Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

It's Time to Evolve.



"Love is just a moment of giving, and marriage is when we admit our parent were probably right."
Billy Bragg


Hands up, if at some point you were against gay marriage and then just found your arguments turning to dust as time went on?




Well that was me. I remember having a vociferous argument with one of my more, let's say pro-hippie, friends while driving through North Dakota sometime in the late nineties. Like much of the Canadian body politic, I argued that marriage was a between a man and a woman because that was how society reproduced itself and blah blah blah. I argued loudly and lost soundly, if tacitly. It took the Supreme Court of Canada legalizing same-sex marriage back in 2005 to make me see that it's not courageous for a majority to stand against the rights of a minority; its cowardice. It took that change to demonstrate to me that former Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau's statement, "There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation" is a governing philosophy that conservatives and liberals can endorse. So be you American or French or a Supreme Court Justice; it's time to evolve.





Sunday, January 27, 2013

Barack Obama is Not Pleased



While I await the American president's sitting down with some less-friendly, more relentless journalists, this interview with ally Chris Hughes over at The New Republic is still a crucial read in order understand Obama's current mind-set.

And I want to be very clear here that Democrats, we've got a lot of warts, and some of the bad habits here in Washington when it comes to lobbyists and money and access really goes to the political system generally. It's not unique to one party. But when it comes to certain positions on issues, when it comes to trying to do what's best for the country, when it comes to really trying to make decisions based on fact as opposed to ideology, when it comes to being willing to compromise, the Democrats, not just here in this White House, but I would say in Congress also, have shown themselves consistently to be willing to do tough things even when it's not convenient, because it's the right thing to do. And we haven't seen that same kind of attitude on the other side.

 Who would you like to see interview Barrack Obama?

Sunday, December 9, 2012

Mr. Burns Explains the Fiscal Cliff



I, for one, welcome our new more fast-acting, politically-pointed Simpsons.





Saturday, December 1, 2012

Mr. 47% Fails to Go to Washington



It was that secret video, what finally done it.

There are no end of plausible explanations as to why Mitt Romney was so soundly trounced by Barrack Obama. Some say Romney lost because of demographics (by which they mean his alienating of minorities, women and the young), others say the whole campaign was blinded by their own self-serving media (a.k.a. 'epistemic closure'), some say Romney conned his big donors  others claim it was Romney who was conned by his own consultants. The validity of many of those points underscores how it was not one single factor that sunk Romney.

But the power of that video must be accounted for.

While millions of ballots are, scandalously, still uncounted, Romney's total percentage of the popular vote is plummeting towards the 47% figure he so cruelly delineated in that private speech to his big donors. It will be a fitting finally tally in light of what was the key moment of the 2012 campaign; Romney laying bare the depth of his hatred for the very people he was seeking to lead. That tape revels so many of the losing facets of that campaign; the mass conning, the minority-bashing, the vulnerable-demonizing, the reality-defying and, of course, the vaulting hubris of Willard Romney.

That speech was the firewall. No matter the millions he spent on false advertising, no matter the roadblocks to voting his allies threw up, no matter the bait-and-switch trick he tried at the first debate, Romney could not make people forget how nakedly he had extolled class warfare. Once he'd revealed the truth to the American people, they knew he was not fit to serve and they were not going to let anything stop them from voting their interests.

When those results came in that showed districts with next-to-no Romney votes, unskewed Republicans cried 'fraud', and I just thought 'the 47% strike back!' I like to think a piece of that secret video was playing in the mind of tens of millions of voters when they stepped in the voting booth to sweep Mitt into the dustbin of history.




Saturday, November 17, 2012

The Republican Problem




While I'm not a dedicated reader of right-wing site National Review Online*( sites like NRO and Daily Kos seem to me to favour light-weight propaganda) Ramesh Ponnuru's piece, "The Party's Problem" is well worth a read for anyone, left, right or centre, who believes the Republican party needs to modernize.

The Republican story about how societies prosper — not just the Romney story — dwelt on the heroic entrepreneur stifled by taxes and regulations: an important story with which most people do not identify. The ordinary person does not see himself as a great innovator. He, or she, is trying to make a living and support or maybe start a family. A conservative reform of our health-care system and tax code, among other institutions, might help with these goals. About this person, however, Republicans have had little to say.

