Thursday, April 24, 2008

Hillary or Obama, who has the most votes.

Recently Hillary claimed that she had the most votes cast for her and Obama claimed the same thing. The answer of course is what is the definition of a vote and whose vote do you count. If you do not include states that use Caucuses and include Florida and Michigan then Hillary has a wide margin, if you include Caucuses then she has a very thin margin. However, if you count the votes that are counted by the DNC to determine delegates then Obama is ahead. One thing to note, most caucus states do not keep accurate records so that vote is not very accurate.

This brings me to my point. Michigan and Florida need to be part of this process. Every vote should count. I'm not a big fan of Hillary and I don't really hope she wins the nomination but I am a big fan of democracy and voting. To ignore Florida and Michigan and exclude them from this process is a disgrace to a party that 8 years ago cried about how horrible not counting votes are.

Here is the best description of my thoughts on Obama are: Found over at the

As the democratic primary season drags on, we know the show by heart. It's experience vs. change. But I can't believe I'm about to do this - I`m going to defend Hillary Clinton. Why? Because when the New York Times viciously attacks someone in an editorial - that means that person must be doing something right. It's the enemy of my enemy theory that works in politics as well as the salad bar at the Olive Garden. Here's the bottom line. Barack Obama is about change. But what is that change? It's not substance, it's style. Fact is, not a single idea Barack has bandied about is new - he's every bit as liberal as Ted Kennedy on a bender- and his ideology is in lockstep with the most disastrous progressive thinking of the last 20 years. Meaning, Obama is praising stuff that doesn't work and never has. Hilary knows this, but has no idea how to explain it without the Obamites coming down on her.So she's screwed. She might actually be a fairly mediocre president, but it's not going to happen, because she's the old crone at Cinderella's ball. And it's Obama's foot that fits the slipper. This is not to say Barack doesn't believe in change.For him, change means "pick me." And that's it. There are no revolutionary ideas, or inspirational thoughts. He`s just an extremely charming man who wants to be president. Is that enough? Please let me know. I'll be out back tending to my roses. They cover the graves.

Monday, April 21, 2008


I got talked into seeing Expelled last night, This is the right wing response to the Michael Moore approach to propaganda. Let me say that Ben Stein has out Michael Moored the left. I generally didn't want to go see this but I'm now very glad I did. It was very, very thought provoking.

The premise is that the University systems and science in general is suppressing meaningful dialogue about Evolution as a scientific theory. There are holes in the theory that are not explained and most scientist would agree. However, not a lot of them think Intelligent Design has a shot at filling those. So why the suppression if ID as a solution.

This is where the movie got interesting. He says it's not about the science or lack there of, it's pretty clear that it's about religion and a world view. That this is just one of the battle grounds on going around two opposing world views. One where there is a morality, there is good and evil and a God who set it all up. And there is the world view where there isn't any of that, it's all happening by accident and chance. Good and evil are what we decide. He then shows the cultures that fully embraced that world view and where it led. Russia and Nazi Germany. That was very powerful, he showed how using Darwin, Nazi's used it to justify Euthanasia and Genocide.

Very powerful stuff, I was impressed. It was sobering.

Friday, April 4, 2008

New Anti war movie bombs, Keeping doing the same thing over and over. Expect the same results

The new stop loss movie is one more item on the growing list of anti war movies dieing at the box office. When is Hollywood going to join the rest of America in not hating our military.

I found this over at the


So the new anti-war film Stop-Loss took in about twelve bucks on it's opening weekend. I haven't seen it - as you know my weekends are jammed with massage therapy and community service. But I know it's a movie about a soldier whose service is involuntarily extended in a war that's unpopular among people who eat at Spago.

And it does what Hollywood does best: be predictable. I mean, this is not a movie about a soldier who wants to fight. That reeks of patriotism, which kills your chances of Tim Robbins, or his mom Susan, talking to you at a cocktail party.

So whose fault is it for the film's failure? According to someone at Paramount: "It's a function of the marketplace not being ready to address this conflict in a dramatic way because the war itself is something that's unresolved yet." Meaning, Paramount already thinks the war is lost. But because you don't, you're too dumb to enjoy the picture.

You gotta admire that gumption: it's the audiences fault when a picture doesn't connect. However, when Paris Hilton's film flopped, you didn't hear that kind of assessment.

Look - we don't need war movies to remind us that war is bad - we know that. Plus, mainstream media is already doing a bang up job ramming home that idea - even to the point of ignoring good or encouraging news about the conflict.

But I guess what bothers me most about the flick is being lectured by people who are fundamentally more flawed than the rest of us. Really, is the act of stop-loss worse, on a personal level, than cheating on your wife and mother of your two kids - with your saucy little costar? I'd ask Ryan Philippe that, but I'm already over him. He's no Orlando Bloom.

And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler.