The Name Written In Blood

Much has been made of Sen. Obama's endorsement of his candidacy by Louis Farrakhan, but does a candidate really have control over who endorses them? Whether they want them or not, they're stuck with it, so can you really hold it against them? And if said candidate denounces statements made by supporters, are they exonerated? How about if the candidate embraces statements made by an endorser?
Such is the case with John McCain's endorsement by none of than John Hagee. Will MSNBC devote as much coverage to McCain's embrace of Hagee's support as it did to Obama's rejection of Farrakhan? After all, Hagee has denounced homosexuality, the Catholic Church, Islam, and feminism, why is he given a free pass?
Hagee likes MvcCain because he believes McCain will be good for Israel. Funny, I thought McCain was running for president of the US. I have nothing against the people of Israel (just the government which is strangling Gaza, but hey, in Hagee's mind you gotta kill them Mooslums before they kill you) but shouldn't the president of the US do what's right for the American people? We're the ones who are paying the taxes, as well as the ultimate price for Washington's Israeli-centric foreign policy.
Hagee is arrogant (or psychotic, or deluded ) enough to think that if we wipe out all the Mooslums, God will send Jesus back. That his mighty and all powerful God can be told what to do by some chunk with bad skin is lost on Hagee's followers, but you can take two unrelated passages in the Bible and interpet them any way you wish in Hagee's world, as long as it serves his anti-papist, misogynistic and homophobic agenda.
Just remember, these are all ideals that John McCain, by refusing to denounce, has embraced as ideals for America.

Get Real

So now Hillary Clinton says she has proof of media bias towards Obama. She claims a skit on Saturday Night Live proves there's a media bias towards Sen. Obama.
Saturday Night Live? That show has been funny in a decade and hasn't been relevant since the 70's. Now she's claiming a skit that was written as a gag is proof of media bias for Barack?
Funny, when she was the front runner, and had all the media attention over better candidates (such as Dennis Kucinich or John Edwards), she didn't have a problem with the media bias, but now the media has dumped her like a dumpy girlfriend for a more attractive candidate, all of a sudden she's upset? Get over yourself, lady. The American people have spoken and they have decided they don't want you or your lousy-excuse-for-a-president-and-husband/life partner Bill.

Everywhere You Go, There's a Drunken Idiot

I took my boys to their first concert this weekend, to see 1964-The Tribute, a Beatles tribute band. The guys have been really been into the Beatles for sometime, and their step-father gave us some tickets for Christmas (he's not such a bad guy-for a Guard recruiter), so we hopped into the car and headed down to the State Theater in Kalamazoo.
We went down early and walked around downtown Kazoo looking for a place to grab some dinner. We found a nice place, although the guys became confused because it had cloth napkins and they didn't know whether they were napkins or handkerchiefs. Wilbur found a quarter on the floor under our table (which he is holding up in the picture) and nelson is holding up an after dinner mint.
The crowd was mixed, aging boomers and young hippie-wannbes coming together in celebration of the music that was John Paul George and Ringo. The band did a fantastic job of recreating the four piece sound of the Beatles, the kids loved it, with Nelson singing along with every song. They did two sets, and left the stage, then Wilbur wanted to go.
"Wait," I said and began clapping rhythmically with the rest of the crowd, "Encore."
Sure enough, the band came back and did a two-song encore.
"I can't believe we encored them!" said Wilbur delighted. I didn't tell him that most bands will do that.
All through the show, there was a man who had imbibed too much sitting behind us, and in between songs, he would holler"Norwegian Wood!" or "This Bird Has Flown" like the band was a bunch of trained monkeys asking for requests. I knew they wouldn't do it, because one, the Beatles never performed it live, and two, there was no sitar on the stage. But it didn't stop this jerk from yelling it out every chance he got. And we didn't let him ruin our good time, either, all the way home we kept making fun of him by yelling out "Norwegian Wood", or "This Bird Has Flown".
I thought I might see my brother Sean at the concert, since he gets into shows like this, but the drunken idiot brought back a recent memory.
In 2004, he and I went to see the Vote For Change Tour at Cobo hall (or maybe it was the Joe Louis) in Detroit. It was a great concert, with Bright Eyes, REM, Bruce Springsteen and John Fogerty. It was sponsored by Move On, in an effort to get voters registered to help elect John Kerry, and more importantly, get rid of George Bush.
The crowd was into it, except, once again, behind us sat another drunken idiot. When ever anyone urged people to vote, or spoke out against the war, he would boo, or yell out "Four more years!" I did my best to ignore him, figuring that there was probably a time when I was that drunken idiot, thinking I was being funny when I was really being a moron, but my brother became upset, and let that one person ruin what was an awesome concert. He then swore he would never see another concert again, and to this day, will not go see any artist at all.

