Monday, June 30, 2008

So Long June 2008

June 2008 has come to a close and it was quite a month. Let's take a look at what happened this month.

We lost Bo Diddley, Tim Russert and George Carlin.

I've said it before and it's going to start happening a lot more these days. The greats of my generation and my parents' generation are going to start making that trip. At least Teddy dogged the bullet this time.

The Celtics ate the Lakers alive.

I used to be a pretty big Boston fan when I was young. I haven't paid attention since then. I used to have a pretty cool Celtics towel.

The International Olympic Committee announced a shortlist of finalists for the 2016 Olympics.

The list included Chicago, Rio, Tokyo and Madrid. It looks like it won't be Rio or Tokyo, and Greece just had it, so maybe Chicago will get it by default. Ideally, my wife and I are planning on living in Chicago and that would be great. Also, we're planning on staying with friends in London for the 2012, so we could return the hospitality.

Turkey's Constitutional Court reinstated a ban on the hijab in universities.

Forcing secularism is not right either.

Japan and North Korea resumed bilateral talks.

Like most talks with North Korea, this will not go anywhere. Prove me wrong.

Seven people were killed and ten injured in a stabbing spree in Tokyo.

This, and I just read about a 77 year old man who killed his whole family with a hammer. Rough.

Rafael Nadal won the men's singles title at the 2008 French Open for the fourth year in a row.

I first watched Nadal in summer of 2004. He was awesome. I'm better though.

Apple, Inc. introduced a new iPhone.

Of course, it already has problems. I like watching Samsung try to compete and realease the same phone, but worse and watch their profits fall.

India's prime minister Manmohan Singh called for global nuclear disarmament asking world countries to create 'timebound framework' to rid the world of atomic weapons.

Right, India. Great idea, but since when do you get a say?

South Korea's cabinet resigned following widespread protests at decisions to resume US beef imports in South Korea.

Do I have to comment on this?

US House of Representatives voted on whether to refer Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush.

Of course Kucinich is leading the charge. That guy is my hero. Huge balls and how did he get that wife? Oh yeah, his balls.

The US Midwest flooded.

And Obama got dirty while McCain flew over. Who's elitist?

Muqtada al-Sadr claimed that he is developing a new force to fight United States forces in Iraq.

What??? But McCain told me that children were planting flowers and family picnics were becoing pandemic.

Gay couples finally got married in CA.

About time. Now, will this become another election issue?

Tiger Woods won.

Big whoop.

Typhoon Fengshen roughed up the Philippines.

It actually hit right around where we honeymooned. I hope our buddy Phol is okay.

The Supreme Court ruled on Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker that the damages awarded in the Exxon Valdez case were excessive and reduces them from $2.7 billion to $507 million.

I like how the Supreme Court (well...the insane 5) can judge the damage done to the envirnoment.

China reopened Tibet to foreign tourists as a ban imposed during the Tibetan unrest was lifted.

I'm sure that Tibetans really love to be told that they've been reopened. Also, where are all of those protesters now?

North Korea destroyed the cooling tower of the Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center as a sign of its commitment to ending its nuclear weapons program.

Let the rice party begin.

Barack Obama won the Primary and prepares to face old man McCain.

I think I have covered this a few times on this blog.

***Check out "Musings" as I'll be wrapping up what went on with me this month (it should be up tomorrow though***

November Story

As November looms in the not-so-far-off distance, the story will become more defined and the election will become about one or two issues. While voters will still be worried about the economy, health-care costs and Iraq, the focus from the pundits and talking heads will be about meaningless slogans that they will create and blow out of proportion. The media has no interest in pushing real issues. If they focus on the economy or health care, then that becomes the story for the election. The problem with that story is that it doesn't make for a close rating-friendly election. Obama would slaughter old man McCain. The networks need a nail biter so people are glued to the television. The question is of course, what will they go with?

While this might seem complicated or impossible to accurately guess such a thing, there is one common storyline that always seems to bring the nutty right out in support of anything: Patriotism.

I think that this will become the story. Obama has all sorts of "dents" in the eyes of the GOP and the media will hype this up to make the race appear much closer, therefore defining the story for November. And it will work. The wingers love to focus on shallow expressions of patriotism like flag pins, bumper stickers, saluting the flag and telling other people that they know how patriotic others really are.

As John Kerry learned, even serving in Vietnam and being awarded two Purple Hearts is not patriotic enough to pass the average GOP-voter "patriotic" smell test. Besides the fact that more Congressional Dems have served in the military than the GOP, the Right truly believes that only they can be the judge of true patriotism. Afterall, they have outlined the few narrowly defined ways to express patriotism and the metric, of course, is immesuarble, i.e. Kerry went to Vietnam and was branded as unpatriotic, while Bush was too busy with blow to show up.

Here's a typical right-wing comment that I read on Politio in response to that Clark article. If you click on that link, you can scroll down and check out some of the opinions that illustrate just how easy the patriotism card is going to be pulled.

"When did Obama put His Life at risk for America. McCain was tortured for 5 years. Obama has Not even been in the Senate for that long. Obam should be ashamed of such a comment. He refuses any town hall meetings. He wants to have com-lete control of his public appearances and give a prepared speech. He is aferaid to answer questions from voters."


Time will tell and I hope that I'm wrong on this, but the media often proves just how incompetent they are.

Clark Attacks

Yet again, Wes Clark is proving that he wants the VP position and he's got the balls to attack McCain on his only strong point.

“I don’t think getting in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to become president.”
Keep them coming Clark.

My question: While I agree that McCain uses his service and time as a POW to somehow justify his credentials, will this kind of attack usher in a new theme to this campaign? Specifically, if these attacks continue, will this campaign become less about the issues and concerns of the voters and more about patriotism?

Saturday, June 28, 2008

McCain's New Demographic?

It looks like McCain just might have more appeal than I thought.


Study: Most Children Strongly Opposed To Children�s Healthcare

Friday, June 27, 2008

Image of the Week



This is how I interpret the Second Amnedment.

November Issue?

Another party-line decision on the Supreme Court reverses the DC gun ban and nutters are rejoicing. Within minutes, St. McCain jumped in and let us know how original he can be.

“Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today’s ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right — sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly,” Mr. McCain said."
There is nothing elitist about wanting a safe country FREE of guns. And today's ruling only highlights the fact that we can not allow for a McCain presidency where it is almost certain that he will appoint more far right-wingers to the bench. Here is McCain's full statement:
"Today’s decision is a landmark victory for Second Amendment freedom in the
United States. For this first time in the history of our Republic, the U.S.
Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was
and is an individual right as intended by our Founding Fathers. I applaud this
decision as well as the overturning of the District of Columbia’s ban on
handguns and limitations on the ability to use firearms for self-defense.
“Unlike Senator Obama, who refused to join me in signing a bipartisan amicus
brief, I was pleased to express my support and call for the ruling issued today.
Today’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller makes clear that other
municipalities like Chicago that have banned handguns have infringed on the
constitutional rights of Americans. Unlike the elitist view that believes
Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today’s ruling recognizes that gun
ownership is a fundamental right — sacred, just as the right to free speech and
assembly.
“This ruling does not mark the end of our struggle against those
who seek to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. We must always remain
vigilant in defense of our freedoms. But today, the Supreme Court ended forever
the specious argument that the Second Amendment did not confer an individual
right to keep and bear arms.”
The timing of this issue is interesting as it will certainly help McCain is some of the rural areas. It will help the New McCain, not the one who battled with the NRA and gun lobby just years ago. And apparently, the right to own a gun is sacred and that scares the hell out of me.