I certainly don't agree with all of what Ponnuru has to say but I think he is courageous for saying it.


On similar lines Forbes Magazine has published a highly-readable-if-occasionally-glib piece by Timothy B. Lee called "Conservatives' Reality Problem" that argues since the nineties there has been a reverse of fealty-to-facts between liberals and conservatives.  

 I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Team Romney’s polling cluelessness comes after years of conservatives demonizing pointy-headed academics, including scientists. On subjects like evolution, global warming, the biology of human conception, and even macroeconomics, conservatives have been increasingly bold about rejecting the consensus of scientific experts in favor of ideologically self-serving pronouncements. That attitude may have contributed to their loss of the White House in 2012.

Again, not someone with whom I entirely agree with but who's points are well-made.



* For anyone who wants to know just how weak NRO can be, check out this post-election Romney spin job that is so disingenuous that Jennifer Rubin would recoil in horror from it.


Friday, November 9, 2012

Reality Wins!


"Don't tell me the old, old story
Tell me the truth this time"
Billy Bragg

Yeah my 'side' won on November sixth but more importantly truth won out! While politicians are slippery with the truth by their very nature, the politicians of the Republican Party has become completely disconnected from reality. As they did with the climate change debate, they believed with enough lies and money they could dictate reality. But they can't: ocean levels rise up and so do disrespected voters. Watching the Karl Rove melt-down on Fox News on that earth-shaking Tuesday evening, was final proof of the party's utter disconnect from the world as it is. This party need to dump their delusionals and get its house in order. (For the cleverer version of this point, do yourself a favour and read Charles P. Pierce's take). And I say that as somebody who believes that a healthy opposition is crucial for a democracy. In fact, that sentiment, has been echoed across the left(ish) side of the internet, rather then rubbing Republicans noses in thier devastating loss. People like Rachel Maddow have offered a hard-headed but fair-minded defense of a saner Republican Party.  Even if you don't like her, she makes her case rationally:





Another thoughtful and hard-hitting take on this phenomenon was written yesterday by  John Heilemann:

What all of this signifies is that the Republicans now find themselves facing a moment similar to the one that Democrats met in the wake of the 1988 election, when the party found itself markedly out of step with the country — shackled to a retograde base, in the grip of an assortment of fads and factions, wedded to a pre-modern policy agenda. And so, like the Ds back then, the Rs today must undertake a wholesale modernization of their party, starting with, but not limited to, making real inroads with those ascendant elements of the electorate. Doing so will be a Herculean task, and one that will require not just institutional resolve but individual leadership; it will require, that is to say, that the Republicans find their own version of Bill Clinton circa 1990. But daunting as the task may be, what last night indicated is that the party has no choice but to undertake the assignment — because to forgo it would be to risk not just irrelevance but extinction.


Wednesday, November 7, 2012

'I Have Never Been More Hopeful About America'



'I Have Never Been More Hopeful About America'

I think much of the world concurs with you there, Mr. President.

America, congratulations, you helped the best man win!

It is my hope that the majority of you who voted for Barrack Obama will be magnanimous in victory with your fellow citizens but be willing to back your president to the hilt should he need to be ruthless with the obstructionists in the Republican Party.



Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Bob Dylan: "It's Going to be a Landslide!"



When I did a post that invoked Bob Dylan, as a brief aside, in my post about music and politics (see HERE)*,  I received an avalanche of negative feedback, with one reader even going so far as to imply Dylan had become a birther!

Now it turns out that during a performance of "Blowin' in the Wind" on November 5th, in the crucial swing state of Wisconsin, Dylan said, “We tried to play good tonight since the president was here today.” Then he laid it all down, “Don’t believe the media. I think it’s going to be a landslide.”

'But he didn't say he was voting for Obama!" the Right Wing Bobbers will howl. These, of course, are the same people who tried to downplay his unusually direct praise for Obama in '08!