Rebumblicans Bumble Again

Do you know what is the proper thing to do as the National Anthem is played?
Does one stand straight up, or do they put their hands over their hearts?

If you answered put your hand over your heart, you're a fucking idiot, and probably some mouth breathing television watching Rebumblican as well. You put your hand over your heart when you're saying the pledge of allegiance.
Once again, the jingoistic and chauvinistic Rebumblicans, who have pretty much lost the election due to their choice of a philandering, lobbyist linked flip flopper have decided that the election hinges not on who has ideas to change the direction the country is going in but who is more patriotic. What's more important? Wearing a silly flag pin on your lapel, or getting our troops out of the quagmire that is Iraq?
The problem is that there are more people worried about whether Obama adopts what is their own ignorant idea of which is the proper stance during the Star Spangled Banner than who is going to do something about the economy, health care, or continuing the unsuccessful Bush foreign policy of not speaking to our enemies. If the American Idiot is stupid enough to fall for this neolithic neocon ruse, then it's time we split the country up and give all those morons Texas.

If Hillary Had Fought Bush As Much As She's Fighting Barack, She Might Get My Support

Only one of us has spent 35 years being a doer, a fighter, and a champion for those who need a voice-Hillary Clinton

Ahh, the world of Hillary Clinton, one where she attempts to have it both ways. For instance at one point she says "My opponent has taken to attacking me on NAFTA. I've long been a critic of the shortcomings of NAFTA" forgetting the fact that when she was ensconced in the 35-year-period of change she keeps harping on, she was a champion for NAFTA. Like her vote on the authorization for the war in Iraq, she supported it then, but now, in retrospect, it doesn't seem like a good idea. How many truly awful and horrible decisions is she allowed to make before she realizes she isn't fit to be president?
Now Hillary is caught in the fight for her political life, she's come out swinging against Obama. Now she's fighting, but when the Senate was voting to strip immunity from the telecom bill, was she fighting then? When Bush used the Congress authority to use force to start an all out war, was she fighting then? Did she fight against the use of torture? Is she fighting for better conditions from our soldiers when they return home from the war? Is she fighting to end the war? No, no, no, no and no.
Is she speaking out for the Iraqi citizens, caught between warring factions and the US military? Did she speak up for the Lebanese people caught between Hezbollah and the IDF? Is she speaking out for the citizens of Gaza, caught between the Israeli government and the democratically elected Hamas fighters? Is she speaking up for the displaced residents of New Orleans, whose city is still feeling the negative effects of hurricane from almost three years ago? No, no, no and no.
Did she fight Bush on any of his Supreme Court nominees? Has she fought against any of his signing statements? Has she the Bush administration's various abuses as much as she's fought to have the Democratic Party convention rules so she can become the nominee she arrogantly assumes is her right and destiny?
No, she hasn't fought for anything except her own political future, placing it higher than the American people. She might make a better president than Bush, but only because he lowered the bar.

UPDATE- Over at Fred's I just found a link to this about Hillary voting for war with Iran. Tell us about how you're for change again.

"But, Hey, Defense Contractors Are Making Money. Wait, You Mean There Are Americans Not Employed By The Military-Industrial Complex?"