From Obama:

"I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today’s ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country.
“As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact common-sense laws, like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Today’s decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe."


He takes the sociological approach like always and employs logic and reason rather than stump speech rhetoric. He is pushing for States rights and not pandering to the gun lobby at all.

I honestly do not agree with either on this issue. I want all guns to be banned outside of hunting. Period.

The signiifance of this ruling in regards to the election is what I am interested in. Slowly but surely we are seeing what is going to define this election and I can gaureentee you that McCain will be airing all sorts of ads in PA, OH, MT and WY to convince people of the same thing that Hillary did: Obama is an elitist who is out of touch.

For an excellent read on gun control check this out.

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Video: McCain's Youtube Problem

I wrote about McCain's Youtube Problem a couple weeks ago and today I found this video.



Pretty bad.

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Korean War

Today is the 58th Memorial of the beginning of the Korean War.

ROK Drop has some great pics and will have several posts and images all day today. Check them out.

Two Mams for McCain?

Jack Cafferty from CNN's Caffert File wrote this piece about McCain's consideration of a woman for VP.

Cafferty never really offers insight, he just poses questions. I think that this might be one of the dumbest moves he could make. He is clear opponent of womens rights and I think it would move more people away from him. Democratic women are among the strongest in the world and they do not want to be pandered to based on their mams.

Here are some comments from the post.

Damian writes:

As long as McCain has his track record against women’s rights, he could fill every post in his fantasy administration with women. I’d bet women are not going to swing for him, unless of course they want unequal pay and accept their body as being the property of the federal government
.

Cindy from Mississippi writes:
Of course it would help. Unfortunately, given McCain’s age and the possibility that his veep will one day be president, there are a lot of women who would vote for him on that basis alone. I’m voting for him whoever he chooses, but Palin sounds best to me!


Pablo writes:
It is possible that a woman VP choice would get some support but only from those women who share the GOP Pro Life stance and want to see Roe v. Wade overturned. Even with a Femme VP the most die hard Clinton supporters would be hard pressed to support Mccain as he stands for almost everything they stand against. Women ain’t stupid, you know.


Chris writes:
Well before any woman supports John Mccain, I strongly recommend that women ask about what happened with John McCain’s first wife. Also look at his record and stances on issues that women really care about. Even the so-called “security moms” should feel very insecure about a John Mccain Presidency!.


Gina writes:
I just can’t believe all the “Hillary didn’t win the Nomination-so I will Vote McCain” haters that are still out here whining.

Wake up and smell the coffee…..McCain wants to Privatize Social Security……overturn Roe vs. Wade……fully supports NAFTA and the loss of U.S. jobs…..and is willing go sacrafice more of Our Troops to a War that should have never been waged and fought.

Oh…..and lets remember how he NOW embraces the Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthiset Americans (you know…..the ones that DON’T need them).

Is your bitterness/vengeance worth losing more Troops ? Losing your job to an Overseas market that is unfair to the American Worker (Don’t think that it can’t happen to you). Having to retire without Dignity and a way to support yourself because Social Security is Privatized and your money was not invested well and their is no money left?

The only Woman that can help McCain is now firmly behind Obama…..if Hillary ever wants to be Voted into a Democratice Seat (or Presidency) ever again she will have to work hard to undo all the damage that she did when she fractured Her Party.

…….even adding a Woman to Mccain’s ticket will do no good.
The only way McCain wins is if there is Voter Suppression and dirt done by the Republican Party (you know……just like what happened in 2000). WE WANT CHANGE……We do NOT want a Bush 3rd Term. Our Country will not be able to survive 4 more years of this.



These were the friendlier ones too. It's not gonna work St. McCain.

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Donate First!

The RNC has a lot more money to spend than the DNC does. Bush is still raising some big bucks for McCain even though he is in the shadows.

The difference is big:

GOP: $85.1 million
Dems: $47.1 million

That means we have to work extra hard and donate to the DNC and Obama again and again. Remember, McCain is taking public finance, illegally used his general election stash as collatreal for a loan and has the nutty 527's just waiting to 'Swift Boat' Obama. We can do it, but then I see this crap from Hillary.



This is not the time for this plea. This is not the time to help her with her own campaign debt while the DNC is trailing the snakes in overall cash. She should be asking people redesignate their general election donation to Hillary over to Obama.

Look, I understand that she needs some help, but her timing is no good. She needs to be making pleas for her supporters to stop hoping for an Obama loss, a 2012 HRC run and start getting them to unite.

Donate to Barack Obama.

What now McCain?

This would shut McCain up.

"Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki raised the possibility that his country won't sign a status of forces agreement with the United States and will ask U.S. troops to go home when their U.N. mandate to be in Iraq expires at the end of the year."

GOP MO

As if we didn't already know this was how the GOP operated, it's still nice to have it handed to us on a nice platter with a McCain insignia. The server, senior McCain adviser Charlie Black, decided that it would be a good move to publicly wish for a terrorist attack so that McCain can slip in on fear.

"The adviser, Charlie Black, was quoted in an interview with Fortune magazine describing the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an “unfortunate event” but adding that: “But his knowledge and ability to talk about it re-emphasized that this is the guy who’s ready to be commander in chief. And it helped us.” The magazine then added: “As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. ‘Certainly it would be a big advantage to him,’ says Black."

Rather than taking issue with what he said because I was not surprised in the least, I'm wondering if this would still work. Are people still convinced that because the GOP got us into war, that they are the best at protecting us? What bizarro world do we live in where this reasoning makes sense? This is not a "don't change horses" argument. This is a "the horse had to be euthanized because he broke his leg" argument.

My question: Will McCain fire him and will the media pick up on the underlying story?

This is not a gaffe. This is wishful thinking from a seriously disturbed political party. If McCain does not fire this douche now, he can never again walk around like he's more patriotic than Uncle Sam himself. McCain can weasel out of this one, but the GOP is in too deep to escape their skeletons.

Monday, June 23, 2008

China Wins?

Apparently, somebody thinks that China is going to top the US in medals in Beijing. Now, I'm not the type to wave my flag, but the Olympics gets me going and I hope we crush the Chinese on their own soil.

From Yahoo,

"China should win one more medal than the United States at the Beijing Olympics—88 to 87—and top the overall table for the first time, according to a survey released Monday by accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers."

My prediction: USA wins by 7 or more medals. However, if we do somehow lose to China, I will eat Chinese dog food for one whole meal and post the video of it here.

RIP George Carlin

We lost another great.

"Comedian-actor George Carlin, known for his raunchy but insightful humor, died of heart failure Sunday in Los Angeles, his publicist said. He was 71. Carlin went into St. John's Health Center on Sunday afternoon, complaining of chest pain. Carlin died at 5:55 p.m. PDT, The Associated Press reported."

Here's to the election with Carlin's take on voting.

300 million to shut up

It's almost like Old Man McCain isn't even trying anymore. His latest attempt to get attention is probably one of the most ridiculous things I've heard yet. He is actually offering 300 million to whomever creates a car battery that "far surpasses" what the market offers. Instead of encouraging people to be more responsible or holding major car companies accountable, he is offering 300 million additional bucks to whoever can afford to come up with such technology, that being car companies. And this is the guy that hates government spending.

"McCain said such a device should deliver power at 30 percent of current costs and have "the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars."


So, forget all the options we have available now. No, let's continue to ignore them and make this absurd offer.

Prediction: This will be gone in a week, only to creep into one debate when McCain is digging.