To be fair, I not only believe Dylan is likely incorrect in his prediction of an overwhelming victory (though I would be ecstatic to be wrong!), I also believe Dylan left himself enough wiggle-room to avoid having his words being called an 'endorsement'

However we parse his words, it seems plain that Dylan's true devotion is to his work and that politics are merely an aside.


* A couple of the comments are priceless and worth perusing!


Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'


 

From The Onion January 17, 2001


WASHINGTON, DC–Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."

President-elect Bush vows that "together, we can put the triumphs of the recent past behind us."

"My fellow Americans," Bush said, "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."

Bush swore to do "everything in [his] power" to undo the damage wrought by Clinton's two terms in office, including selling off the national parks to developers, going into massive debt to develop expensive and impractical weapons technologies, and passing sweeping budget cuts that drive the mentally ill out of hospitals and onto the street.

During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.

"You better believe we're going to mix it up with somebody at some point during my administration," said Bush, who plans a 250 percent boost in military spending. "Unlike my predecessor, I am fully committed to putting soldiers in battle situations. Otherwise, what is the point of even having a military?"

On the economic side, Bush vowed to bring back economic stagnation by implementing substantial tax cuts, which would lead to a recession, which would necessitate a tax hike, which would lead to a drop in consumer spending, which would lead to layoffs, which would deepen the recession even further.

Wall Street responded strongly to the Bush speech, with the Dow Jones industrial fluctuating wildly before closing at an 18-month low. The NASDAQ composite index, rattled by a gloomy outlook for tech stocks in 2001, also fell sharply, losing 4.4 percent of its total value between 3 p.m. and the closing bell.

Asked for comment about the cooling technology sector, Bush said: "That's hardly my area of expertise."

Turning to the subject of the environment, Bush said he will do whatever it takes to undo the tremendous damage not done by the Clinton Administration to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He assured citizens that he will follow through on his campaign promise to open the 1.5 million acre refuge's coastal plain to oil drilling. As a sign of his commitment to bringing about a change in the environment, he pointed to his choice of Gale Norton for Secretary of the Interior. Norton, Bush noted, has "extensive experience" fighting environmental causes, working as a lobbyist for lead-paint manufacturers and as an attorney for loggers and miners, in addition to suing the EPA to overturn clean-air standards.

Bush had equally high praise for Attorney General nominee John Ashcroft, whom he praised as "a tireless champion in the battle to protect a woman's right to give birth."

"Soon, with John Ashcroft's help, we will move out of the Dark Ages and into a more enlightened time when a woman will be free to think long and hard before trying to fight her way past throngs of protesters blocking her entrance to an abortion clinic," Bush said. "We as a nation can look forward to lots and lots of babies."

Enlarge ImageSoldiers at Ft. Bragg march lockstep in preparation for America's return to aggression.

Continued Bush: "John Ashcroft will be invaluable in healing the terrible wedge President Clinton drove between church and state."

The speech was met with overwhelming approval from Republican leaders.

"Finally, the horrific misrule of the Democrats has been brought to a close," House Majority Leader Dennis Hastert (R-IL) told reporters. "Under Bush, we can all look forward to military aggression, deregulation of dangerous, greedy industries, and the defunding of vital domestic social-service programs upon which millions depend. Mercifully, we can now say goodbye to the awful nightmare that was Clinton's America."

"For years, I tirelessly preached the message that Clinton must be stopped," conservative talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh said. "And yet, in 1996, the American public failed to heed my urgent warnings, re-electing Clinton despite the fact that the nation was prosperous and at peace under his regime. But now, thank God, that's all done with. Once again, we will enjoy mounting debt, jingoism, nuclear paranoia, mass deficit, and a massive military build-up."

An overwhelming 49.9 percent of Americans responded enthusiastically to the Bush speech.

"After eight years of relatively sane fiscal policy under the Democrats, we have reached a point where, just a few weeks ago, President Clinton said that the national debt could be paid off by as early as 2012," Rahway, NJ, machinist and father of three Bud Crandall said. "That's not the kind of world I want my children to grow up in."

"You have no idea what it's like to be black and enfranchised," said Marlon Hastings, one of thousands of Miami-Dade County residents whose votes were not counted in the 2000 presidential election. "George W. Bush understands the pain of enfranchisement, and ever since Election Day, he has fought tirelessly to make sure it never happens to my people again."