So George Bush thinks the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the economy. This chimp faced chump couldn't buy a clue if he was the only bidder at a clue auction. Not that anyone expects him to admit to any of his numerous failings, in his mind the economy's doing swell.
Let me spell it out for you, Mr. Presnit: The war in Iraq has increased the budget deficit. Deficits mean the government has to print up more dollars, which in turn makes those dollars worth less than before by virtue of the fact there's more of them floating around. That increases inflation, and if you don't think prices are going up, you haven't been to a grocery store recently.
The war in Iraq has also increased instability in the Middle East. This coupled with your threats against Iran have driven up the price of a barrel of oil. Higher oil prices means Americans are paying more at the pump. In the last three years, gas prices have doubled. Paying more for gas means people have less to spend on other things, which in turn has led to slower retail sales. That in turn leads to lay-offs, etc., etc.
So never mind that most Americans think that leaving Iraq would boost the economy, even though most Americans have a higher capacity for intelligence than you. You are like a fart in a stiff wind, you're talking out of your ass and your breath probably stinks as well.

Electability?

The latest Clinton camp buzzword is "electability".

“Winning Democratic primaries is not a qualification or a sign of who can win the general election. If it were, every nominee would win because every nominee wins Democratic primaries.”

Clutching at straws, getting weepy whenever you start trailing, this is not how you become electable. (is that even a word?) You become electable by, uh, winning elections. The Clinton camp seems to think that only she is strong enough to go up against McCain in November, but really, who couldn't beat Senator Hothead?
The primary reason for the presidential primaries is for each candidate to flaunt their appeal for voters. The voters listen to each candidate and measure what they have to say against what they have done in the past. They measure each candidate against the other then follow the one who seems to know where they are going.

It All Comes Down To Tuna

We've been told for years that the reason businesses needed to offshore many of our manufacturing jobs is because the cost of American labor had gotten too high. Things such as taxes, health benefits and other costs that kept the worker able to complete their mundane tasks and live comfortably were hurting the bottom line. But I see it differently.
The company I work for provides food service for corporate settings. We provide breakfast and lunches, and dinners in factory and executive locations. This gives me a unique perspective to see the differences between the two extremes.
A good example of this is tuna. The line worker in the factory gets canned tuna, usually made into tuna salad. The bread usually comes in frozen and is never fresh. The worker also pays for this food from their own pocket. The worker has twenty minutes to eat their food, unable to leave the grounds, because the company feels if they return late from their lunch break, productivity will be compromised.
The executive flying on the corporate jet, however, is fed sushimi grade tuna. While the worker in the factory would be fortunate to get flank or skirt steak on rare occasions, the executive can have nothing less than steak cut fresh from tenderloin. And the executives meals are provided for by the company itself.
Once a quarter, if the worker has not missed any days of work, the company will throw an "attendance celebration", where they get to dine on a five ounce strip loin steak, scrambled eggs, hash browns, and off brand fruit juices. The executive has weekly meeting where only the finest pastries, juices, and fresh fruit are served. While the factory worker has to make do with regular-old-coffee, the executives can have nothing less than Starbuck's coffee.
The executives have their own dining area, where they are waited on by good looking young women (as opposed to the worked, who gets food slopped on a plate by an old cafeteria worker), and have their choice of refreshments (including beer, wine, and liquor) to wash down their meals.
The job of a CEO is to make their company as profitable as possible, which in turn will make the price of the stock rise along with profitability . You would think that meant manufacturing products that people would buy, but as of late, it has meant cutting costs to make the company more attractive to prospective investors. Trade agreements such as NAFTA allow these companies to offshore manufacturing jobs with impunity. The downside to this is that the service jobs created don't pay as well as the manufacturing jobs they are replacing, and as a result, the economy has slowly been sliding downhill because people no longer have the money to buy the items made in this country that have traditionally driven the US economy, such as new cars or houses.
And now, the subprime crisis has led to a global $77 trillion in stock market loss, and the country is headed towards a recession. And it's all because some bigwig is too good for canned tuna.

A Torture Romance

The Senate has voted 51-45 to prohibit waterboarding and other harsh methods of interrogation (i.e., torture) with Sen John McCain voting against the measure. Surely this is a bid to woo the sick fucks that are conservatives and prove he's just as soulless and evil as they and their president are, so pretty soon the endorsements will come rolling in. Bush is already planning on vetoing the bill, because we need to get people to confess to crimes others have committed to enable the loss of our civil liberties in the so-called war on terror.