Saturday, June 21, 2008

Weekend Clip Roundup: June 15-21

Obama pulls out of public finance with this clip...



McCain tries and fails to pull one over on the voters.



Obama on offshore drilling.

Friday, June 20, 2008

And there's your answer

It seems that we have finally reached the point where the underlying reasons for the Iraq invasion are surfacing.

"Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners in the Iraq Petroleum Company — along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies, are in talks with Iraq’s Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq’s largest fields, according to ministry officials, oil company officials and an American diplomat."


So, after decades of nationalized oil production in Iraq under Hussein, the western powerhouse oil companies have been selected over the Russians, Indians and Chinese companies to extract what's left of the Iraqi oil reserves and continue to make an obscene profit. They know that the world is watching and they are already hiding under the viel of anyomity while making ludicris comments like they are "helping Iraq rebuild its decrepit oil industry". We knew someone was going to profit from this war and it certainly isn't the Iraqi people.

My question: As we have seen with the bogus facade of Gitmo trials that have recently been put in full throttle by a Bush administration who despirately wants to change the story for November, I wonder if the timing of this deal is an attempt to pad the voters' wallets in order to lessen the blow of a failed Republican economy.

I hope I'm wrong.

Safety First



Nerd! I was too cool to wear a helmet.

Scare Tactics

Obama is airing a new ad highlighting his family values and his background. It's a good ad to go along with an inspiring story.



This ad is running in Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia. Many of these states are Red states that the GOP takes for granite.

The strategy: Obama is running excellent campaigns in each of these states. His success will scare the McCain camp into spending money (that they don't have) in traditionally safe GOP states leaving little to go towards the battleground states. Nice.

Battleground Polls

Here's a clear picture of how the some of big battle states look.

I Hate this Woman

The ever-plastic Cindy McCain is feeling a little blue since all the attention seems to be on Michelle Obama and not her. She recently made this comment.

"I do not think that spouses and family members ... are fair game," she told CNN's John King. There has to be some decorum left in politics and in American journalism as well. Our husbands are the candidates," she said.

Of course she doesn't want the focus to be on the family. John McCain left his wife because she had an accident which left her with a deformed face and married Cindy (who is as unethical as they come) for the career and inheritance. That info is just waiting for the MSM to start talking about regularly. She says that families should be left out, but a few months ago we got this from her.
"(I) am proud of my country. I don't know about you, if you heard those words earlier -- I am very proud of my country."

That's about as blatant as it gets. It's funny how when Michelle starts getting all the attention Cindy says that the elections should be about the candidates, but I remember when Cindy was the focus of a Vogue magazine spread and she didn't seem to have a problem with it then.

The entire McCain family needs to bring a pad and paper so they can remember just how many times they contradict themselves.

Irony: "Cindy McCain was in Hanoi, Vietnam, where she was working with an organization that helps children who have facial deformities."

Thursday, June 19, 2008

43% is too high and I'm scared

Apparently, 43% of Americans believe that torture can be justified.

"More than four in ten Americans (43%) say that the use of torture can be justified to gain key information sometimes (31%) or often (12%), according to a 2007 Pew Research survey. However, a 54%-majority say torture is never (29%) or rarely (25%) justified. The number of Americans saying the use of torture against suspected terrorists is at least sometimes justified has been fairly stable since 2004, though the percentage saying torture can often be justified has dipped from 18% in October 2006."

I was not surprised to see that "more African Americans than whites say the torture of suspected terrorists is never justified (37% vs. 28%)".

Then again, that number makes sense when you factor in the amount of people who identify themselves as Republicans.

Obama / Clark team up...kind of

Obama formed a Senior Working Group on National Security who will meet regulary to talk about how to fix the mess that Bush has left the world to clean up.

“Each individual here today has provided extraordinary service to our nation in the executive branch and Congress. Several have been advising my campaign for some time. We’re also honored to be joined by some of Senator Clinton’s senior advisors. In the months to come, we’ll be reaching out to others, as well as leaders in Congress,” Senator Obama said. “The stakes in this election could not be higher. John McCain wants to continue George Bush's foreign policy which has made us less safe, less respected, and less able to lead the world. It's time to change course. It's time to end the war in Iraq responsibly, refocus on Afghanistan and al Qaeda, and renew our global leadership so that we can tackle the huge challenges of the 21st century.”


Who are they?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
Senator David Borenformer Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Secretary of State Warren Christopher
Greg Craig, former director of the State Department Office of Policy Planning
Secretary of the Navy Richard Danzig
Representative Lee Hamilton, former Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee
Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder
Dr. Tony Lake, former National Security Advisor
Senator Sam Nunn, former Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Secretary of Defense William Perry
Dr. Susan Rice, former Assistant Secretary of State
Representative Tim Roemer, 9/11 Commissioner
Jim Steinberg, former Deputy National Security Advisor

Pretty powerful team, huh? Can McCain trump this team? Of course not, but I was a little concerned as to where Clark was. It turns out that this was made up of people with civilian national security experience.

"...he will also meet with a group of nearly 40 retired Admirals and Generals to discuss the state of our armed forces, and the challenges facing our military in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world. This meeting is part of an ongoing dialogue between Senator Obama and current and former military officers of various ranks and views."


Was Clark there? Yes he was and he was sitting next to Obama when he met with the rest of the retired officers.

I think that what Obama is doing since becoming the nominee is outstanding. He is bringing in the best minds to join his. Now, all he needs to do is select Clark for his VP.

*** I will keep on stressing the importance of Clark until Obama has selected a VP. ***

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Come see the softer side of Sears...

The "softer side" strategy is used all the time in many different theaters and now it's Michelle Obama's turn. Honestly, I didn 't know she was perceived that poorly. NYT has the story.

Will it work? It did for Sears.

McPrettyDamnCloseToBush

This loving couple is prominently featured on Youtube. It's been the central theme of many liberal grassroots campaigns. Even MSNBC's, Keith Olberman refers to John McCain as McBush and there are scores of liberal blogs that call him McSame.





This is an excellent campaign strategy to get the anti-Bush voters out, but is there any substance behind it? Do McCain and Bush really agree on that much? Well, the NYT gave a quick, but somewhat comprehensive of where the two stand.


Bush and McCain agree on...

Abortion and Judges:

"Both men oppose use of federal money for abortions, including aid to groups that help women obtain them. Both support the ban on Partial-Birth Abortion Act of 2003 and parental notification for minors. Mr. McCain says Roe v. Wade "should be overturned," an idea he spoke out against in 1999, and says he would
appoint Supreme Court justices who "strictly interpret the Constitution." He voted for both of Mr. Bush's picks to the court. Mr. Bush has not publicly called for repealing Roe."

This is a huge issue to be in agreement with Bush. This is the issue that has politicized generations of women AND men. If McCain is looking to swing some women and indy's to the dark side, this is not going to help him. Furthermore, he said that he would "appoint Supreme Court justices who "strictly interpret the Constitution". And that was in 1999 BEFORE he sold himself out. I guess we can expect another Scalia on the bench under McCain.

Education:

"Mr. McCain generally supports No Child Left Behind, Mr. Bush's signature education policy. Calling it a "good beginning," he has said, "there's a lot of things that need to be fixed" about it. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a McCain adviser, has said "the law needs to start addressing the underlying cultural problems in our education system."

Backing one of the worst education bills that nearly all of those in education abhor will not help McCain as he faces serious problems with our system. Besides the fact that his home state has one of the worst high school dropout rates in the country, Obama has been there and understands what needs to be done -and this is key- from the ground up. Writing laws about test scores and evaluations does not improve education.