Bush concluded his speech on a note of healing and redemption.

"We as a people must stand united, banding together to tear this nation in two," Bush said. "Much work lies ahead of us: The gap between the rich and the poor may be wide, be there's much more widening left to do. We must squander our nation's hard-won budget surplus on tax breaks for the wealthiest 15 percent. And, on the foreign front, we must find an enemy and defeat it."

"The insanity is over," Bush said. "After a long, dark night of peace and stability, the sun is finally rising again over America. We look forward to a bright new dawn not seen since the glory days of my dad."



NEVER FORGET!


Sunday, November 4, 2012

Will Ferrell for Obama!



Well I may prefer The Economist's dour endorsement or Jonathon Chait's full-throated one but I gotta admit that Ferrel's is ' a slam dunk!"






Update: Chris Rock too!





Saturday, November 3, 2012

Mr. Burns: 'Romney is Ehx-cellent!'



Who else would he endorse?





And for your further amusement:




Last but not least:





Friday, November 2, 2012

One Vote.



Disclaimer
I believe editorials concerning another country's election, my own included, are fair journalism, so long as they are reasoned, informed and respectful*.

Well "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal" is a clever slogan and anarchists, like their libertarian brethren, do have a weakness for the glib.

But readers, ask yourself, what if Al Gore had won the 2000 American election (assuming he actually lost it)?

The Bush-Cheney regime crippled America like no other; where they saw surplus, they brought deficit, where they saw peace, they brought war, where they saw balance, they created inequity.

It didn't have to be that way.

Of course, we can't know for certain how a different election result would've changed history but yet we all know that a President Gore would never have invaded Iraq. A few hundred voters could have saved 100,000 Iraqi civilians, 5,000 Coalition solders and nearly a trillion American tax dollars.

How about a decade-long Afghanistan War, a repressive Patriot Act, an unfunded extension of Medicare, a far-right faction on the Supreme Court, debt-building tax cuts and the disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina? Again, we can't know know for certain what would be different but based on his record I'll be damned if Gore would have proceeded with the kinds of reckless disregard for country that Bush-Cheney did. And you can be assured that Romney-Ryan would be Bush-Cheney on steroids if elected.

Ask a Canadian suffering under an anti-democratic, dissent-stifling, deficit-spending regime about the importance of HOW you vote. 61% of us voted against against militarism, science-defunding and jail-building but because we're a four-party system the bad guys won.

Right-wing reactionary parties love the kind of 'glass-is-hall-full' pessimism, expressed in slogans like "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." They love seeing us dividing up over our pet issues and forming new parties. Hell, they helped get Ralph Nader on the ballot in many states because that aided their cause. The enemy of my enemy is my friend goes the old strategy. What's so sad, is how often the strategy works.

After all, if voting changes nothing, why do the richest spend so much money trying to buy elections?

So, if you'll indulge me (and I`m sure a few of you won`t), I'll ask you to at least consider the mistakes of your Canadian brethren. Your vote matters. Who you vote for matters too. A vote that empowers the people and hold back the plutocrats is never wasted. Then, with victory in hand, go to work against government surveillance, the unbalanced tax code, corporate deregulation, the drug war, defense spending et al from the bottom up.

After all, If we don't get it together, they'll tear us apart.


 





*If you're actually against outside interests being involved in American politics, please re-consider your support of Brits like Nial Fergusson, Canadians like David Frum and Australians like Rupert Murdoch who've dedicated their lives to electing Republicans.


Saturday, October 20, 2012

The Politics of Music



How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Psalm, 137

It's amazing how belligerent right-wing reactionary types can get when the connection between music and politics is brought up.

I know why.

It's fear.

They're afraid to admit how closely linked artistic expression and small-l liberal ideals are.

They're afraid to look at their own music collection and realize that the vast majority of the artists they love, hate the ideology they hold so dear.

Ask yourself, when was the last time you heard a musician issue a cease-and-desist order to The Democratic Party for using one of their songs?

Ask yourself, when have you ever heard a pro-Margaret Thatcher song?

