a quick question for all those hillary supporters that want florida votes to count

based on your demographics, i assume that most of you hillary supporters that want those florida votes to count are a bit older and a likely parents. so with that in mind i want to ask you a question.

what would you do if your little son or daughter did something you didn’t like. so you tell them not to do it or they will not get any ice cream in the evening. well, the threat didn’t do much the little guy still does it. you then obviously tell them that that means no ice cream. as you sit down for dinner and everyone is about to get their ice cream, with the exception of the little rebel, the little rebel says that he/she wants some ice cream, that it is not fair that they didn’t not get ice cream while all the other members of the family are getting their ice cream.

so let me know what you would do … would you give the rebel some ice cream or be firm?

and then let me know why should the florida votes count?

thanks

mccain once again showcases his ignorance of global affairs

not only does mccain in the video below showcase bush traits by ignoring facts and stressing that he is right by making stupid jokes that are supposed to cover up his own ignorance.

but what really gets me is the very end where he says that he takes the side of “the average american” on an issue like who would be the head of iran. well, maybe he wants to take a look at this video to find out about how much the average american knows about the world outside of the US

or maybe these guys here

“leaning tower of pizza” …

hillary is starting to make ads for obama

i just saw this new hillary campaign video that she is airing in indiana: 

what i find amazing is that she thinks that what she is doing is good!!

let’s start with the forclosures, yes she is suggesting bailing people who made wrong investments out of them. and in part that is an ok policy. but she was a senator in the stupid build up to the current economic mess, if she is so ready to be president, why didn’t she do something earlier? why didn’t she suggest more rigid lending laws two or three years ago? no back then she was missing in action, and now she wants to use tax payer money to bail out poor investment decisions by individuals and by financial institutions. 

what is most amazing though is her stupid idea to freeze gas tax over the summer. what good does this do? nothing. all it will do is reduce the money the government has to repair the already crumblin infrastructure in this country and will make people use their cars more. let’s get this country to accept that gas prices will be high. why? because there is a limited amount of it and there are now more people who want it. so let’s swallow the bitter pill and get this country into the 21st century. 

obama rightly says no to her two initiatives, because he wants to put an end to this reactionary, populist policy making and wants to bring us back to a sane model … which will be painful for all (likely include tax increases) because over the last 20 years the country has been living above its means. so in the end this ad just shows how short sighted hillary is (she will do anything just to win votes).

are americans really so stupid that they would fall for mccain’s cheap shot of linking obama to hamas?

election season is always an interesting time since it shows on the one side how american’s think, but at the same time it also shows how politicians think american’s think. for the last 8 years the public has pretty much proven that it doesn’t deserve any other president than bush, after all they voted for him - twice. the first time was not really their fault i would say since he didn’t really win, plus the probably didn’t expect him to be such a moron, but the second time is unexcusable. 

but now it is 2008 and they again have the option to vote for a president. there is on the one side obama and on the other side mccain (i admit that for me this is a no-brainer, i certainly would support obama). obama is certainly a bit of an unknown, but what he has accomplished so far is certainly amazing. plus, despite all of his competitor being “experienced” washington insiders and longtime campaigners he has run an incredibly efficient campaign. 

now mccain is not only old, but he is more or less bush’s mini-me. he is now supporting the bush tax cuts (which is ridiculous in face of a $10 trillion national deficit and mounting costs of a stupid war) and he has always supported the iraq war. mccain always touts his own horn how much experience he has, but i am sorry, just because you are old that doesn’t mean you have experience. and judging by his decisions over the last 8 years i have to say that it seems to me that he is just another guy like bush who hates losing even if that means that even more soldiers have to die and even more tax payer money has to be spend. experience is not just about having been around for a long time, but learning from what has happened around them and from the mistakes — mccain clearly has not done that.  in addition, mccain has been around for a long time, that is for sure, but he has made his experience during the time of the cold war. what the US is now facing is not a way (even though bush is trying to sell it as one). if this is a war it is a war of ideas (obama’s against the rest in a way, or the increasing number of the disenfrenchised against those with a voice), and all that mccain knows is to use force, just like bush, and this won’t work in this war. obama, on the other hand understands this. 

but getting back to the electorate. i am not that optimistic that american voters have learned from their mistakes of the last 8 years. and this ridiculous mccain email sent out to supporters 

shows that the mccain campaign thinks the same. they think that a ridiculous connection of obama and hamas (which does not exist) will turn people against obama. for those that read this and are thinking about voting for mccain, please answer one question for me: how can you vote for someone who clearly thinks that you are a moron? mccain recently called obama an elitist, but this email shows that mccain is way worse than an elitist, mccain doesn’t have any respect for his voters as it looks like, he thinks they are not able to distinguish between crap and reality. 

a running list of bush’s achievements

there still seem to be about 40% of americans that say they are happy with bush. i don’t know why, but just to help those people, i will start a list here with some of his achievement: 