Diplomacy with Iran and Syria:

"Like the president, Mr. McCain has ruled out direct talks with Iran and Syria for now. Mr. McCain supported Mr. Bush when he likened those who would negotiate with "terrorists and radicals" to appeasers of the Nazis, a remark widely interpreted as a rebuke to Senator Barack Obama."

While some might think that this is a McCain strong point, I would disagree. Trying to be a tough guy when dealing with other tough guys only gets us to one place: more war. Discussion is not appeasement. Diplomacy is not appeasement. Ignoring a problem until it comes to a head is what the Bush / McCain strategy gets you.

Immigration:
"Mr. McCain supported a 2007 bill, strongly backed by Mr. Bush, that called for establishing a guest-worker program and setting up a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. He sponsored a similar bill in 2006 but
this year he said he would not vote for his own proposal now. "Only after we achieved widespread consensus that our borders are secure, would we address other aspects of the problem in a way that defends the rule of law," he said in February."


This sounds good, but the issue is how and who sets up this so-called "path to citizenship". Again it appears McCain is backtracking from his previous self and will defend whatever the GOP instructs him to do. What a Maverick!

He also agrees with Bush on Iraq, health care, medicare, social security, Same-sex marriage, taxes, trade, no due process for Guantanamo detainees, and the worst, wiretapping and executive power.

These are not small issues. These are issues that will create ripples that could last centuries and effect generations to come.

To be fair, let's look at what he disagrees with Bush on and more importantly, to what degree does he disagree.

Climate change:

"Unlike Mr. Bush, Mr. McCain supports a cap-and- trade program that would set a national ceiling on carbon emissions. Although critical of the Bush administration's lack of initiatives on the climate, Mr. McCain has said that "America did the right thing by not joining the Kyoto Treaty" and that any such global accord should include China and India, an argument used by Mr. Bush."

So, he has a conscience and understands that there is a problem with pollution, but uses a Bush line to excuse participation in cleaning up. Would he agree to cutting emissions in the US proportionate to population? Doubt it.

He also disagrees on Federal spending, interrogation tactics, and arms control. I don't think for a second that if he was elected he would cut down on spending. And yet again, he wants to get tough on North Korea rather than diplomacy.

The bottom line here is that the issues that he agrees with Bush on for the most part are very critical and hits a chord with many voters. The issues that he disagrees with Bush on are all minimal in as far as that he doesn't really disagree with Bush, he just has some small qualms with them.

Arizona also has cowboys.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

We need Clark NOW!

WaPo reports that Independent voters are split between McCain and Obama. The article is quite telling as to how much Obama appeals to all people and most of all, just how much he needs an experienced military running mate, like Wes Clark.

"In the first Washington Post-ABC News poll since the Democratic nomination contest ended, Obama and McCain are even among political independents, a shift toward the presumptive Republican nominee over the past month. On the issues, independents see McCain as more credible on fighting terrorism and are split evenly on who is the stronger leader and better on the Iraq war. But on other key attributes and issues -- including the economy -- Obama has advantages among independents."

As I have been saying, there is not a single issue that McCain is "better" on than the issue of military matters. Even so, this poll says that McCain is "more credible on fighting terrorism", but independents "are split evenly on who is the stronger leader and better on the Iraq war". If I were John McCain, I would be seriously worried. He is not testing better on who is a stronger war time leader.

Take that stat and then factor in...
"...Obama has significant advantages. He leads by 34 points as the candidate who would do more to bring needed change to Washington, by 18 points on empathy, by 15 points on standing up to lobbyists and special interests, and by 13 points on better representing people's "personal values."


Still, there seems to be a large amount of Dems who want Hillary on the ticket. But would Hillary on the ticket give Obama a boost in any way?
"As Obama considers possible vice presidential running mates, Clinton remains atop the list: Unprompted, 46 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents pick her as their top choice, and no other Democrat breaks out of single digits. But it is unclear from the poll whether Clinton would help or hurt Obama's chances." About two in 10 said her placement on the ticket would make them more apt to support the Democrats, but about the same proportion said it would push them toward the GOP. Most said it would not make much of a difference either way."


As the article says, it might get a few of those women who swore off Obama to come back to their senses, but it would not help him against McCain. He does not need her help on domestic issues (on the front end). He needs help in an area that she does not offer anything: foreign policy and military affairs.

One option: Wes Clark.

Obama needs to get Clark in there as soon as possible. The sooner he defines the full image of what he offers for the fall, the sooner he can start framing McCain as the military lightweight he is.

My question: Are the two camps waiting for the other to announce a VP choice so they can respond with an announcement and dominate the news?

Change the story, win the election.

Photo Hunt: Gore Endorsement

Can you spot the edit?





Rules: You must clearly identify what I edited. It could be color, size, add-ons or anything, but it will only be one edit. I will keep a published tally and after six months, I will buy the winner a book of their choice or donate $25 bucks to the DNC. Also, please do not post as Anonymous. I can't reward your eye if I don't know who you are.

The last one was a Bush / McCain pic...



And Sid spotted the edit: Bush's nose was made smaller and pointier.

Tally:

Sid - 1 spot

Me time...

I must apologize for the lack of posts. I explain it in Musings...

Monday, June 16, 2008

Reasonable as always

As mentioned by the Marmot and reported by the NYT, Obama is critizing the unfair trade practices with Korea.

“You can't get beef into Japan and Korea, even though, obviously, we have the highest safety standards of anybody, but they don’t want to have that competition from U.S. producers,” Mr. Obama said last month in a speech to farmers in South Dakota. Last week, near Detroit, he asserted that “if South Korea is selling hundreds of thousands of cars to the United States and we can only sell less than 5,000 in South Korea, something is wrong.”


Obama is right on target here. It is totally ridiculus and while his interest in trade with Korea is more of a campaign strategy, it does speak volumes for his reasonable take on such issues. If Korea wants to us the US as a chopping board to get rid of LMB, that's fine, but don't expect the US to do any trade favors. You can only bite the hand that feeds you so many times.

Happy Father's Day

Obama made an amazing Father's Day speech. I have class now, but I will post it here. I'm sure that some of you have seen the sound bites, but watch the whole thing. This man knows what it takes and what needs to be done.



More to come on Father's Day and how it can shape American political discourse...

Convention Location

The untimely death of Tim Russert seemed to dominate the media this weekend and honestly there was very little action outside of Obama helping out in Iowa and McCain admitted that he doesn't know how to use a computer.

I figured I would take a look at another element of the electoral map strategy: convention placement.

In recent years, the Democrats chose safe locations – Boston (2004), Los Angeles (2000), Chicago (1996), and New York (1992). Not since 1988 (Atlanta) had the Democrats strayed outside their comfort zone, and before that came San Francisco (1984), New York (1980) and New York (1976).

The Republicans have generally chosen equally non-competitive territory – New York City (2004), San Diego (1996), Houston (1992), New Orleans (1988), and Dallas (1984). Only Philadelphia in 2000 marked a convention site in a swing state.

Both parties had reason to be hopeful. The once-liberal haven Minnesota had been surprisingly close in 2004. John Kerry only carried the state by 3.5%. Neighboring Iowa flipped blue-to-red from 2000 to 2004 by 10,000 votes, and neighboring Wisconsin was the single closest percentage state in 2004, a state Kerry carried by a mere 0.4%. Looking at the map objectively, this region seemed ripest to add new electoral votes into the Republican column.

The Democrats looked over the same red-blue stalemate map of the previous two presidential elections and chose Colorado to host its convention despite the fact that labor problems and funding concerns in Denver made New York seem the easier logistical choice. Bush beat Kerry in the state by just under 100,000 votes out of a little over 2.1 million cast, less than 5%. That margin was down from 9% in 2000. Similarly, Nevada was tightening as its population boomed, from 3.6% in 2000 down to 2.6% in 2004. New Mexico was under 1% margin in both elections.

Ironically, despite the narrow previous elections, the realistic opportunity for Dems to play offense with a state like Colorado and the Mountain West as a whole was not as clear-cut at the time Denver was chosen. When Denver was announced in January 2007, the conventional wisdom was that Hillary Clinton would be the nominee, and it’s hard to think of a worse match than the gun control poster child Hillary Clinton and the libertarian-striped Mountain West Dem brand. (Barack Obama is to Appalachia as Hillary Clinton is to the Mountain West, and the polling data backs this up.)

But now that Obama is the nominee, we see that his opportunity to win Colorado is significant. Obama currently leads by 5.9% over McCain. In New Mexico, Obama projects to win by 5% even, and in Nevada by 2.4%.

On the flip side, McCain is not currently competitive in Minnesota, projecting to lose by 12%. Iowa, where McCain finished a distant fourth in his party’s caucus vote behind Fred Thompson (Fred Thompson!) looks equally dismal for Republican hopes at a 9.1% deficit. Wisconsin isn’t much brighter a prospect, where Obama projects to win by 7%.

Perhaps McCain has an opportunity in Michigan, a Democratic state since 1992. Obama has gotten off the mark slowly there, in no small part because it was one of the two states where Democrats did not campaign during the primaries.

All in all, however, the Democratic opportunity to play offense with its regional convention pick seems much better than the Republican opportunity.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

RIP Tim

I'm speechless...

Friday, June 13, 2008

Weekend Clip Roundup

Fox News staying above the fray. (Check out the ticker)


Does he know that video's exsist?


And a little environmental news.

Smear

Talkleft reports that Obama has a new website called "Fight The Smears" that is, as the name suggests, meant to put to rest some of the wild internet and conservative rumors that are going around.

Talkleft sums it up so I don't have to...

"I'm wondering if a website like this can make a difference. Normally I would say no, however I thought one feature on the site could make a difference. It allows readers to e-mail any particular debunk to others. So if, for example, a person was at work and heard someone claim one of the smears was true, he or she could have the debunk emailed to everyone they think might have heard it.

On the other hand, I wonder if people who are inclined to believe the smears would be satisfied with a statement from the Obama campaign as opposed to an independent source."

Tired of this?

I've gotten some comments from people that miss my ramblings about the more mundane and less political aspects of life, so I have started a second blog, Musings Over Makkoli, for any of you interested in that. At this point, I have not actually written in it, but I plan to start today.

So there...

Red to Purple, Purple to Blue

The DNC has been trying to successfully implement their 50 State Strategy for years now. They tried in 2004 and quickly realized that Kerry only appealed to solid, life-long Dems. The only inroads he made with fence voters did not go beyond that anti-Bush vote. That loss made most Dem insiders believe that this strategy would not work and that elections are won in the few big swing states (OH, FL, PA, and MO). The hope of changing the map was scrapped as Hillary became the big front-runner who was sure to carry OH and maybe even FL. With that, senior Dems and the media anointed HRC as the one who can take back the White House in the more conventional way.

Enter Barack Obama. After his 2004 DNC Convention Speech, people have been drawn to Obama. People liked him a lot and had high hopes for him, but he did not have the backing of the establishment Dems. Hillary had already claimed that territory and had her speech writers working on her convention speech. Obama did not gain momentum for a long time. He battled criticism from every possible angle up until Iowa. It was in Iowa that the people decided to let themselves be inspired enough to pull that lever (or caucus I should say) for the young Illinois senator. As the primaries continued, Obama proved himself to have the following, the support and the momentum to break free from the conventional style of winning a primary. By focusing on how the delegate system worked rather than writing off the Red states and battling in Clinton strongholds, he expanded his map. He brought in otherwise Democratic write-off's which in turn gave him the nomination. By doing this, he earned a solid Red state backing and has turned some Red states to Purple states. Had Clinton won, she would be fighting the conventional fight of holding Blue and fighting for only OH and FL. The Dems have seen this fail too many times.

Howard Dean, Obama and a handful of other Dems know that the strategy to capture the White House by only winning key states does not benefit the Dem party. Sure Hillary might have won, but Obama and Dean want to make the Dem party what it used to be, a big tent. And to pitch that tent, you can not focus on some states and ignore others. You can not focus on a select few voting blocs and leave the others for the GOP. You have pitch that tent with a wide coalition of voters who all share a common thread.

Obama has made people realize that a thread even exists and once it is sewn and the big tent is pitched, the GOP will only be able to view the party from the outside.

Obama Responds

Reported on Talkleft and from Obama's site, his response to today's Gitmo ruling...

"Today's Supreme Court decision ensures that we can protect our nation and bring terrorists to justice, while also protecting our core values. The Court's decision is a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo - yet another failed policy supported by John McCain. This is an important step toward reestablishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus. Our courts have employed habeas corpus with rigor and fairness for more than two centuries, and we must continue to do so as we defend the freedom that violent extremists seek to destroy. We cannot afford to lose any more valuable time in the fight against terrorism to a dangerously flawed legal approach. I voted against the Military Commissions Act because its sloppiness would inevitably lead to the Court, once again, rejecting the Administration's extreme legal position. The fact is, this Administration's position is not tough on terrorism, and it undermines the very values that we are fighting to defend. Bringing these detainees to justice is too important for us to rely on a flawed system that has failed to convict anyone of a terrorist act since the 9-11 attacks, and compromised our core values."

I like it and I don't. I like that he issued the statement and threw McCain in there while painting an accurate picture of his understanding of why habeas is so important to our nation. That was good, especially since he will probably be appointing Stevens' replacement. I did not like it because he is still enthusiastically support the failed war on terror. But that's me.

How about you?

Winds of Change

Are we already feeling the winds of change? Could it be that the Supreme Court actually voted for democracy? It appears so...

From the NYT,

"Foreign terrorism suspects held at the Guantánamo Bay naval base in Cuba have constitutional rights to challenge their detention there in United States courts, the Supreme Court ruled, 5 to 4, on Thursday in a historic decision on the balance between personal liberties and national security."

Of course, the dissenting vote was Alito, Scalia, Roberts and Thomas, you know, the non-activist judges that legislate every GOP issue.
Scalia even added a little kick and claimed that this ruling“will almost certainly cause more Americans to get killed.”

Of course he would say that, but in reality

"The ruling on Thursday focused in large part on the centuries old writ of habeas corpus (“you have the body,” in Latin), a means by which prisoners can challenge their incarceration. Noting that the Constitution provides for suspension of the writ only in times of rebellion or invasion, Justice Kennedy called it “an indispensable mechanism for monitoring the separation of powers.”


Now all we need to is get rid of these conservative wacko's and continue moving forward.

Thursday, June 12, 2008

That would have helped...

I remember college amd I'm glad Obama understands how stupid we can be with credit cards. Of course, McCain does not connect on yet another Under Forty Issue...

"In 1998, McCain opposed a Democratic bid to require credit card companies to obtain information showing that borrowers under 21 could handle the debts they would likely incur if given cards. Obama also noted that McCain opposed a 2005 bill to require credit card companies to inform borrowers, on their monthly statements, that making only a minimum payment would increase the amount of interest paid and the time it would take to pay off the full balance."

