I hear all the time about how the American Public only cares about "Bullshit" and who is screwing who, like Rev Wright, Monica Lewinski or the sniper fire in Bosnia or lack there of.
Here is why we do care about "Bullshit". When the candidates talk seriously about issues we think --- I don't believe an f---ing word. We have heard all the lies before. The president is not a king who can do anything he wants. The president responds to National issues and tries to set the national agenda. He does not do a lot law crafting and can only approve or veto the budget. He can propose laws all day but they are always modified by the House and Senate. 99% of the things said on a campaign trail is designed to sound like something I want to hear while not pissing off too many people. It's all manufactured and carefully crafted. It's all dishonest!
So we are looking at the fringe of what they have been up to in the past to try and gleam who the person is really. Not what is the carefully crafted image we see all the time. But who is the person really. How do they really feel and how will they really react to a 9/11 or a pearl harbor or a mortgage crisis. The only way we have to discover who the person is really is find out what they are up to behind the scenes when the camera is off and they think no one will find out. And that is often sordid and awful. It's often about people they surrond themselves with.
What choice do we have when no one is really honest about who they are? When you can't trust anything a politician says, we are left with inuendo and accusations.
Mark
Friday, March 28, 2008
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Whale Explodes! Shop Keeper waters it!
A 56 ft, 60 ton beached while dies in Taiwan. During the transfer for autopsy purposes gas builds up and the Whale "explodes". The following are pictures of the event. My favorite picture is the Shop Keeper in his surgical mask and one glove pouring a ridiculously small stream of water on this giant mound of rotting whale guts. I love this guy because he is trying to make a difference. Instead of complaining or calling the Gov't to fix his problems. He gets out a water house, a glove (I can't get over that single glove) and a mask and begins to spray water on it. How long does a small stream of water take to move a few tons of whale guts into sewers of Taiwan?? I can't tell if this is the bravest man I've seen in a long time or one of the dumbest. Maybe there isn't much of a difference!!!
This man doesn't curse the darkness, he lights a candle! Of course there also happens to be a hurricane going on at the same time.
How would you like to be the owner of the scooter and explaining this event to your insurance company. I really wanted to photoshop out the picture of the whale and change the blog title to "Man on Scooter Explodes!!!!". Now that would be cool!!!
Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama
Pastor Wright is the person who lead Obama to his Christian faith, the person who was his spiritual leader for 20 years, the person who married him and his wife and baptized his two children. Pastor Wright also said things from the pulpit like "God Damn America for all the things it does," or "America created the AIDS virus to kill people of color" or "America deserved 9/11" and a whole host of crazy things you can see on you tube.
So what does this mean. Obama admits he does not have the experience that Clinton or McCain has but that he has the better judgment and that is what being president is all about. I'm wondering how effective his judgment is to send his children to this Church every Sunday. It's one thing to join the biggest church in the area, especially if you are running for office. It's another thing to send your children to a place where hate against America is promoted from the pulpit and cheered for in the audience. Maybe every Sunday they don't bash America, however, the fundamental underpinnings of this kind of thought is taught there every day. So I'm left with two options here, Barack Obama has poor judgment when it comes to caring for his children's spiritual well being or the political value of that church comes before his families spiritual well being. Either way, not a guy I'm liking much right now.
So what does this mean. Obama admits he does not have the experience that Clinton or McCain has but that he has the better judgment and that is what being president is all about. I'm wondering how effective his judgment is to send his children to this Church every Sunday. It's one thing to join the biggest church in the area, especially if you are running for office. It's another thing to send your children to a place where hate against America is promoted from the pulpit and cheered for in the audience. Maybe every Sunday they don't bash America, however, the fundamental underpinnings of this kind of thought is taught there every day. So I'm left with two options here, Barack Obama has poor judgment when it comes to caring for his children's spiritual well being or the political value of that church comes before his families spiritual well being. Either way, not a guy I'm liking much right now.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Florida and Michagan
There is a lot of talk about what to do about the fact that Florida and Michigan are not allowed to seat delegates in the Democratic Convention. Basically the State's of Florida and Michigan moved their Primaries up to a date that was not allowed by Democratic and Republican National Committee rules. So the Democrats disallowed the states delegates from having a voice in the convention and the Republicans allow the delegates to vote but cut the number of delegates to half. Sounds like the Republicans are acting like adults here. The democrats also requested the candidates to take their names off the ballots in the offending states and to not campaign there. Every one did that in Michagan except for Hillary and the other learned their lesson in Florida and kept their name. No one campaigned in Florida for the Dems.