• a failed strategy to fight al qaeda — with the terrorist group regrouping and getting stronger in pakistan 
• a war in iraq that can only be described as a failure, has cost more than 4,000 american lives, will cost in the trillions of dollars, and has taken troops that were needed to fight al qaeda to fight in iraq
• oil at records prices (i don’t even know how much it costs these days, but it is still above $100 for the barrel) 
• an economy is shambles … the other day i heard someone (that was a fairly well known economist) say that it is in its worst situation since the great depression 
• a dollar at record lows — i remember when you could get 0.86 euros for a dollar now it is somewhere around 1.5 euros
• a housing market that is going to make lives even harder to americans as they find their investments going sour 
• ever increasing debt — that national debt clock in ny is running out of numbers as it is going to hit $10 trillion in national debt this year
• an increasing gap between the rich and the poor 
• an economy that is producing less and less but borrowing more and more 
• no energy policy what-so-ever that addresses changing oil demands and energy needs in a time of global warming 
• … there are probably a ton of other achievement 

so if you are a bush supporter can you please enlighten me why that is the case? 

what is hillary’s problem? why can’t she say it is over?

i can’t imaging what celebrations must be going on at the mccain’s and the republican party’s headquarters. there they are, an unpopular war which is going nowhere and an economy that is tanking, and a presidential candidate that is the lapdog of the president that has gotten us all into that situation. but, there is a good chance they can win the election. why? because of hillary.because one person in the democratic party thinks that it is ok to keep on running in the primary despite the fact that she will not have enough votes in the end. all along she is discrediting her opponent to a degree that it is helping the republicans while at the same time pissing off voters that would love to vote for the democratic party (but will probably not do so if she gets elected). there is a time when one has to have the guts and the poise to say “this is it, i concede, i gave it all, but in the end the other one won.” especially at a time when you are not even fighting the other team, you are just fighting who will be the head of your own team. i find that hillary’s behavior right now just shows how unelectable she is. the thing she is solely focused on is power. it is not what is better for her party, it is not what is better for her country.  it is only about what is better for her. and i am sorry, but i seen too many presidents over the last 20 years that fit that profile.so to all those people that gave money to hillary (and might still be giving money to her) please stop, send her an email instead and ask her to concede. or take the blame when next january mccain will stand on the stairs of the capitol and be sworn in to be the next president.  

speech on race - a speech that should not be necessary in 2008…

… but unfortunately the speech is still necessary.  in case there are people out there that have not seen the speech yet … here it is:   as usual a superb speech that is both moving and invigorating at the same time, and is addressing a topic that a lot wish would not be necessary to give and others would rather ignore. i am not sure a president obama would make race something no one cares about anymore, but i would hope it would help to get there at sometime in the future. 

iraq is doing just fine … you still need a bullet proof west though

mccain is visiting iraq, and he will probably proclaim again that things are going great and are no different than they are in any US city. well, i guess with the exception of the bullet proof west you have to wear (even at the heavily guarded airport in the middle of nowhere)  the story about his visit on the nyt web site includes an interesting quote from a iraqi on the street: 

Some Sunni Arabs were not so pleased by the visit. “If the Republicans win the election, then nothing will really change in Iraq, and we need a big change to kick the occupiers out of the country,” said Abu Mohammed, a 30-year-old barber shop owner in Samarra, north of Baghdad. “I would like to show him the schools and hospitals and how the children and women suffer.”  

 on a side note, the trip is being paid for by tax payer money … because it is a trip mccain undertakes as a member of the armed services committee … hm, yes, i see (so much for maverick, he is just another washington politician who takes any money he can get). 

Mr. McCain has said the trip is not primarily political. He told reporters last Friday: “I do want to emphasize again that the three of us are going as members of the Armed Services Committee.”But on Thursday, Mr. McCain will attend a $1,000-per-plate fund-raising lunch at a home in London. His campaign has said that Congress would be reimbursed for the political parts of the trip, including the fund-raiser in London.  

obama brings fun back into politics

in today’s politics it doesn’t happen a lot that a politician speaks his/her mind or that they god forbid are sarcastic/funny. but obama broke with this today. npr had this story on one of their blogs. after the clinton campaign sent out another information leaflet (or however you want to call it) the obama camp just took the clinton paper and annotated it. the result couldn’t have been more true and more fun to read.

To: Interested Parties From: Clinton Campaign Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2008Re: Keystone Test: Obama Losing Ground [Get ready for a good one.]

The path to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue goes through Pennsylvania so if Barack Obama can’t win there, how will he win the general election?

[Answer: I suppose by holding obviously Democratic states like California and New York, and beating McCain in swing states like Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Virginia and Wisconsin where Clinton lost to Obama by mostly crushing margins. But good question.]

After setbacks in Ohio and Texas, Barack Obama needs to demonstrate that he can win the state of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is the last state with more than 15 electoral votes on the primary calendar and Barack Obama has lost six of the seven other largest states so far — every state except his home state of Illinois.