Hey, when you marry up like McCain did (the second time) you wouldn't care either!

Does this qualify as "important"?

While St. McCain is busy saying this, there is another grim tale that is lurking in the depths of this wars reality. If McCain is not worried about bringing the troops home, I wonder if this is a concern. Judging by the condition of Walter Reed (where I recommended he donate his 58K yearly disability check), I doubt that he cares too much about the soldiers after they come home. After all, he ditched his first wife for a rich blond, why can't these guys?

From NPR,

"Suicides among active-duty soldiers rose to 115 last year, a 13 percent increase over the previous year, say top Army officials. The overall increase in numbers is troubling to Army officials, who are grappling with how to respond. They are offering more training to soldiers, sergeants and chaplains to help them spot the warning signs that a soldier is considering suicide."

Any amount of suicide is too much. It's time we start paying attention to our vets.

Blood loss is "not important"

It seems to John McCain simply does not understand the concerns of the voters and he proved that again in an interview on NBC. Here's a snippet.



Here he goes again. He loves to make these claims that Iraq will be like Korea and Japan. He loves to go from point A to point C without mentioning how he will get through part B. When asked the very reasonable question if he had a better estimate as to when the troops can come home since life is apparently wonderful on the ground in Iraq, he responds

"No, but that's not too important. What's important is the causalities in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany. That's all fine."


People want the troops home because they don't want causalities, right? What about the fact that we have lost nearly 4095 people during this war? What about the lives that will most definitely be lost while we're trying to make Iraq like Korea or Japan? I'm shocked that he STILL does not get it. He still thinks that this is what we want. People will not wait for the slim chance that Iraq might become a stable nation.

It costs blood and lives to get there. It is important to those families.

The Youth Vote

Commenting on my previous post McCain's Youtube Problem, Gypsy Scholar made a short, but astute proposal that it be called "McCain's Youth Tube Problem". While McCain does have some youth appeal, it pails in comparison to the cult-like following that Obama enjoys.

So, what is McCain doing that is making him the less desirable youth candidate? Is it actually McCain that has the problem or Obama that has mastered this young demographic? What does media have to do with their support base? Can McCain make up for lost time?

First of all, it is June. The trend can change and time will tell. McCain does have the support of those youth who would support a piece of petrified wood (no comparison) as long as it sported an elephant. I am not talking about the wingers on either side, I am talking about the fence voters and those youth newly introduced to the political scene.

This younger generation has been politicized during the last eight years. They have witnessed what a bad government can do and have had to sit and wait for their chance to speak and be heard. McCain does not really give them that voice. McCain is an icon of the past and that past does not include the youth vote. Sure, Bush bashing is going to have a negative effect on McCain's popularity and give some support to Obama, but these young voters are looking forward and trying to mold the political world around their issues and their world. They have witnessed McCains political world and have rejected it.

McCain's age is also on the voters' minds. People are concerned that he might not be mentally or physically up to the demanding position, but I don't think that is the biggest issue with the youth vote. The problem McCain has with the youth vote (with respect to his age) is the fact that he is actually quite old. He's from a generation and a path that has little or nothing to do with any of these younger voters. There is no connection. This race is about connectivity. The youth view him as an older grandfather type that is respected, but is seen as more of a "cute" older man that missteps and forgets things that he says. McCain only widens that gap with playful comments like his "you little jerk" jab that was funny to his audience, but does not serve him well in connectivity.

McCain has nothing to offer the younger generation. He does not speak with them, he speaks at them. Obama knows how to talk to people. He knows how to talk to all people of all ages and races. He makes very wide and open statements that does not isolate a particular voting bloc and he does it with gusto. Simply watching McCains speech in New Orleans last week comparison to Obamas in St. Paul, you get the picture. The youth voters need to see, hear and feel the speeches. Obama offers that. McCain offers choppy, forced and uncomfortable soundbites that brings to mind the priest from Poltergeist. However, this is not just McCain's problem. If the Dems offered the same old sap, then the youth would not be in play (at least not in the numbers that we are seeing today). Connectivity is huge. JFK and WJC mastered it.

And yes, the youth have a new world of media and technology at their fingertips. They are savvy and do not have to turn on the news or read a paper to find out what is going on. They can form their own opinions and voice them on youtube, blogs and millions of Internet forums. They can watch very clear examples of McCain displaying his inability to adapt to the times while he flips and flops over every word. Not only can they form their own opinions and self-publish them, but they can get that message to millions of like-minded youth who are hungry to participate.

St. McCain will not be able to catch Obama in money or popularity with the youth voters. Youth voters do not want wonks. They want to be inspired to take control of their political future just like they have taken control of media. They have proven that they are a powerful voice in American politics and even if McCain realizes it soon, it will be 8 years too late.

Welcome to the new political age.

No Mass Exodus

Perhaps I was a bit hasty in my assumptions that women voters wouldn't throw their support behind Obama, but it appears that that is just what seems to be happening. Since Clinton bowed out and put her weight behind Obama, his support from older women has grown, while McCain's appears to be slipping.

I'm encouraged by this number for many reasons, but the biggest of course is that there has not been the mass exodus from the party that many anger Clinton supporters threatened. The drop in McCain support has got to be troubling for the GOP. McCain had three months to capitalize on the Dem in-fighting and did not seize that opportunity.

Now, it's time for Obama to select Wes Clark and make McCain irrelevant.

Clark will fight

I fully support Wes Clark as Obama's VP and I think that Clark just passed the first phase of the audition. From Huffington

"I know he's trying to get traction by seeking to play to what he thinks is his strong suit of national security," Clark said of McCain while speaking from his office in Little Rock, Arkansas. "The truth is that, in national security terms, he's largely untested and untried. He's never been responsible for policy formulation. He's never had leadership in a crisis, or in anything larger than his own element on an aircraft carrier or [in managing] his own congressional staff. It's not clear that this is going to be the strong suit that he thinks it is."


Obama's only choice has to be a senior military official. We can neutralize McCain and as we have seen by this "untested and untried" comment, Wes Clark is becoming the fighter that Obama needs.

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Fishing without bait

As McCain's pitch to disenchanted Dems who were Clinton supporters intensifies, the glaring differences between the two blocs is starting to surface. Most Dems and BO supporters can see right through McCain and know that it would make no sense for the Hillary supporters, who are arguably the sharpest and most committed Democratic voters, to lean towards St. McCain. Only in their anger and possible feelings of betrayal will this powerful demographic be temporarily blinded by such attempts. As the blinders fade with time, they will realize that a vote for John McCain is a vote against everything they have fought for.

Let's take a quick look at a defining McCain value that women might take issue with.

From NARAL,

"Sen. John McCain served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1983 to 1986 and in the U.S. Senate from 1987 to present. During his four years in the House, then-Rep. McCain cast 11 votes on abortion and other reproductive-rights issues. Ten of these votes were anti-choice. In the Senate, through 2006, Sen. McCain cast 117 votes on abortion and other reproductive-rights issues, 113 of which were anti-choice."

He's not hiding it either. Even his website boasts his determination to overturn Roe v. Wade.

"John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench."

I like how he doesn't want judges to "legislate from the bench" in this case, but he is fine with it when it benefits his party. I'm sure Dem voters and especially women want their privacy jeopardized for political gain.

The most important issue that ALL voters should be considering is McCain's stance on the Supreme court. These lifelong appointments have the potential to damage so many lives and can have a serious effect on the world (Bush v. Gore).