The Latest Distraction

Today, I happened to catch a glimpse of the congressional hearings on steroid use by professional athletes, and I wondered, who really gives a fuck if some juiced up ball player is taking performance enhancing drugs? All it really does is add some excitement to an incredibly dull game. In a capitalistic society, independent contractors should be allowed to do what ever is necessary to give them an edge in the race for glory, history books and astronomical salaries. Next you'll be telling me it's a bad thing that Amy Winehouse is a crackhead.
Sure, some of you may say that, hey, these professional athletes are setting a bad example for the youth of our nation. We have an executive seeking immunity for telecoms that spied on Americans, illegally, a political party that thinks torture is okay, and a White House that has abused it's power more than a teenage boy with a stack of Hustler magazines abuses himself, these are far worse examples being set by our leaders that will have far reaching ramifications in the years to come. Why not investigate these? Why waste taxpayer's money on something that will have no immediate bearing on the lives of many Americans?

Ouch, That Stings!

"Of course President Bush would attack the one candidate in this race who opposed his disastrous war in Iraq from the start. But Barack Obama doesn't need any foreign policy advice from the architect of the worst foreign policy decision in a generation," - Obama spokesman Bill Burton.
(Picture stolen from The American Insurgency)
George W Bush, in an unbridled act of arrogance (of which he is so proficient) has decided to attack Barack Obama. Of course, Bush knows from inexperience, Bush had no experience of foreign policy to speak of when he took office, just lots of plans to take it easy at Camp David, and look at the mess he made of this once fine country.
I hear the experience argument thrown around a lot recently, and really, no one running for president for their first term has experience being the leader of the free world. What we need to judge them on is there intelligence, not their opportunism. Their judgment, not the insincere apologies for lapses of judgment.
And so, the Obama campaign issued the above rejoinder, the first time anyone with in this campaign has dared to blame the great dictator for the mess he has made. And for that, he gets my respect. And if the Democrats have the good judgment to make him their candidate, he has my vote.

Join The Blogswarm-Save Nelson's Birthday!

March 19, 1999, was a very important day in my life. that's when my youngest son, Nelson was born. Four years later, the US invaded Iraq. Now his birthday will be forever linked with that fateful day, unless we all do something. I know how it is to have a birthday associated with a tragedy (I was born on Groundhog Day), and believe me, it never really goes away.
In the day's leading to the illegal (under international law) invasion of Iraq, I wrote my congressperson. I stood in the freezing cold along with fifteen million other people around the world to protest a war that hadn't even begun. I began blogging, because as John McCain recently said, we'll be in Iraq for a hundred years, and with 3956 US soldiers sacrificed to the corpocracy, not to mention the many injured, or soon to be debilitated due to the effects of DU, it won't be long before they institute a a draft to fill the gap since the children of the corpocracy won't be asked to fight. And I don't want Nelson or his brother to be forced to fight in a war that began when he just had turned four years old.
So i joined the March 19 blogswarm and am asking all of you to do the same, since the elections, the faltering economy, and the psychotic ravings of pop stars has pushed the war from the consciousness of the American people. Remind them the war is still there, it was still based on lies, and it won't go away unless we fight to end it. And I'm asking you please, please, please, do it for Nelson.

Winter Blues

Here in West Michigan we have a saying (by "we", I mean undoubtedly me), a winter storm is when kids can't make it to school, but a blizzard is when you can't make it to Meijer's. Here in the frozen north, when a front is looming, people often flock to the supermarket to stock up on comfort food, alcohol and cigarettes to help them ride out being snowed in. This evening when I visited the store it was virtual empty, or as empty as I've ever seen a Meijer store at five o'clock. So if the hour drive home from work when it usually takes me twenty minutes wasn't enough of a tell, nor the multiple accidents on the way home, or the quarter mile visibility in white out conditions, the emptiness of the grocery store was all the sign I needed that this was in fact a blizzard.