[If you define "setback" as netting enough delegates out of our 20-plus-point wins in Mississippi and Wyoming to completely erase any delegate advantage the Clinton campaign earned out of March 4th, then yeah, we feel pretty setback.]

Pennsylvania is of particular importance, along with Ohio, Florida and Michigan, because it is dominated by the swing voters who are critical to a Democratic victory in November. No Democrat has won the presidency without winning Pennsylvania since 1948. And no candidate has won the Democratic nomination without winning Pennsylvania since 1972.

[What the Clinton campaign secretly means: PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT WE'VE LOST 14 OF THE LAST 17 CONTESTS AND SAID THAT MICHIGAN AND FLORIDA WOULDN'T COUNT FOR ANYTHING. Also, we're still trying to wrap our minds around the amazing coincidence that the only "important" states in the nominating process are the ones that Clinton won.]

But the Obama campaign has just announced that it is turning its attention away from Pennsylvania.

[Huh?]

This is not a strategy that can beat John McCain in November.

[I don't think Clinton's strategy of losing in state after state after promising more of the same politics is working all that well either.]

In the last two weeks, Barack Obama has lost ground among men, women, Democrats, independents and Republicans — all of which point to a candidacy past its prime.

["A candidacy past its prime." These guys kill me.]

For example, just a few weeks ago, Barack Obama won 68% of men in Virginia, 67% in Wisconsin and 62% in Maryland. He won 60% of Virginia women and 55% of Maryland women. He won 62% of independents in Maryland, 64% in Wisconsin and 69% in Virginia. Obama won 59% of Democrats in Maryland, 53% in Wisconsin and 62% in Virginia. And among Republicans, Obama won 72% in both Virginia and Wisconsin.

But now Obama’s support has dropped among all these groups.

[That's true, if you don't count all the winning we've been up to. As it turns out, it's difficult to maintain 40-point demographic advantages, even over Clinton]

In Mississippi, he won only 25% of Republicans and barely half of independents. In Ohio, he won only 48% of men, 41% of women and 42% of Democrats. In Texas, he won only 49% of independents and 46% of Democrats. And in Rhode Island, Obama won just 33% of women and 37% of Democrats.

[I'm sympathetic to their attempt to parse crushing defeats. And I'm sure Rush Limbaugh's full-throated endorsement of Clinton didn't make any difference. Right]

Why are so many voters turning away from Barack Obama in state after state?

[You mean besides the fact that we're ahead in votes, states won and delegates?]

In the last few weeks, questions have arisen about Obama’s readiness to be president. In Virginia, 56% of Democratic primary voters said Obama was most qualified to be commander-in-chief. That number fell to 37% in Ohio, 35% in Rhode Island and 39% in Texas.

[Only the Clinton campaign could cherry pick states like this. But in contrast to their logic, in the most recent contest of Mississippi, voters said that Obama was more qualified to be commander in chief than Clinton by a margin of 55-42.]

So the late deciders — those making up their minds in the last days before the election — have been shifting to Hillary Clinton. Among those who made their decision in the last three days, Obama won 55% in Virginia and 53% in Wisconsin, but only 43% in Mississippi, 40% in Ohio, 39% in Texas and 37% in Rhode Island.

[If only there were enough late deciders for the Clinton campaign to actually be ahead, they would really be on to something.]

If Barack Obama cannot reverse his downward spiral with a big win in Pennsylvania, he cannot possibly be competitive against John McCain in November.[If they are defining downward spiral as a series of events in which the Clinton campaign has lost more votes, lost more contests and lost more delegates to us ... I guess we will have to suffer this horribly painful slide all the way to the nomination and then on to the White House.]

[Thanks for the laughs guys. This was great.]

oh when can we have an intelligence test for elected politicians?

watching this interview with rep. steve king i only have two questions 1. what kind of idiots voted this guy into office?2. in a country that requires a license to drive a car, why can’t we have a intelligence license for those people that make quite important decisions about the future and well-being of this country?     so terrorist will be dancing in the streets. can i just say something, even if they would, there would be far less of them dancing in the streets that have been dancing in the streets over the last 8 years of the bush administration. in case this guy hasn’t figured this out yet (but then he actually admits that he has no idea what he is talking about and just wanted to start a thought process to better understand the middle east) each day the US is fighting muslims in iraq and has troops stationed in saudi arabia terrorists are dancing in the streets and muslims are waiting in line to sign up to be the next suicide bomber. then he goes on about saying that what he said (and i assume he means the part about terrorists dancing in the street if obama wins) is objectively true and has not been negated by anyone else. well it hasn’t because first of all i assume no one takes this guy serious (with the exception of fox news) and second something in the future can NOT be objectively true. it has not happened yet. there is no date set yet for dancing in the streets. if rep king is aware of any “dancing in the streets obama victory parties” i would like to see those invites. if this event would have happened in the past, yes, than it could have been objectively true (although very few people would probably call it objectively true, but just true).