From Scoop,

"While McCain spoke about a number of issues related to the Constitution, including the separation of powers that it enshrines, the subtext of his remarks was red meat to conservatives. The candidate assured them that he was resolutely opposed to so-called "judicial activism", and that a McCain administration would nominate Supreme Court justices in the mould of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito, Jr., both of whom were appointed by President George W. Bush."

I love how he repeats his love affair with separation of powers, yet lauds George W. Bush's super conservative appointments up and down the judiciary. It's easy to claim to love the separation of power when all those powers are working together.

Obama camp answered,
"The Straight Talk Express took another sharp right turn today as John McCain promised his conservative base four more years of out-of-touch judges that would threaten a woman's right to choose, gut the campaign finance reform that bears his own name, and trample the rights and interests of the American people," said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor."

While these Clintonista's might be angry now, they are nowhere near as angry as they will be if they allow themselves to be taken by John McCain. Buyer beware.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Beef Impatience

My patience with the US-beef protests ran out days ago. If you want to read about it go here and here.

ROKDrop points out that it's not all Koreans who are crazy, just those who still live in Korea. There is a huge protest tonight; probably the biggest yet. I'll let you know if I was taken away in the middle of the night and thrown into concentration camps filled with US beef. The horror!

McCain's Youtube Problem

McCain comes from a different political generation. In fact, many people do. The political generation of the past thrived on one-day panderers, double standards, frequent policy changes and outright lying. It worked because the print media could not reach a large enough portion of the population to make it a national story and the news media often allowed these somewhat routine speeches to go directly to the archives. This is how it has always been and this is the political atmosphere that John McCain is used to.

John McCain was the master of this under-reported political world. He thrived in it because he could push his absurd image as a "Straight Talker" simply by calling himself that. He was the "Maverick" because he said things and then stuck by them in selected speeches and politically advantageous instances. He "crossed the aisle" and that made him the most ethical suit in Congress. Of course, he wasn't. He just worked the system well.

That was then and unfortunately for St. McCain, the time where people can say one thing and then backtrack on it the next day has passed. It does not matter who, what or how many people you speak to because it will be recorded and those clips don't just go into the archives anymore. People record, Tivo or capture all of those routine speeches and download them to websites like Youtube. He can't hand pick what he wants to be heard and who gets to see it like he's used to. Everything he does and says can be and is viewed by millions and it seems that his self-proclaimed title is more ironic than accurate.

As the media and voters shift their focus from the Dem race to the GE, McCain is proving himself to be completely oblivious to this political tool and rather than using it to his advantage, he is hurting himself every time he makes an appearance. He naively thought that by inviting the press to tour with him it would help portray him as the ethical person he claims to be, but all it has done is show his gaffes, his inability to admit mistakes (a Bush byproduct), his fear of change, and most of all, just how much his age is an issue.

McCain has a lot to learn and the more the cameras are on this very 71 year old man, the less I worry.

Chipping Away at the GOP?

Talkleft reported that Obama will be reaching out to young Christians with a new campaign called The Joshua Generation Project.

"The Joshua Generation project will be the Obama campaign's outreach to young people of faith. There's unprecedented energy and excitement for Obama among young evangelicals and Catholics. The Joshua Generation project will tap into that excitement and provide young people of faith opportunities to stand up for their values and move the campaign forward."


I'm not thrilled with this at all. It might help him win, but I have had enough of politicians catering to this vote and I don't want to win like that. It's one thing to make sure that voters know that the Dems aren't the godless pinko's that the Right has painted them as, but a comment like this does not make me feel great.

"I'm here because somebody marched. I'm here because you all sacrificed for me. I stand on the shoulders of giants. I thank the Moses generation; but we've got to remember, now, that Joshua still had a job to do. As great as Moses was, despite all that he did, leading a people out of bondage, he didn't cross over the river to see the Promised Land. God told him your job is done. You'll see it. You'll be at the mountain top and you can see what I've promised. What I've promised to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob. You will see that I've fulfilled that promise but you won't go there. We're going to leave it to the Joshua generation to make sure it happens. There are still battles that need to be fought; some rivers that need to be crossed. Like Moses, the task was passed on to those who might not have been as deserving, might not have been as courageous, find themselves in front of the risks that their parents and grandparents and great grandparents had taken. That doesn't mean that they don't still have a burden to shoulder, that they don't have some responsibilities. The previous generation, the Moses generation, pointed the way. They took us 90% of the way there. We still got that 10% in order to cross over to the other side. So the question, I guess, that I have today is what's called of us in this Joshua generation? What do we do in order to fulfill that legacy; to fulfill the obligations and the debt that we owe to those who allowed us to be here today?"


I know he is pandering a bit, but it's a little over the top and seems that he is promising something that is just vague enough to get an unwanted following and sect of the Dem party.

The challenge: Get those new faith-based recruits to fight poverty, aids, hunger and climate change rather than battle against gay marriage and abortion. If he can do this, then I say welcome to the Democratic National Party.

More Unity

From TPM, Obama will be teaming up with Elizabeth Edwards on health care. Sometimes I forget how great Obama is at bringing in the best of the best to work on major issues. Elizabeth Edwards on the trail with him would do wonders for this country and the election.

Stupid Polls

A recent Rasmussen poll suggests that a majority of voters on both sides of the aisle want to see McCain and Obama in a town hall setting. Of course, they want to see the two nominees go at it, but by asking this question they are trying to frame this as an issue and one that Obama is running away from. I would like to see these polls asking real questions like...

Is John McCain too old to be President?

Whose Iraq policy do you favor?

Who would do better in restoring the international opinion of America?

Does John McCain make you uncomfortable when he attempts to smile?


These are questions. These should be polled (especially the last one). Asking people if they want to hear the two candidates discuss issues is a given. People want it, so don't try to turn this into a McCain talking point more than he already has. McCain likes to think that he is best during these town-hall meeetings, but he bungles ever forum he steps into.

Bring it on, St. McCain.

Hot Summer Issue

Just as the hysteria and mess of vigils, protests and public anger continues to garner public support, another story that actually warrants an outcry of public concern is swept under the rug because, apparently, nothing is more important than abusing riot police, I MEAN, protesting the re entrance of guaranteed MCD infested beef to the helpless Korean population.

South Koreans can sleep well knowing that their North Korean brothers and sisters are starving just 30km north of Seoul, but manage to gather the stamina and passion to protest in the streets for over thirty days about beef.

"A 66-year-old fisherman escaped from North Korea 33 years after being kidnapped and is currently under the protection of the South Korean consulate in Shenyang, China, the head of an abductee-related association said Monday."

These stories come out all the time, yet there is never any increased interest or demand from the public to work for the millions in the same situation. And if their is any interest, it peaks with this one story and then is put to rest soon after.
"The abductee was one of the 33 fishermen aboard the boat and the fourth one who has made it home. Ko Myung-sup, 64, Choi Uk-il, 68 and Lee Han-seop, 60, escaped from the North and successfully returned home between 2005 and 2007."

So, there were 29 other people on board that were kidnapped. My question: Will the four who escaped from Kim's gulag fight for the other 29? If they don't, then no one will. No one in Korea will at least and especially when this summers hot political issue is beef and not human life.

I wonder how they would explain themselves to their imprisoned North Korean brethren? They couldn't and they wouldn't.

Terrorist Fist jab



When the loving Obamas first did this a week ago, most people thought it was endearing, affectionate and maybe even a little hip. It should have been discussed for one day and that would be the end of it.

Were you at all confused about what that was, or what it meant? E.D. Hill, former host of Fox and Friends and current host of American Pulse on Fox News, wants you to believe she was. Oddly enough, she simultaneously wants you to believe she's smart and tuned-in enough to be qualified to deliver the news to you on television.

Anyway, Hill actually calls in a body language expert to analyze what it was, as though it were from another planet.

But that isn't even the worst of it. Before going to their expert, Hill actually ponders aloud whether it might have been some kind of -- it makes me sick just to think they got away with this in front of the whole world -- terrorist signal.

A "terrorist fist jab," she calls it!

No Democrat should ever go on Fox News again.

Monday, June 09, 2008

St. McCain's Laundry

I have written about how the GOP and McCain are trying to sway some of the angered Clinton women over to the dark side and they still might have a chance, but I have a feeling that once the voters get to know how McCain dumped his ex-wife, they might start to think again.

"She was the woman McCain dreamed of during his long incarceration and torture in Vietnam’s infamous ‘Hanoi Hilton’ prison and the woman who faithfully stayed at home looking after the children and waiting anxiously for news. But when McCain returned to America in 1973 to a fanfare of publicity and a handshake from Richard Nixon, he discovered his wife had been disfigured in a terrible car crash three years earlier."

Being the man that he is; a man full of ethics and moral fiber, it goes without saying that he would stand by the woman who stood by him and their three kids. You would think he would do the honorable thing, right? Nope, McCain, the "self-centered womaniser who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to ‘play the field’" decided that his life and career would be much better with his "new father-in-law, Jim Hensley, who was a multi-millionaire with impeccable political connections."

If St. McCain is trying to win those women on the fence, he better hope that he maintains his Darling status with the MSM because in the GE it's all fair game and I'm counting the days until this implodes and he has to stumbled through the same sort of "respect my privacy" garbage that Cindy McCain tried with her tax returns.

Here's a tribute to McCain's dirty laundry.

Awful Waffle

My wife just called me from the office. She has started a new job and has been busy orienting herself to the new gig, office and coworkers. She is very social and has an inviting personality, but when it was time to go to lunch, the workers split into their respective clicks and went to lunch. It was at that time when I received a text message from 고운.

"Damn! The people went 4 lunch N I don't have a group yet, nor do I know where to eat! I'm so hungry!"


I think it would be fair to say that most people have had similar experiences growing up and most of them were probably in the early days of high school. I mention this because I think that Koreans of all ages act very much like they are still in high school; the clicks, the conformity, the inability to be an individual and the of course the jealously, envy and unnatural desire to have what others have and compare your life to others.

While some of these societal traits can be traced back to Korea's Confucius roots, most of this occurs because people are scared to stray from the safety of popular opinion. Their opinions, habits and lifestyles are all as close to identical as possible and that is a little too much like high school.

I do wonder what segments would represent the jock, the nerd, and the popular kid. I think that the English teachers should give every Korean an Awful Waffle and maybe that would snap them out of their safety zone.

Clinton Can Unify

The focus is now all on Obama. Can he win? Who will he pick for his running mate? Will he be able to unify the party? All of these questions are valid and all of them can be answered, as one Kos writer suggests, with one simple strategy: Hillary needs to attack John McCain and she needs to do it hard and often.

She needs to rail into him just she would have if she was the nominee. She needs to hit him on the economy, on national security, on equal rights, on equal pay, on Webb's GI Bill, on every Democratic bill that comes to the Senate floor between now and the end of June. This will serve the Dem party in two ways. Kos claims that this is a solid strategy because McCain will fire back at her and then her supporters will rally behind Obama. That's totally true, but there are a lot of angered Clintonista's out there who might be thinking that voting McCain for be a good way to regain some face after that upset. If she sticks it to McCain on every issue that he is weak on (and the list is long), then her base will realize how bad a McCain presidency would be for the country. This would also calm down the BS sympathy that the GOP is throwing at HRC in an lame attampt to woo some Dems to the dark side.

In closing: Clinton attacks McCain. McCain attacks Clinton. Clintonista's rediscover their political compass. Democrats unite.

It's not the only way, but it's a kick ass way and one that I would love to see.

Surprised? -nope

From Americablog,

"...John McCain, who is refusing to vote for the GI Bill for our troops because "it's too generous," is himself getting $58,000 a year, tax-free, from the US government for his military service. Had McCain been getting that amount every year since Vietnam, that would total $2,000,000 for the man who isn't into overgenerous government. I just find that interesting."

So do I. We're paying 58K to a multi-millionaire who voted against the new GI Bill, but we can't pay for our newly disabled vets. The hypocrisy deepens...
"The Republicans decided that the last election should be about whether a Vietnam war hero, who was awarded the Purple Heart, really was injured enough to get those medals."

That's right. Just how injured was St. John?

John McCain should donate that money to Walter Reed and then check into the old soldiers home and rant about kids playing too close to one of his nine houses. No, that's too much. He should just snooze by his atrificial lake on his estate in Sedona like the regular guy that he is.

"Open wide Mr. President."

McCain just doesn't seem to understand the challenges that he is facing. For a man that dragged his 96 year old mother around for his primary stumps to show people that he has good genes, I would think that he would put that issue to rest or at least avoid bringing it up himself, but yet again he is proving that his campaign is not the smartest.



Do you think the VP will end up having to feed McCain his jello while making sure that his denture solution is always nearby? I imagine that McCain will hear, "You dribbled a little bit on your shirt Mr. President." OR "Here comes the jello airplane. Open wide, Mr. President."
If he somehow convinces people to vote for him, I'm really concerned about his senior moments that are only going to increase. He has had so many already and GOPJoe is always going to be next to him.

Friday, June 06, 2008

My Ears!

Yet again, Korean citizens and netizens have proven that their passionate crusade against rational and independant thought is stronger than ever. As if the riots, vigils, violence, web propaganda and demostrations weren't enough, they have now turned their intellectually absent minds against a once beloved, but now soon-to-be former television personality.

"Jeong Sun-hee, a female comedien, made the controversial comment on a listener's complaint about losing a bicycle at the site of a candlelit vigil. She said: ``Amid rising iron prices, some people have been stealing manhole covers. People participate in candlelit demonstrations over big issues such as mad cow disease, out of patriotism, but do not feel guilty over such small things as manhole theft, which is a crime. Who knows? Some of those steaming over the big issue and participating in the rally may be such small-scale offenders."


This comment is so benign and tame, but the backlash has caused her to quit some of her television shows and even issue this apology.

"I'm also a Korean who worries about the same things as you. I didn't intend to neglect public reaction, but thought people would understand me if I stayed calm for a while. I'm sorry again for not understanding you fully and making you angry,'' she said in Friday's broadcast."


She meant to say (IMO)...

"I can't believe that I misunderestimated how willfully blind my own people are. I was wrong for assuming it would be okay for having a unique thought and I promise that will always be quick to follow the great wisdom of the Korean ovine."


Of course, the ineterent petition demanding her resignation for such treason is already in full swing and you can join in the fun and let her know that indivuality like this can cause seriuos harm and will not be tolerated!

Photo Hunt


Can you spot the edit?

Rules: You must clearly identify what I edited. It could be color, size, add-ons or anything, but it will only be one edit. I will keep a published tally and after six months, I will buy the winner a book of their choice or donate $25 bucks to the DNC. There is no deadline.

Weekend Clip Roundup

Even McCain thinks he's too old.



Lou Dobbs continues to be a douche.



Stewart is always on top of the bullsh*t.



Some tunes for those Hillary victims.