There is an inherent disconnect between artistic expression and right-wing reactionary ideology.

Music, so often, encourage free expression, the sharing of cultural experience as well as the acceptance of the new and the different. Right-wing ideologies, however, frequently demonize free expression, push for the homogenization of culture and condone the bullying of the different. Of course, there have been reactionary musicians from Richard Wagner to Ian Stuart and many more throughout history but their numbers have not grown stronger over the years.

Look at the paltry play list of wash-ups and go-nowhere lunatics that make up the musical right in America (Ted Nugent, Hank Williams Jr., Kid Rock, Big and Rich et al). It's as laughable as the measly list of 'scientists' the oil industry trot out to the media for the sole purpose of delaying the acknowledgement of man-made climate change.

I grant you it is impossible to speak to the views of all musicians. Surely their numbers would encompass a wild range of views from libertarian to non-partisan to Bacchanalian but the paucity of artists in the Republican tent and the abundance of them in the Democratic one must have some significance. 

It seems fair to say that music has long been the province of the outsider, of the marginalized. In some cases the musical talent itself might lead to marginalization and in others the punishing reality of marginalization may encourage people to use an instrument as a means of escape. Either way, many musicians have early experience with bullies who seek to hold and consolidate power with all forms of intimidation.

But they sing and play anyway.

The young Robert Zimmerman had the curtain pulled on him by his high school principal during a performance at Hibbing High school* but Bob Dylan changed the world anyway.

Then, since, as Walter Pater said, "All art constantly aspires towards the condition of music" those musicians refusal to play the silent victim helps inspire the painters, the dancers, the writers, the actors, the cartoonists, the meme creators and multitudes of others to express themselves.

So art untrammeled shows the power that those oft-considered weak can wield - see Sword v. Pen, (1839) - it reminds us all that there are more bullied then bullies. Hence why so many right-wing reactionaries are afraid of the arts and show such contempt for them.

Artists know of this contempt and as a result a great many artists recognize that in that strange land, that right-wing Shangri-La Republicans and their brethren around the world seek to force us into, that they would only be subservient shills for the powerful.

So, the majority of musicians and artists either try to avoid politics or stick together in ragged, often shaky big-tent political coalitions, such as today's Democratic Party in America.

These alliances of the marginalized are not so much about fear as they are about recognizing that self-preservation is not served by throwing your lot in with those that hate and despise you in the vain hope that they'll pass you over when they consolidate power. It's about recognizing that, contra Margaret Thatcher, there is such a thing as society and that when it works, civil society may in fact be humanity's greatest creation.

If I’d thought about it I never would’ve done it, I guess I would’ve let it slide
If I’d lived my life by what others were thinkin’, the heart inside me would’ve died
I was just too stubborn to ever be governed by enforced insanity
Someone had to reach for the risin’ star, I guess it was up to me

Bob Dylan, "Up To Me"


Wiser minds than my own have pondered the role of art in the political sphere, so I'll finish off by simply asking readers for their own take on the intersection of art and politics.



Friday, October 19, 2012

Fighters Never Quit!




I deeply admire Ta-Nehisi Coates' (more HERE) writing over at The Atlantic but since I'm not a Civil War buff I don't follow his work on a a daily basis. Since, however, I am  a 20th century history buff, Coates' piece comparing Barrack Obama to 1930's boxer Joe Louis (and in Coates' typically tangential style to honourary Canadian Warren Moon) is as considered and thoughtful a discussion of race and politics in 21st century America as you're likely to find anywhere:

Like Joe Louis, like Warren Moon, like any black person significant for the fact of being black, I imagine that Barack Obama would love to have only the burden of being great at his craft. All presidential candidates represent something larger than themselves, and in that sense their loss is always broadly shared. But few classes in America have so little to lose as the one Obama represents. 
(Continue reading here)





(both links via The Daily Dish)

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Pants on Fire!



Politifact notes Romney's blatant lying:

The notion that President Barack Obama started his presidency with an "apology tour" is a persistent and false Republican talking point that we have debunked a number of times.

Mitt Romney is sticking to it.