So what should we do. Should we follow the rules set forth when the election began and ignore Michigan and Florida. Should we say no, all people who want to vote should have the right to vote and their vote should count. This in many ways is a lot like Florida in 2000. In that instance I felt the right thing was to follow the laws as set out originally and end the election. Here I feel differently. What is the difference. Well the people of Florida got to vote in 2000, and the official count of the vote was used to decide who the president was. They voted, it was counted and the results were what they were. In this situation, all votes are being thrown out. Their is a time to follow the rules and their is a time to fight those rules. When people begin discounting votes a whole state, then it's time to fight those rules and see them changed.
I also want to talk about the 2000 election. I find the anger of Democrats over the 2000 florida incident an embarrassment. Was it awful, yes. Why was it awful, it was the Democrats. Here is why I have a problem with it. When the vote was so close, there should have been a recount. And Al Gore and the Democratic National Committee had a chance to do the right thing and ask for a complete state wide recount. But they didn't. In an effort to ignore the will of the whole state, the Dems cherry picked the three most democratic counties in the state and asked for a recount there only. Dade County then proceeded to recount only the Democratic precints. When it was obvious to the Dade county Officials that more counting would actually increase Bush's lead, they quit their count. The Dems also tried to have the absentee voting thrown out because absentee voters tend to be mostly military and they tend to vote republican.
After the 2 and 1/2 counties were counted, the time to request a recount expired and Bush's lead had grown. According to state law, the vote was certified. Then the Dem's sued. Eventually the Florida Supreme Court got involved and decided unwisely to have another recount but wisely insisted that it be state wide. Which is what it should have been from the beginning. However, the law had been followed, the votes has been allowed, counted and delegates assigned according to that law.
For me the difference was that there was a good faith effort to cast and count the votes in 2000. In 2008 there is an actual democratic policy that throws out all the votes of two of our most important states. One did unintentionally miscount or possibly cause the intent of the voter to not be understood but that was purely unintentional and it effected the votes of a small minority. Here it is intentional and it effects all Dems in the two states
I also want to say the manipulation of a national election for president being forced down to a recount of three Heavily Democratic counties in Florida was the worst, ugleist, most machivelian, tainted politically move I've ever seen in my life. Worse than Nixon and watergate, worse than Reagan and Iran/Contra and worse than the Monica Lewinsky tragedy.
So what should we do. Should we follow the rules set forth when the election began and ignore Michigan and Florida. Should we say no, all people who want to vote should have the right to vote and their vote should count. This in many ways is a lot like Florida in 2000. In that instance I felt the right thing was to follow the laws as set out originally and end the election. Here I feel differently. What is the difference. Well the people of Florida got to vote in 2000, and the official count of the vote was used to decide who the president was. They voted, it was counted and the results were what they were. In this situation, all votes are being thrown out. Their is a time to follow the rules and their is a time to fight those rules. When people begin discounting votes a whole state, then it's time to fight those rules and see them changed.
I also want to talk about the 2000 election. I find the anger of Democrats over the 2000 florida incident an embarrassment. Was it awful, yes. Why was it awful, it was the Democrats. Here is why I have a problem with it. When the vote was so close, there should have been a recount. And Al Gore and the Democratic National Committee had a chance to do the right thing and ask for a complete state wide recount. But they didn't. In an effort to ignore the will of the whole state, the Dems cherry picked the three most democratic counties in the state and asked for a recount there only. Dade County then proceeded to recount only the Democratic precints. When it was obvious to the Dade county Officials that more counting would actually increase Bush's lead, they quit their count. The Dems also tried to have the absentee voting thrown out because absentee voters tend to be mostly military and they tend to vote republican.
After the 2 and 1/2 counties were counted, the time to request a recount expired and Bush's lead had grown. According to state law, the vote was certified. Then the Dem's sued. Eventually the Florida Supreme Court got involved and decided unwisely to have another recount but wisely insisted that it be state wide. Which is what it should have been from the beginning. However, the law had been followed, the votes has been allowed, counted and delegates assigned according to that law.
For me the difference was that there was a good faith effort to cast and count the votes in 2000. In 2008 there is an actual democratic policy that throws out all the votes of two of our most important states. One did unintentionally miscount or possibly cause the intent of the voter to not be understood but that was purely unintentional and it effected the votes of a small minority. Here it is intentional and it effects all Dems in the two states
I also want to say the manipulation of a national election for president being forced down to a recount of three Heavily Democratic counties in Florida was the worst, ugleist, most machivelian, tainted politically move I've ever seen in my life. Worse than Nixon and watergate, worse than Reagan and Iran/Contra and worse than the Monica Lewinsky tragedy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)