anyway (organizations getting together to form bargaining blocs, unless of course prevented by law - Medicare part D, anyone?) This is about promoting infighting that's distracting and worthless. He's the pig, and he loves it. You don't need it. America doesn't need it.
Then three paragraphs of "negative sells". It may sell but it doesn't govern. I remember watching Mr. Rove or one of his Imperial Army clones on C-SPAN after the 2000 elections. Someone hosted a seminar on "how we won the election" and the message was "we sold a better product. We showed Americans how our guy could help them." Then he compared and contrasted two cellphone commercials. One was the mom with three kids who begged her not to go into work today because all they'd do is watch TV with the babysitter. That she had a critical meeting at work, which fed those kids was apparently not something she could just tell them, so they all went to the beach and she had her meeting by cellphone. Nice happy ending.
To "compare and contrast" he put up the "can you hear me now?" guy. Irritating as hell, and the point was that selling positively wins elections.
Two things - the "mom" commercial wasn't about positive anything, it was about making mom guilty and wrong no matter what she did, and the message was "give in to what you want, don't think about consequences".
Also, they don't show that commercial anymore. "Can you hear me now?" guy still has a job. Their message was about stability, reliability, consistency, and more recently, faithfulness.
So Mrs. Clinton campaigned against welfare deform. Good for her. It was a bad idea, still is a bad idea, and it shows that she can think her own thoughts and wasn't being used as a pawn to get people to do what the hubby wanted, no matter how wrong. Unlike some other First Ladies. She stood by her man on personal matters*, but was independent otherwise.
What's next? Oh, yes "gently belittle". No, don't "attack" the poor woman, "gently belittle". Get over it, she's a big girl, attack. She'll attack you back. You're a big boy. Handle it. Good Lord.
And besides that, the blogosphere's doing that for you anyway. Why bother?
Now I quote: "Hillary comes across as cold, distant and conspiracy-minded, more like Richard Nixon than her sunny, charming husband."
I have nothing to say about Mr. Rove's woman issues. Calling Mr. Clinton charming isn't lying, it's just good policy not to piss off Mr. Bush Sr, and more importantly, Mrs. Bush, Sr. who reportedly loves Mr. C. like a son.
See what I mean, there are enough attacks already. Don't fall into the trap. Take the good stuff (be positive, clear about what you believe, explain the change you represent) and leave the rest behind as so much chaff. Just because he calls you "weak" if you don't win in Iowa doesn't mean he's giving you good advice.
It's not sound advice, and it's not even advice that sounds good.
DISCLAIMER: I've got nothing against Obama or Clinton personally, but I don't endorse either for the Job. I'm for Richardson/Edwards. I just can't let this go by.
--------------------------------
*and before you start on that, I don't give a good goddamn what you think, it was their business.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
That's not a personality test, THIS is a personality test
From here:
Here's how it works, if you want to know. If you agree with a candidate, he gets point(s). If you disagree, take point(s) away. Unkown/other results in no points. The number of points given or taken depends on the weight you set. "Meh" is worth 1 point, "important" 2, and "key" is worth 5. The items you disagree about will be listed directly underneath each candidate (if they score greater than zero).
Kucinich 71 No Child Left Behind, Border Fence
Gravel 68 (you have no disagreements with this candidate)
Obama 46 Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage
Edwards 42 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage
Clinton 39 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage
Richardson 38 Death Penalty, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage
Biden 38 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage
Dodd 37 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action
Paul 19 Abortion Rights, Embryonic Stem Cells, ANWR Drilling, Kyoto, Assault Weapons Ban, Guns - Background Checks, Citizenship Path for Illegals, Border Fence, Net Neutrality, Minimum Wage Increase, Same-Sex Marriage, Universal Healthcare
Cox -15
McCain -29
Thompson -30
Giuliani -37
Brownback -41
Huckabee -54
Tancredo -64
Romney -69
Hunter -82
Here's how it works, if you want to know. If you agree with a candidate, he gets point(s). If you disagree, take point(s) away. Unkown/other results in no points. The number of points given or taken depends on the weight you set. "Meh" is worth 1 point, "important" 2, and "key" is worth 5. The items you disagree about will be listed directly underneath each candidate (if they score greater than zero).
Kucinich 71 No Child Left Behind, Border Fence
Gravel 68 (you have no disagreements with this candidate)
Obama 46 Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage
Edwards 42 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage
Clinton 39 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage
Richardson 38 Death Penalty, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Same-Sex Marriage
Biden 38 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Same-Sex Marriage
Dodd 37 Death Penalty, No Child Left Behind, Patriot Act, Border Fence, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action
Paul 19 Abortion Rights, Embryonic Stem Cells, ANWR Drilling, Kyoto, Assault Weapons Ban, Guns - Background Checks, Citizenship Path for Illegals, Border Fence, Net Neutrality, Minimum Wage Increase, Same-Sex Marriage, Universal Healthcare
Cox -15
McCain -29
Thompson -30
Giuliani -37
Brownback -41
Huckabee -54
Tancredo -64
Romney -69
Hunter -82
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