The Republican presidential nominee repeated it during his second debate against Obama at Hofstra University on Oct. 16, 2012, in response to an audience member’s question about the September 2012 Libya attack.

"The president's policies throughout the Middle East began with an apology tour and pursue a strategy of leading from behind, and this strategy is unraveling before our very eyes," he said.

We checked Romney’s "apology" attack when he used it at the Republican National Convention  (read the rest of the entry here

I suspect the reason that member of the right wing pundiocracy are so pissed at Candy Crowley is that she called Romney out on lie when they are trying to build an entire campaign centered on innuendo, distortion and outright lies.




Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Don't Call it a Comeback, He's Been Here For Years!


Do I think Obama won the second presidential debate?

Yes.

Do I think Romney lost the debate?

Yes.

Do I think this debate as one-sided as the first one?

Almost.



If you're going to claim Romney took this one, you better be getting paid by RNC or its overlords. Sure, this wasn't quite as lop-sided as The Debacle in Denver but that just makes this loss more pronounced - it's now obvious that Romney can only compete when Obama phones it in. Truth is, Mittens' October Surprise was to feign being a moderate after a few years of playing 'severe conservative". That bait-and-switch tactic clearly threw Obama for a loop in round one but that just left a now-vulnerable Romney on even-playing field with his better for round two. Clearly, the now-departed Mrs. Ann Dunham recommended that her son knock Mitt out!





Friday, October 12, 2012

Biden Put the Hurt on Ryan



Do I think Joe Biden won the VP debate

Yes.

Do I think Paul Ryan lost?

Yes.

Do I think this was as lop-sided as the last debate?

Not quite.





Biden's laughter, perhaps over done, was crucial. As Romney proved in the last debate this Republican ticket is not honest about the rights of women, the deficit, their tax plan, their military expenditures, their own record or just about anything else you can name. I'm not claiming that the Obama's record is perfect, just that Romney's campaign has been trying to run a post-truth campaign (see "we won't have out campaign dictated by fact-checkers etc.) becuase they think that no one will effectively call them on it.

So Biden eviscerated Ryan by laughing at the lies and then, with a great big grin, carving up those lies like a Thanksgiving turkey. Can you fact-check Biden's speech? Sure, but that doesn't allow you to create any sort of equivalency with Ryan's weapons-grade malarky!


Take it away my fellow Winnipeggers:


Saturday, October 6, 2012

Why the Politics?



I guess it was the trolls who inspired me.

Back in January 2009 I posted a 1991 single by Seattle punk-metal band Coffin Break (see HERE). I pointed out that the single's A-side, "Kill the President" wasn't about politics at all but was in fact "...a bright pop song about insanity. The narrator is like Travis Bickle just as the Prozac wears off." Then after sparing a brief thought for the relationship between punk and politics, I cast a wary eye upon the next four years:

And it does seem like everyone’s in a sincere mood these days doesn't it? It’s kinda like watching that besotted couple who, in their first flush of passion, offer loud, wild promises that make you wince with the pain of regret to come. So, when the inauguration spectacle is packed away, when the word historical gets a well-deserved rest, there’s gonna be some ugliness. The American Right thinks everyone (but them) is a communist and the American Left thinks everyone (but them) is a fascist and they both love political bloodsport. America may well be in a better place in four years but by then the axe-grinders that dictate public discourse in the U.S. will have tossed all this non-partisan sincerity aside.

Well my crystal ball was a little cloudy (how was I to guess that the American Right  would brand the Left as communists AND fascists!). On the other hand, I did call the cynical malaise that would soon cloud Obama voters view and rightly noted that no good deed by Obama would be acknowledged by the axe-grinding class.

However, despite the cautious, not-terribly partisan nature of the post, the trolls heard me tromp-tromp-tromping over their Bridge to the 19th Century and came out howling:

Anonymous January 18, 2009 3:16 PM
You're an idiot. The Left blamed GWB for everything. He kept integrity. Iraq did have WMD, did use them, and Iraq and the world are better off now than before. The economic crisis was created by Dodd, Obama and Frank - the Dem congress. 0bama's "career" was built on fraud and waste and maybe the clueless crowd you hang with is "optimistic", but there is fear with an inexperienced person whose only idea is raising taxes and restricting personal rights among most of the free thinking adults.