Like I Said, A Couple Of Posts Down

The problem inherent in backing one political party over another is obvious. The Republicans had this problem in 2000. many of them, unhappy with their candidate, simply held their noses and voted for him anyway, because in their mind, the alternative was worse. And so, vote fraud notwithstanding, they elected what has come to be known as the worst presidency in the history of the US. Of course, some of them, following a false flag "terror" attack on our country, were sucked in and began defending his actions, no matter how morally wrong or unconstitutional. They had to because he was their man.
When I started blogging, they were all over the net, responding to any criticisms with out logic, with out reason, with out sanity. Slowly, they began to see we were right. They ran to the comfort of their like minded set, grumbling about the "wing-nuts", but less and less, defending the presidency they helped wrought on this country.
And now, history is repeating itself, only this time, it's the Democrats. many of them have said they wil hold their noses and vote for a candidate who refuses to commit to a pledge to renew the Constitution. A simple pledge:

"We are Americans, and in our America we do not torture, we do not imprison people without charge or legal remedy, we do not tap people's phones and emails without a court order, and above all we do not give any President unchecked power. I pledge to fight to protect and defend the Constitution from attack by any President."

Every other Democratic candidate has signed it, save one. Would you still vote for this person?

Nothing Israel

Over forty years after barring the Beatles from playing a concert there, Israel wants the Beatles to play a concert there in celebration of it's own 60th anniversary. Considering half the Beatles are dead, you would be treated to an evening of Paul McCartney songs bookended by "Yellow Submarine" and "Octopus' Garden".
It seems the Beatles were booked to play a concert there in 1965, until the government refused to grant them the necessary permits because their music might corrupt the morals of the country. You know, with those obscene songs like "I Want To Hold Your Hand" or "I'm Happy Just To Dance With You".
Of course, the Israeli government somehow managed to get morally corrupt with out the aid of the Beatles, so messages were sent to the two remaining Beatles, as well as the CEO of the Beatles Story

This Is Serious, Senator Specter?

I often feel that the US puts too much emphasis on sports. This weekend is a good example, but what is essentially games that children play to burn off energy has become a multi-billion dollar racket, which in the end is mere entertainment, no more important than movies or television and not having any type of bearing on reality whatsoever.
Remember when Congress had a big investigation into steroid use by baseball players? How is professional athletes using performance enhancers bad, while the US military is using depleted uranium for the exact same result? Winning is everything, because we are not a society of losers! What's next? An investigation into actresses who used cleavage enhancing breast implants? (Please,sir, can I be on that committee, sir?)
Early on in this season, the New England Patriots were caught videotaping defensive coaches' signals to players during games. The tapes were confiscated by the NFL, who then fined and denied a first round draft pick to the Patriots. After which, the tapes were destroyed. Now, Sen. Arlen Specter has declared the tapes' destruction analogous to the CIA interrogation tapes destruction. Except with those tapes, they were destroyed before an investigation and no punishment has been meted out at all because of it. Or how about the deletion of emails missing from White House servers? It seems to certain Senate Republicans, only other crimes bear closer scrutiny (or maybe Sen. Specter heard there were some awesome cheerleader upskirts on there he needed to see).

Hillary Clinton Is Just George Bush In An Ugly Pantsuit

Strange things are happening. Kenya's voting was rigged. How do we know? The exit polling differed from the final results. Funny, when that happened in New Hampshire last month, it was the exit polling at fault, not vote fraud.
All over, I read "progressives" talking about how great it would be to have a woman president, and I agree, as long as it was a great woman. That is not Hillary Clinton.
Why are progressives, so famous for opposing any unnecessary use of force, so happy to get behind someone who voted for the Iraq war? Someone who has chided President Bush for not being tough enough on Iran, a country who has yet to be proven has any nuclear weapon program? Who posed with children as Israel dropped cluster bombs all over southern Lebanon while stating "America stands behind you, Israel!"? Not only that, but she voted against the Feinstein-Leahy Amendment, which would restrict the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas around the world. Does this sound like a progressive?
The answer is no, and Democrats are deluding themselves if they think they are better than the Republicans they've been bitching about for the last eight years who blindly supported George W. Bush because he was their candidate. Hillary Clinton is George W. Bush in a pantsuit, not any one who would “discipline the corporate crooks and lobbyists and their corporate candidates."