What? The? Fuck?


Honestly, I was a little shocked (ah, such naivete) at how high the level of hatred BEFORE THE MAN EVEN TOOK OFFICE but just then a blogging legend dropped by to offer a little tutorial on trolling:

Joe Stumble January 20, 2009 7:27 AM
CLASSIC Troll move. He starts off by calling you an idiot thereby shutting the door at the get-go on any meaningful conversation. Then he proceeds to regurgitate right wing nonsense that he's picked up from Rush or Ann or whomever. Finally he does it all anonymously. When did conservatives become such whiny sissies? 

Not one to allow the noble art of trolling to be so besmirched, a new voice shouted out:

Maria January 24, 2009 1:08 AM
Bush never tried to limit anyone's constitutional rights.
Everything obama says he is going to do is completely wrong.
You are like the morons that vote based on sunshine logos and bubblegum speeches.
You should look up the term "useful idiot".

Now comparing me to a Stalinist showed an ignorance of history (plus a terribly limited array of snappy put-downs) but I realized that if you can express an opinion with a minimum of clarity you're a threat to these reactionary types. And no, I will not sully the word conservative, a legitimate political philosophy, by letting these people take that name upon themselves when they can be more accurately labelled reactionaries. These aren't people of a different view who want to debate ideas and interpretations, no they want to hurl inflammatory invective and then run away and hide in anonymity.


So I knew I had to keep going on this blog, to do my part to show those people on the fence that this kind of hate-filled, tongue-tied, Fox-fed know-nothingness is an integral part of this imbalanced modern Republican Party which needs to be brought back to sanity.

Snip-snap-snout 
this tale's told out....

Thursday, October 4, 2012

Things To Do in Denver When You're Dead




Do I think Obama lost the first debate in Denver?

Yes.

Do I think Romney won?

Not really.

I’m a fierce Obama supporter but I can admit it when I think he fucked up.

I think Obama fucked up by failing to ready himself. I also think he underestimated two things about Romney: one was Romney’s being rehearsed (to the point of appearing haughty and over-prepared at times) and, more lethally, was Romney’s willingness to lie. Mitt’s denying the existence of his tax plan, or at least any verifiable version of it was an intolerable betrayal of the American people.




There are lots of hasty explanations being offered; the loser, whether Republican or Democrat, always tries to spin a debate loss. The rope-a-dopers say that Obama wanted to stay calm while an over-excited Romney buried himself in lies. Others point out how incumbents frequently lose the first debate and still others blame terrible moderation by Jim Lehrer and others say the president attacking Romney in that setting is un-presidential and would only end up elevating the contender. Some even claim he lost on purpose because he knew, as we all do, that the media needed to get a start on Mitt's Comeback story.

I'll wait to see how these things shake down to determine if there's credibility to any of these assertions. The bottom line is, regardless of what happened in Denver last night, if the president doesn’t pick himself up off that mat and get Mitt, he’s dead. 



Thursday, September 27, 2012

The Ads Just Write Themselves



While I won't deny my obvious bias, the Republican ad campaign this time around seems so weak that rather than pissing me off it just makes me feel sort of sorry for them. I mean, Romney tried to turn up the robo-charm to ten on this ad but the next day, the Democrats just drop a bomb on it:




Then they release a better, if not spectacularly so, version of the same thing:





The reason their campaign is winning is that Obama's ad team have at their disposal, not just money, expertise and passion but that they also have Mitt Romeny's own words, which weaken him like Kryptonite:





Hell, even the mostly ignorable MoveOn.Org facilitated a powerful  set of DIY political ads:





(see the rest of these heart-breaking series HERE)


Of course not everything is perfect, the NSFW "Wake the Fuck-Up" created by the Jewish Council for Educational Research with an assist from Samuel L. Jackson is a damn funny idea but just comes off as a little too hectoring for the audience in question.





And, finally, even all the good meme writers seem to be pro-Democrat, as this brilliant series that puts Mitt Romeny's words in the mouth of Arrested Development's Lucille Bluth: