Blue-Dog Democrats –vs- Progressives

During the Democratic convention, there was an argument played out between the Blue-dog Democrat and the Progressive Democrat mythology of campaigning (at least on the TV punditocracy patrol). The two competing wings of the party strain to claim their hold on the direction of the party, while trying to win the White House.

These two camps in the Democratic party are at odds. Progressives (like the fantastic Ms. Maddow) contend that the Democratic Party haven’t proposed real reforms, spoken “the truth,” and thus, they keep losing elections.

The other camp, the Blue-Dog Democrats, contend the party must be more moderate and tone down the gay rights, anti-gun language/rhetoric, in order to appeal to the center of the country and not appear so out of touch with “traditional American values.”

Let’s take a long, hard, self-reflective look at which wing's argument of the Democratic Party holds more water with their current idea of how to affect change in this country by electing Democrats to the White House consistently (term after term):

Blue-Dog Democrats – centrist (Democratic Leadership Council) Democrats who are like former President Bill Clinton. Triangulation, and offering modest reforms (step-by-step) is the best way to not only bolster the parties hold on power, but to also enact meaningful change that can take hold while maintaining power long-term.

Progressives – Democrats who are socially liberal and populist type in nature. Raise taxes on the wealthiest portions of the population to distribute the wealth more fairly…almost a socialism kind of thing. Support those inner city communities and provide programs to help those people dig their way out of poverty.

There are many reasons why the Democrats haven’t won more than 1 Presidential election (I don’t count Bill’s 2nd win) since 1978: this B-squared (blow-hard blogger) has a unique perspective to draw from, and I believe I know the real reasons for failure and how Dems can hold that important Presidential power and why the Presidency is the most important political office that Dems must be willing to give up virtually anything to get that office.

Why is the Presidency the most important office to hold?

** It goes to the modes of change in the history of this country. Change in this country, traditionally and historically, has come in one of two forms: 1. Supreme Court Rulings and 2. a popular President using the bully pulpit to call upon the people or make a case for a specific change. A political party can hold both houses of Congress by massive majorities, but without a President to sign a bill they are largely screwed and still don’t have the pulpit to address the people with one, consistent voice. Even with no control over Congress by vote, the President’s party holds significant power by setting the agenda and being able to allow bills to even get to the floor much less a vote on them.

1. The Presidency must be goal number one, above all else. If we want sweeping “Progressive” reforms (eg: Brown –vs- Board of Education, Roe –vs- Wade), the Supreme Court is the easiest, fastest why to force people to change in a radical way. However, this method is a long-term approach that is largely untenable. It is also a potentially divisive method, as we shall recall previous examples of SC rulings.

2. The other way to bring consistent change via Presidency is through enacting step-by-step reforms. When teaching children, we teach small steps to build upon small steps in order to effect a change of skill level. What we don’t do is give students a number line, review the names of the numbers, and then say “Time to start adding!” No, no, no. You skipped the step of explaining what the numbers mean. America will not vote consistently for a candidate who calls for radical ideas/reforms (eg: giving gays the right to marry). This country is not built to make such changes voluntarily and will be easily deterred for supporting such a candidate by the demonizing opposition.

* My unique perspective comes from growing up in “the Heartland” of America, while still holding these far left views. When you grow up in these Republican areas (the state I hail from has voted Republican for president for years on end) you get to know HOW these people think, even if you come to despise it. The old axiom here (of sorts, I don’t recall exact wording) holds true: “To know thine enemy is to defeat thine” enemy”, or “hold your friends close and your enemies closer.” The progressives don’t get the enemy, they don’t understand their enemy…they believe that if they just explain their positions, they can defeat/win-over the rural American, white voter.

Whoever said “the truth shall set you free” was right, but it is not applicable in the case the progressives want it to be. Their truth, they believe will set these rural voters “free,” but do they really want to be “free,” and their definition of “free” stands in stark contrast to what progressives would interpret “free” to be.

Onto the reasons why the Democratic Party has failed to achieve the Presidency:

1. THE MESSAGE – Look I am a progressive liberal. I want marriage rights for gays, I want to legalize marijuana, I want broad abortion rights, education about sex in schools, free condoms, legalizing and regulating sex workers of all stripes, complete removal of any mention of any “God” in public and on our currency…but the Progressives are like OCGM….they don’t get it.

I love the liberals, the “crazy” liberals (like Sen. Barbara Boxer, Sen. Diane Feinstein, Florida’s Robert Wexler, Ms. Maddow, Mr. Olbermann). I would most likely vote for them any day of the week and twice on Sunday’s. But, what they have never understood or refuse to “get” is that you don’t win national elections with those types of views in today’s America.

Progressives - Like it or not, you must play to the middle of the country in order to win voters in a national election, as Bill Clinton did in 1992 (but, even then, Perot helped him a ton). We can get the change we believe in, the change we support, the change the people stuck in lower middle class need, but it can only come through a massive wave (5-6) of Supreme Court nominees, or through incremental change that shows those resistant middle America voters that all WILL be okay if you open the door a creak. And creak-by-creak we can get what we want. But by going for all the marbles at once with someone too progressive, too liberal, we make it far to easy for them to shriek with fear of the unknown.

It is also apparent to this blogger that (as I believe I have also written somewhere on this blog) the right-wing has a much easier case to pitch with. Trying to explain a federal bureaucracy is infinitely tougher than saying, “They are stealing your money for their pet projects, so lets lower taxes and get our money back.”

It is also apparent to this blogger that Democrats have consistently done a shitty job of clearly explaining how lowering taxes for individuals and families can come back and cause higher taxes from the state you live in, and higher costs for car/house maintenance because the roads are worse, which causes more accidents and general automobile problems. Democrats have also done a shitty job nationwide election cycle after election cycle of clearly/concisely explaining how those low prices at Shit-Mart lead to lower paying jobs, and jobs being shifted overseas to keep profits up. In short, the Democratic Party has been abysmal at demonstrating that lower taxes will result in higher costs elsewhere that will retard their quality of life.

2. ORGANIZATION – democrats are also perennial losers in national elections because their organizations are not nearly as streamlined as the republican bases is…it can’t be. First, the republicans build through churches, and rural Americans who support more conservative views tend not to move out of their house, thus making them easier to find. Liberals, who tend to live in or near big metropoli, are more transient, and harder to keep track of. Moreover, progressives are so diverse in their views, interests due to the endless possibilities in the metropolis that they don’t tend to join a huge homogeneous group like rural church-goers.

Unions have traditionally been strong allies for organizing support for democrats, but that has shown to not be either reliable enough to get those voters to turn out (which I wouldn’t think is true), or more likely, unable to get the large numbers of voters the church’s get. Moreover, union jobs have vanished at a dramatic pace, and even these people are also typically in working class areas (eg: car factories) in the rural areas, which have some of those votes stripped by the social church group issues.

Republicans are great at cranking out their base vote, and it has helped for many, many elections nationwide. This is another reason why Dems have been unsuccessful.

3. CAMPAIGN TACTICS/STRATEGERY – perhaps my biggest gripe of all with the “Progressive” wing of the party. Every single time I hear from these people, they want to run a principled, decent, above-board campaign…which is why we keep losing.

Politics, as they say, is the ultimate American blood sport. But, the high and mighty left wing of the party refuses to acknowledge this fact and work within the full parameters of the current system, whether you like the system or not (this blogger has made clear in previous posts that he hates the system as is).

The right wing is exceptionally good at attacking Democrats negatively. “Liberal” has become a dirty word. “Progressive” has become a dirty word. We have been branded as “soft.” Liberals often say they won’t “lower themselves” to match the tactics of the Republicans. Therein lies the essential problem.

No one likes negative political ads. But, again this election year, we have seen they are effective and damaging. Obama, who should be easily winning this election in the polls, and had a massive lead over OCGM, has seen his lead shrink to miniscule levels, if not go below OCGM. Why did this happen? OCGM, and Dubya in 2000/2004 to Gore then Kerry, did exactly what they know how to do: They ran negative ads subtly and not so subtly calling Obama un-American, and un-patriotic, and a Muslim.

The Democratic Party and its candidates have been pathetic when it comes to attacking their opponent. Moreover, they’ve been overly nice and deferential when attacking their opponent. As I’ve called for on this blog before, the Democrats MUST grow some gonads and run negative ads that hit hard on the nominee of the day.

Even if it’s not negative ads, Democrats need to be better at framing an issue. What was the inheritance tax, is now called the death tax because some Republicans focus-grouped how to re-frame the issue and make it a winner. Democrats have sucked at this for years, and we need to be better at being able to effectively re-name something that suits the progressive ideals. Progressives need to not be so high and mighty on their totem pole and demand that any Presidential Campaign they support must run on the highest of ethical principles possible. I’m all for campaign ethics reform, but by not playing dirty like Republicans you lose a ton of ground by not running negative, nasty ads back at them. Middle Americans want someone who is going to fight for them and what they need. But, how can they support a candidate who shows no fight, no spine…not even for him/herself? Middle Americans see weak candidates when Democrats go the high and mighty route, not to mention them being offended by the mere suggestion that a campaign is better than them (which is what it sounds like to these voters). It sounds elitist, and smug…something which turns off Middle America.


4. PATHOLOGICAL FACTORS – Democrats have demonstrated again and again that they do not understand the pathology of the Middle American voter. Pathology, defined as “the structural and functional deviations from the normal that constitute disease or characterize a particular disease,” in this case the disease refers to the life of a rural voter, is what defines the behavior of an organism. It defines and determines the thinking of an animal. It is, essentially, their worldview. Not understanding the enemy’s worldview has been a damning and harsh reality the Democratic Party has had to live with for low these many decades.

Growing up in that pathology that was constantly reinforced by the culture surrounding my young childhood, allows me to greater understand their worldview (how they think and why they think it). Some of this is not rocket science; It’s basic knowledge you can get from an entry-level freshman college psychology course.

As mentioned earlier, people tend to fear the most what they do not understand, and people do not understand how the federal government can work for them and make their lives better. They are afraid of the federal government (in reality, they should be afraid of the feds, so I can’t blame there) because they don’t understand how it really works. What they believe to be true about the federal government has been largely taught by right-wing propaganda, because (and this goes back to number 1) they have been more effective at getting their message out.

The pathology of the white Middle American voter is not a complex one to grasp. These are largely simple people with simple views and sorry to state, simple minds. They see broad change as a dangerous threat to their livelihood. These are people who can accept small changes at a time, if you frame it the right way and don’t attempt to shove it down their throats.

Looking back at desegregation brought about by the Supreme Court, which is the one way that we can have sweeping change in this country. People fought that for generations because they were shoved into it; Hell, some in the wacko-south still gather young white men and feed them psychological poison, telling them that black people are not the equal of the white man. The confederate flag is SLOWLY dying and going away as the older generation, but young at the precipice of that historical change in this country, are dying off. The late Sen. Strom Thurmond, risen from the dead and given some sodium pentothal, would still most likely harbor the same KKK-type views he held for decades. He just masked it better as he got older.

I am not calling Middle Americans (rural voters, lower middle class voters) KKK members in hiding. I am merely demonstrating that they don’t take to radical change well at all and it is more likely that you win them over with solid reasoning, a plea for equality, a plea to their better nature, and concrete ways that changing X policy will benefit them now and their children of the future.

This is why the Progressive message will never appeal to these voters…yes, I said never. Progressives (including me) want to move to fast, to quickly, and it makes these voters cautious that the Democratic Party is trying to pull the wool over their eyes and take their guns, let gay people have sex in public gardens, and hold flag burnings in the town square every weekend. Naturally cautious these people are, so it is best to provide baby steps of progress.

5. OVERALL – one final thing to note here is the idea of recurrence. I say recurrence in the sense that with following the Clinton/triangulation/Blue Dog Democrats plan short term, we can build a strong case and well of support for Progressivism long-term.

These voters don’t trust government because they don’t get the machinery of it, but they also don’t support it because it has failed them in the past. Why has it failed? Democrats who may have gained power based on promises of grand plans (sweeping reforms), put into place plans to address problems for real people, but that takes time to set up, and the republicans come along 4 years later and lay out their simple, effective message: Democrats have taken tons of your money, have you seen any benefits from it? Invariably the answer is “No.” Not just because it takes time, but because Republicans who may hold power in the Congress impede this progress. Remember the shut-down during the Clinton years that inevitably caused Monica-gate? That was because the Republicans, who had control, refused to deal with Clinton and screwed him and the Democratic party in the long run by killing themselves in the short run.

This causes voters in these areas to give up and vote Republican to get their money back from the government because they didn’t see any benefits from the money they gave. And whatever benefits they did see, they don’t really see it because Democrats fail to keep on message (back to #1).

By giving up, this causes the collapse of these programs in their infancy (eg: Welfare to Work, HeadStart) despite demonstrating great results.

Following the Blue-Dog Democrat approach we make/enact/implement small reform after small reform that shows that when implemented properly, the programs we enact do benefit whitey in America. As the momentum builds and Middle America starts to see the progress and how it’s not destroying their lives, but making their lives better, they will be more likely to raise children who see those benefits and support such causes, while parents will be slowly brought into the fold.

This is how you build a base of support, a base of disciples, a base of indoctrinated people. You start with small, but meaningful reforms that soften up the voter, and prove to be enriching to them, and that in turn, creates the positive vibes for deeper, longer lasting reform. All of which can put America on a path to Progressive values in a generation.

These are the reasons why this left-wing liberal who supports those crazy causes highlighted within this post, supported the moderate (perhaps even conservative) Hillary Clinton as the Presidential nominee. I didn’t like Hillary because of her views, because of some sick man-love for Bill (tho, I do love Bill)…I supported her because she met all the criteria to be ELECTED to the White House. Most importantly, perhaps, given this 24/7 media/news cycle with bloggers, the attack chops to fight, fight, fight.

Progressives, in the short term have consistently been pushing a seriously flawed argument for getting Democrats into the White House in a consistent manner.

The Blue-Dog Democrats (& DLC), while I despise many of them (eg: Harry Reid, John Murtha, Evan Bayh) for their lack of leadership on several issues, have the right idea…Democrats all-around have just done an abysmal job of addressing reasons for failure #1-4.

The Progressives need to step aside for the time being and let the Blue-Dogs do their work. The Progressives are sabotaging the work done by Blue-Dogs year after year with their outrageous rhetoric and infighting within the party that doesn’t allow the party to speak with one, consistent voice. And speaking loudly, clearly, effectively, and forcefully with one, consistent voice is how you frame issues, and win Presidential elections.

We do have better ideas. We do. But better ideas, not explained well, and not fought for, are worth nothing. The Democratic Party can do better for itself, and can do better for America’s lower middle class if they are given a chance to do so.

The every 4 years running debate I have going

I have a friendly debate every 4 years with someone I'll call: Oregonman.

We have a recurring debate and speak to each other roughly every 4 years just in time for the Presidential elections. We have had this debate running on 8 years, and through what is now our third Presidential campaign (2000, 2004, & 2008).

He is one of those Progressive types who doesn’t get it. His dream candidate in 2004 and this election year was Dennis Kucinich…the very liberal House Representative from Ohio. Aside from the fact that the man doesn’t look Presidential at all (and campaigns are becoming more about optics/stagecraft), his issues are so left that were he to be elected by the Democratic Party for President, he would be easily beat in a landslide of epic proportions. The young vote, (who has yet to consistently show up to vote - something that worries me about Obama) who supported him, would be thrilled with him as a candidate. However, he is easily painted by the right-wing as a guy who will raise your taxes, take your guns, remove all morality from everyday life, etc, etc, etc. He would have ZERO chance because of the reasons outlined in my ridiculously long-ass post.

Oregon-man doesn’t get it. He believes, misguidedly so, that if Kucinich would just be able to get his message out to the masses…his views/proposals would be so convincing people will show up at the polls in droves. Almost a Dick Cheney-like thinking of “we’ll be greeted as liberators” when he talked about the Iraqi people pre-invasion. It’s pure utopia…pure sycophantic view. Let’s assume Democrats got over all the hurdles and Kucinich was able to get his message out consistently, cleanly, without bias from the Republicans; People wouldn’t be showing up in drives to support this message of Kucinich and people of his ilk…they’d be showing up in droves screaming, “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! We don’t want gay rights!!! Legalizing drugs? Are you insane?????”

Sometimes people aren’t ready for a message, even if it’s the right message. Progressives who continue to pursue this strategy are only continuing to hurt the prospects of a successful Democratic Party.

Think like a lower middle class, Middle American, white voter who is afraid of change. Step-by-step is the only rational, reasonable, effective, and winnable way to carry the Democratic message.

Quick hits on Palin

Some thoughts on Palin as the VP choice of OCGM:

A. Only been in office for barely 2 years.

B. While it could be very similar to black people voting for Obama simply because he’s black, women COULD be pushed to vote for her simply because she’s a woman. However, I doubt that due to the blatant pandering by the OCGM here. Plus, the women who supported Hillary (PUMAs) will not be supporting this woman. Hillary struggled for her advancement, this lady could be seen as getting a free pass, of sorts. Moreover, Hillary is 20 years older and these women identify more with her age-range and her plight.

C. She will only have to survive a debate against the much more experienced Biden (similar to what Dubya did when he faced Gore…he survived). Moreover, Biden will have to watch his flip mouth (and avoid the infamous Rick Lazio moment of 2000) because if he attacks her flippantly, that will infuriate women who may not even have supported her before the debate, to such and extent that they could move over to support her because she is a woman. It also hurts Obama in some sense…he never really was able to effectively attack Hillary. She lost because she gambled wrong, Obama didn’t beat her in a debate…and he never really effectively attacked her…so he hasn’t proved to be able to attack a woman effectively.

D. It could hurt OCGM that this looks purely political. OCGM clearly didn’t really vet her because they met once during the process, and only twice total. Moreover, she could hurt him with her very socially liberal policies…she’s very much like a libertarian. Also, it could hurt if Obama manages to frame the issue that if OCGM dies in office, then this lady with no foreign policy experience will be in charge and who will be whispering in her ear concerning the war (I smell another potential Neo-Con take-over of a person who knows nothing about the situation, which Palin has admitted she hasn’t thought about).

I still feared Ridge more. I think this will help OCGM's "maverick" image, but it has effectively made age an issue and inexperience a non-issue for Obama.

Total EWW moment I apologize for

Watching the highlights of the VP announcement by OCGM today...as Palin is speaking, there are some clips where OCGM looks like he's got the biggest hard-on being way too happy with himself and giving that crazy-man look I have gotten used to seeing from OCGM.

Ewwwww....what a disgusting bastard.

Perhaps another racist moment by yours truly

Call me a racist, but...

Look, I value, recognize the achievement of the first black candidate being nominated for President...I really do.

But, can the black community stop talking about themselves for a minute? Seriously!

Listening to NPR this afternoon, there was some black analyist/reporter ontalking about how he was a bit disappointed with Obama's speech last night because he didn't devote more time to the anniversary of Dr. King's tremendous "I have a dream" speech.

I have bad news for sir...this election is notg about just you and your fellow black bretheren. This is an election about the direction of the country...the whole country.

I'll be writing more later on the dynamics of how/why Democrats haven't been elected to the Presidency...but trust me on this:

Rural white women voters are what Obama needs to target to cinch this election...waxing on and off about the plight of the black man will not with those voters. OCGM just made the task of getting these voters to support him AND show up to vote...all the more potentially difficult. Michelle Obama now, for sure, has a clear role in this campaign.

It certainly won't work with white males voters whom Obama is not likely to get, but looking too black will stir those racist, anti-semetic attitudes predominant in rural America. The very same attitude that allows them to believe Obama is an Islamic fundamentalist.

Not to mention, stressing race goes against what Obama intended for his campaign to be about.

We have ourselves a race

Hmmm...OCGM surprised me with this apparent pick via an AP story.

Think she's gonna be a hatchet-woman...think Barry needs to dispatch Hill to deal with this woman.

More of my analsis...which is apparently shit (recalling my guarantee) later.

OCGM - playing coy

The OCGM's Campaign, at this hour, is coyly toying with the media.

No one would really, really scare me. The only two that would raise my eyebrow are the following:

A. Ridge, for purposes lined out earlier.

B. This Gov. Palin chick from Alaska. I didn't think OCGM would go there, but as a friend pointed out to this blogger, she could be a good pick for McCain.

This could prove to be an interesting day...Obama needs a big poll bounce in the next few days tracking polls. If he doesn't get a sizeable bump, it could be perceived by potential Obama-ites as him not being able to deliver.

Polls are schmolls, but perception is reality in politics as we know.

The Time is Now

A fantastic speech by the next President of the United States of America, Barack Obama!!!

Some good, solid red meat that hit OCGM hard. Also give that aura of hope with meaning, that shared responsibility. I was also taught during speech and debate that when you give a speech you address your opponents perceived strengths, and you obliterate them one-by-one, and you address your perceived weaknesses by the opponent and you blow those away. Brilliant job with beating those and addressing all those necessary points. A good delivery of oratory. On MSNBC it was reported before the speech that Obama spent all night in a motel room ALONE writing this speech...this is why I prefer speakers who give speeches in their own voice...it adds authenticity.

Really loved the fictional President Andrew Shepard (from that great Sorkin movie), 'let's cut the bullshit' kind of moment as well. As well as the moment I called for earlier in this blog: "It's not that Bob Rumson can't sell it, it's that he just doesn't get it." Classic Sorkin, and brilliant bitch-slap.

It lagged a bit at the end and it ended a bit awkwardly, only thing I didn't like...he needed to finish strong and the end seemed very abrupt and disjointed.

Overall, a grand slam!! Count me on board this train!! Finally, the shots of that full football stadium...awe-inspiring.

Note: Nice touch with the country music at the end, playing to that rural American vote.

The beatdown begins?

Here we go Obama, you need a grand-fuck-slam here. Kick it!

Tepid Gore

I'm a fan of Gore. But, what a tepid, awful delivery and speech by the last Democrat President to be elected.

I expected more from him, and I was disappointed.

WOW-sers!!!!!

That is exactly why Clinton is STILL the man. A slice and dice of OCGM and his campaign. Obama will deliver a fantastic speech tomorrow night...but no one, no one beats a barn-burner, vintage Clinton speech

Thanks for the snap to that speech Bill. Finally, some serious red meat (eg: Katrina, cronyism, torture) to clearly highlight how a vote for OCGM would be damning for middle-class voters.

Kay Bailey

Within the past day or so a new name has been rattled around the OCGM's Presidential Campaign: Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX).

Just two days ago, this blogger essentially guaranteed a VP pick of former Gov. Tom Ridge and I outlined numerous reasons why. At that time Kay Bailey's name hadn't been mentioned. I stand by my original prediction.

This has reminds me of the Democrat from Texas who was vetted to be Obama's running mate, and his name got out late.

I think this is a similar case with Kay Bailey. I'm sure she's seriously been/being considered, but I don't see what she realistically gets McCain of measurable gain.

She is (duh) a woman so she adds some diversity. However, most women would have voted for Big Hill because they had a personal connection. While some were voting for her simply because Hill was a woman, I think those are few and far between.

Texas is already leaning towards OCGM. She wouldn't put any other state into play (she's born and raised in Texas), while Ridge would.

White men would prefer to vote for a white woman over an African American male I would guess.

She would likely build/reinforce/comfort OCGM's Republican base as she is largely a conservative, unlike Ridge (Bailey is not for overturning Roe, but supports serious restrictions). But again, I just think these voters will either come home and turn out to the polls for OCGM or they won't. I don't see Kay Bailey helping that as much as choosing someone like Ridge would play to the moderate, middle-class white male.

Finally, as mentioned earlier, I think this is essentially a leak. But, a purposeful leak. This is an effort to show OCGM is willing to look at a woman for a running mate, and maybe curry votes from women that way.

Big Hill

Last night Big Hill delivered a fantastic speech. Especially loved the twins line.

Still want someone to hammer home the message of why OCGM is not the answer and how we are in less esoteric prose. Simple people need simple talk/logic to convince them and I am hopeful Bill will make an even better case to vote for Obama tonight. Hmmmmmmmm.

A new guard

There is now talk of the car companies going to the Fed to get "help," just as did Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

There has got to be a way to changed this system. Has to be a new way to measure if a company is doing well, not just for it's stockholders, but for the long-term health of the country.

Stockholders want profit, thus CEO's need profit and are given great incentive to "cook" the books when they're consistently given millions of dollars.

Perhaps there's some way to establish a base salary for each big CEO of a company as such. Then put any "bonuses" they may get into some type of escrow account where they cannot have meaningful access to it for say...5 years, to give some proof that what they did, the steps they took bore out in the end. Or if they didn't, some type of monetary penalty can be deferred from this escrowed balance and a check can be cut after this supposed 5 years.

It's almost like they do in construction. Have the building built, on budget, within a given time frame, with all the inspections done, and you get a big bonus at the end. However, as we are seeing with the new Redskins' football stadium, there is now a pending lawsuit between the contractor who said he earned the bonus cash, and the owner who apparently is being a tight-wad jackass and refusing to pay.

But, then who would be the judge(s) of such a system, and how would they not be subject to being bought off (eg: mobsters)? And what would be to stop the next CEO from tanking the company just to screw over the guy he replaces. Not normally a problem, I suppose. But in the situation over at Disney between Eisner and Iger (I believe it was, Eisner's potential successor who left Disney) was so bitter one got the feeling that they'd rather stab themselves and the other in the back than to give any credit to the other.

There has to be a way. It's a damn shame to screw autoworkers who were "guaranteed" lifetime coverage by the company and to have that stripped away, and then adding insult to injury, the company comes to the Fed for a payout?...I think not!

Any American car company seeing a bail-out should be laughed out of the office. I apologize to those people who will SERIOUSLY be economically hurt by this, but I suspect most of the real damage has already been done. I am fine with picking up their health-care tab, as I assume we basically are already.

But, to the American car-makers who insist, in fact, persist, to make shitty cars, with shitty gas mileage...fuck 'em. Their product has been shit for going on 20 years and if they are too myopic to see that, then that's their problem.

Honda, Toyota are two of the most selling cars in America now? Why? Because they are cheaper?...hardly. It's because they are damn good cars that can be counted on by-and-large for a good 200,000 miles. Moreover, they don't build 50 different cars over 10 different brands, they do what they do and they do it well.

Why are Mercury, Buick, Dodge, Chrysler even brands anymore? How much money is wasted building Mercury's that never sell? No matter how popular Mr. Woods may be, he doesn't make me want a frickin' Buick either. The entire brand of Dodge is a complete farce, they in and of themselves are a complete joke. And Chrysler is so bad, even Mercedes couldn't save it.

Just like the airlines. They got to big for their own good. Their service went to shit, their planes went to shit, and now their companies are going to...you guessed it...shit.

Good riddance.

Ted

Just saw Sen. Ted Kennedy deliver his speech. He perhaps just stole this night from Michelle Obama. That was powerful stuff for liberals. Seeing him stand there loved it and hated it. This blogger tasted tears...wow. The end of the dynasty is near, hang on there Ted...hang on.

Bill is upset & Obama should be ashamed

I get home today, flip on the telly and hit mute to finish listening to my podcast when I see something about President Bill Clinton not being happy with his topic when he gives the convention speech.

Apparently, the Obama Campaign has given Bill clearance to do a speech on overall foreign policy.

First of all, who the F is you to tell Clinton what he can talk about?!?! Show the man some respect.

Second, he was not exactly known for his great foreign policy prowess. Four words, for which Carville will forever be correct about: "It's the economy stupid." (Okay, three words and an article, who's counting?)

Third, no matter what you do Barack, you will lose a portion of the foreign policy ("hawk") crowd no matter what you say or anyone around you says. Moreover, any minute gains you get in this area would be completely blasted to smithereens if there were some type of terrorist attack around the world somewhere. This is why you have Biden, let him earn his keep.

Finally, you need those white voters, those working class lunch-pail voters who don't see you as a Democrat. They don't see you as a populist. They don't see you as a reformer. They don't see you even as a man. They see you as a black man.

I heard some asshat yesterday on MSNBC say Barack was better at connecting to the audience in person than any other candidate he could remember. Think it was Fineman. And I like Fineman (tho, I think he's secretly a Repo), but has to be right up there with one of the most moronic, asinine, stupefying things I have ever heard uttered.

In sports lingo, Barack Obama couldn't hold Bill Clinton's jock-strap any day of the freaking week. Clinton can still, and will still wipe the floor with your ass Obama. You are damn good, but both Kennedy's were better, and Bill Clinton is better. Number 4 in history isn't bad. Some may, *gasp,* even put Alzheimer's Ronnie ahead of Obama as well.

Recall back to the fantastic movie, "The American President" by Aaron Sorkin, where fictional President Andrew Shepard talks about Bob Rumsen and his bellowing on the campaign trail. Shepard says, "Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't buy it, Bob's problem is that he can't sell it."

Clinton has been by far the best salesman for the Democratic party this side of RFK. You will win this election on the economy, on bread and butter issues Barack. To paraphrase; Your problem isn't that you can't sell it, your problem is that you can't sell it to whitey near as well as Bill Clinton can.

I am under no illusions. Barack you still need to sell yourself to these people, but why not make that sale so much easier by allowing Bill Clinton to not crack that door open, but to open it a good halfway?

I don't get it.

OCGM-Ridge - A prediction

Four and half days from now, this will happen...it's a no-brainer. If I was advising OCGM's campaign I'd pick former Gov. Tom Ridge from Pennsylvania (barring any skeletons we have never seen before that were turned-up during vetting).

Easy case to make here:

1. OCGM will have Lieberman out there, and we saw how ineffective he was in getting support for Gore in 2000. Moreover, Jews are gonna vote how they want, and this faux Jew isn't going to seriously sway that vote.

2. Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-Minnesota) is a wild card. He's young, which only exacerbates OCGM's age problem. He's really untested on a national or even serious big political stage (Minnesota doesn't count ya'll), and he could implode. While it may not be important in the end, he'd also probably have his lunch handed to him in a VP debate with Biden. But, again, as we saw in the last 2 Presidential elections/"selections," both Lieberman and Edwards roll-over and looked highly over-matched by the brilliant *cough* mind of one Dick.

4. Mitt Romney's a total lose-lose proposition whom OCGM doesn't trust (neither would I, frankly). He carries no real state. The people in Massachusetts will undoubtedly vote Obama, and Michigan is in play a bit, but I don't buy that Romney has enough pull to make it worth the cost-benefit analysis.

5. Despite his pro-choice view on abortion, Ridge is far more centrist than Lieberman (eg: pro-death penalty/executions, 3-strikes laws) and I'm sure Ridge has no intention of seriously looking into adding to Roe-v-Wade to further protect women.

6. Also, no matter how ridiculous the Homeland Security Administration is/was/will be, Ridge fostered that in, which he will get points for looking tough, and strong against those "evil-doers." This despite everyone mocking the stupefying colors and levels of threat thing he concocted.

7. Republicans, like most Hillary Democrats, have finally begun to "come home". Neo-cons and hard right-wingers despise and distrust OCGM, but in the end, they know he would be less evil than a liberal, Obama administration.

8. He's also a VietNam Vet. Further emphasizing the OCGM's resume point home, with the military service thing. Ridge is also a disabled veteran who has experienced deafness in his left ear where he now wears a hearing aid (the hearing disability partly came from ear child ear infections, but it was exacerbated due to his service in the Army). No doubt this disability, should the OCGM take this advice, would also be exploited. It may also play into his hands during a debate...who knows. Needing extra lead time. Claiming he didn't hear a question, when he did, and getting extra think time.

9. Finally, and most importantly, Ridge alone COULD, COULD get them Pennsylvania. If the Repos keep Ohio, which I'm fairly certain they will, and they manage to snag Pennsylvania...it's hard to see Obama winning. If nothing else, it makes Obama spend a shitload of time and money on a state he should/must win.

For all these reasons and because of OCGM's "comfort level" with Ridge, he will be the VP pick for the Republican ticket...mark it down, bet the farmhouse, the hen house, and the outhouse.

Quick note

McCain, for the rest of this election will be referred to irreverently as "OCGM," on this blog. I cannot resist this, if not, for my own personal amusement.

FoxSnooze proving they're pious bigots?

At this very hour on FoxSnooze is the program: 2008 Presidential Character and Conduct: Barack Obama.

I found it after clicking on my bookmark of seeing what's currently on the telly as I had just finished watching a tv series on dvd, and I saw it while scrolling on down.

I didn't see a McCain version airing directly before or after this airing on Obama. Upon further searching, it appears there is a version with Old Cranky Geezer Man (OCGM). However, I'd be interested to see how often this particular channel on cable has run both and the times when they ran.

The title in and of itself smacks of piousness and inequity. I refuse to watch it.

There's an old saying that knowing thine enemy is smart business...and I concurrently agree. This blogger, however, is a bad person to rely on because I admit I cannot stomach such crap for so long.

This goes both ways however, as MSNBC did test my patience during the Democratic primaries.

Wuterich's story

60 Minutes re-aired the program they ran last fall (I think it was in the fall) on the story of United States Marine Corps. (USMC) Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, and the massacre at Haditha.

All of Wuterich's men/women who were under him have had their charges dropped since they last aired to program, but Wuterich's Court martial is being held-up because 60 Minutes refuses to give their full interview tapes after they had been subpoenaed by the USMC. Moreover, the original charges of murder have been dropped to manslaughter.

After re-watching this story on Wuterich and his man, I think this man made a dreadful call.

However, with the pressures of combat on this man who had never seen combat before, putting him in charge of men and women in combat, and not giving him some allowance to really F-up seems harsh to this blogger.

No matter the training, I have to feel there is a large percentage of men who, while leading other men/women in a combat situation when their motorcade gets hit by an IED...would flip out as much as it appears this guy did. They, and perhaps I, would go all out in an effort to find the perp of such an attack, civilians be damned.

Wuterich seems to have gotten some leeway and some forgiveness here after his story ran on CBS. Clearly, he bears a ton of responsibility for leading his men/women into such a massacre, but...

...is it possible to for the military to develop some type of "test" (much like those admittedly abominable Supreme Court "tests") to provide some allowance to give these men/women a break when they make such a horrific mistake. Damning soldiers to a Dishonorable Discharge when a young soldier makes a terrible mistake seems unfair without taking into serious account the circumstances (eg: emotional pressure, IQ, experience in combat).

In short, I feel bad for Wuterich who appears to have been pushed into a combat-control situation he had no place of being in due to the reality that not a lot of young men are enlisting in this ill-fated "war."

Eschewing eliteism

Biden is no elitist. Last year the Washington Post I believe it was, did a workup on the net value of all the presidential candidates that were in the race. When assessing Biden's total net worth, they found he was worth around: $100,000-$150,000.

Sounds like a lot of money to me and you, but when looking at respective candidates, that's piecemeal. This is what working in public service gets you...tons of non-monetary wealth. I'm a teacher, I should know.

The attack dog cometh?!

That's all she wrote folks! Great pic, much better than Bayh, Kaine, or that guy from Texas who apparently was vetted. Only possible better pick would have been Hill herself who came with some serious baggage.

Still think Obama bungled this a bit. This should have been introduced at 3pm-ish yesterday, but what can ya do eh?

Clearly it will be interesting to see what McCain does.

A serious WTF?!?! Obama moment

According to this report from Bloomberg news, Obama has outspent McCain to a ridiculous portion.

To which I say...how the fuck can this be?!?! That said, all I mostly see in this market are negative ads from McCain, and a few puff ads from Obama.

This is the core of the problem. Obama talks sweet, he's cute...he's lovely...he wants to run a "different kind of campaign"...well, congrats you jackass...to paraphrase Dubya, "You're doin' a heckuvah job Obama."

Negative ads work...how many times must Liberals be smashed over the bleeping head to get this simple message.

John Kerry didn't get it until it was too late, and it appears Obama isn't getting it either.

Negative ads are smarmy, crass, rude, nasty, un-American...but dammit, they have been proven election cycle after election cycle to work and work VERY well.

THIS is exactly why many of us were supporters of Hillary. She could take a hay-maker, and she could throw one right back.

McCain has spent scant money on negative ads that were inflammatory, un-American, and have been full of utter lies. But, by doing so, McCain has torn down Obama and gotten free advertising on primetime political shows because they are so inflammatory.

No matter how many times Campbell Brown, Brian Williams, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, or even a FoxSnooze person say these ads are PATENTLY bullshit...white-bred America will naturally assume they are just another part of the liberal media and will believe and take hold of un-challenged accusations.

Congrats Obama. You have wasted $57 million dollars on cute, little, puff pieces that did NOTHING. Hope you start swinging the proverbial bat like a mother-fucker.

For if you don't...it will be Kerry all over again. And this SLAM DUNK of an election that should have been, will MURDER the Democratic party as it stands, and it will set back civil rights/liberties for a century (via the inevitable right-wing nut-jobs McCain will appoint to the Supreme Court to give the Republican base more appeasement).

You wanted the future of our country in your hands Obama...you now have it. The future is up to you...it's all up to you.

I plead you: Start getting nasty, and do it quick.

Applegate has balls

Applegate, as in Christina Applegate (teen star of the long-running "Married w/ Children Show"), has some serious brass gonads on her.

Which is good, since she now has no breasts to speak of.

Applegate's mother battled breast cancer, and she tested positive for the BRCA1 gene mutation linked to breast and ovarian cancer. So, there's the family history.

Because of this she made the large decision to have both breasts removed and she will begin reconstructive surgery within weeks.

Bravo her to having the brains, and the courage to make such a huge decision. All the best.

Careful what ye wish fer...

McCain needs to be careful what they wish for.

This blogger has complained for months that McCain is being given free passes like it's Methamphetamine pills an addict would pop.

After the Saddleback event Saturday, which again I saw little of, McCain complained he wasn't getting a fair amount of coverage, that Obama was being covered more by the MSM.

I have concurred. The MSM has covered Obama ad-nauseum, causing Obama fatigue.

For McCain should be careful what he asks for, he just may get it. The minute the MSM turns their attention to the foolishness that McCain is carrying himself with...he will be exposed for the irate, incoherent, drooling, old-geezer he is.

Dubya benefited from the lack of coverage by the MSM during both the 2000 and 2004 campaigns, albeit for differing reasons. McCain should learn from Dubya's example.

I lied (sorta)

Mea culpa, mea culpa...of sorts.

Early on in the life of this blog I do believe I piously declared that I don't look @ polls. This was clearly me being snotty, snooty, and a colossal liar.

At the time in this Presidential race, I didn't. What I forgot was that as the time gets withing the convention, as we have finally found our two combatants...I do at least listen to the polling in a cursory fashion.

What I mean is I do recall that Obama was "up" by a few points about a week or so ago. Now, what I am hearing in the periphery is that, according to pollsters...it has once again "tightened" back up to essentially a dead heat.

I still stick by what I have earlier said on this blog, that a lead in the national "polls" of 2-3 percentage points doesn't much tell you anything since we do have that asinine Selectoral College to deal with.

However, is does go the the "narrative" of the race, and foolish people can be swayed from their convictions by national polling. In America, everyone loves a winner, and they hate to go vote for a loser...so that's where these so-called "polls" have a role...they prey of the psyche of a candidate, the press that covers them, and the people that vote. It's very much a sickness.

By as Frank Rich so aprtly noted in yesterday's Op-Ed for the Times, this race may be tied...but it's only for one reason: No one is covering the joke of a man that has become John McCain.

Once again, the left-leaning media, as they did with Kerry (I'd argue) fell in love with the idea of him and tried to push his story, tried to tell his story to the American people, while lazily and foolishly "covering" the Dubya campaign in such a cursory way that he and his campaign got away with so much balderdash...he scored yet another stolen selection at the craps table.

The media is doing it again, much to the detriment of their own candidate whom they all may love to death. They are killing him through over-esposure...but more importantly, UNDEREXPOSURE of the daft cow that is John McCain.

The man is a war hero, I'll give him that. But, what about being captured and tortured for years makes you fit to be President?...jack squat.

The man has become a disgusting tale of pandering gone bad. I watched his section (I missed Obama's, so perhaps this is unfair) of the "Saddleback Forum" thing on CNN...the man was using that whole experience as a crutch. Literally, that's all he had. Moreover, when he was asked who his top 3 wisest people are, his answer was almost as lame as Dubya's fave philosopher answer back in 2000?: "Jesus Christ."

McCain is off his meds, but he's being given a big, massive free pass. It's as if the media dispatched a representative to his house and handed him one of those giant checks people who win the lottery get. Only his says, "Free pass for making comments that are incoherent and moronic."

Pathetic.

Covering songs

I have been reminded of a truism I have held for a while...artists covering songs of other artists...totally stinks.

Even when it has been my fave artist @ a live concert...I cannot stand it.

I hereby submit a solid 90-95% of covered songs end up screwing up the song in a bad way.

I could be wrong, but I hyighly doubt it.

A love/hate relationship is ending

Well, the Dubya Dumbass Administration may have dun itself a doozy yet again! First, we leave Osama in Afghanistan. Then, we pursue a ridiculous "war" in Iraq. We turn away from Iran who proceeds to go ape-shit. Then they ignore Russian and not worry about Putin who becomes the colossal jackass anyone with a brain knew he was (I say again, once a KGB member, always a KGB member even when it no long exists *wink, wink*).

Now comes word that Musharraf has had it. He's quitting. I don't blame the man, he was in a tough, tough position. Hounded by the West to allow us to hunt Osama, hounded by his former friends and party allies to take a hard line against the U.S., he literally was in a vice.

Frankly, I never cared much for Musharraf, but I understood his problem and his mistrust of the Dubya Stupidocracy...Musharraf was smart enough to know that even if he did exactly what the Administration and others in the "coalition" wanted, he would be left for dead (see Georgia getting pummeled unnecessarily by Russia).

Musharraf didn't have the balls to do what the late Muhammad Anwar Al Sadat did following the Camp David Accord of 1978: Resulting in The Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty, and Sadat's assassination in October of 1981 by angry Islamic groups who despised him for signing the treaty. So much so, Egypt was expelled from the Arab League. Sadat had his flaws, for sure, but at the end of the day he saw the larger perspective...he was able to see the benefits of such a move in the long run for his nation, and he made the move to what he must have known, would be his detriment.

Musharraf could have been a larger-than-life figure in history if he had the cojones to go against his people and allow Osama to be detained. Moreover, allowed the West to take action in his country against the people we have been fighting.

We (loved) needed him for some access, but we also hated him because he wouldn't let us go all in. Now, he will be gone and he will no doubt about it, be replaced by a someone who will ultimately take a much harder line against the US and not be willing to work with us when the next President gets elected.

It says in the NY Times story he wants to stay in Afghanistan, but I would urge him, for his safety, to move elsewhere. No way he has a good life there, assuming he doesn't get shot. Like Sadat, Musharraf knows after several attempts on his life, he is a target. I believe he will remain a symbolic target for those very same groups, and he likely won't have nearly the protection he has now...he will surely be shot, and perhaps mortally wounded.

Veep Rumorations

Well, according to the latest from the MSNBC political unit, the tea leaves have been read. With former Gov. Mark Warner (D-Virginia, who is also running for the Senate this year) getting the keynote speaking slot at the DNC, they argue (logically) that Gov. Tim Kaine (D-Virginia) would not be giving the VP acceptance speech the next night.

They postulate, and it would make sense to me, to believe that you don't put two people from the same state in prime time speaking slots for network television, much less on back-to-back nights. Ergo, that leaves two other possible choices for the Dem VP slot.

It now appears for sure, as we all figured, Hill isn't being seriously considered and her name will now, through a deal reported by ABC News, will be put into the nomination for Presidential candidacy as a formality. And Edwards is CLEARLY toasted, so he's out as well.

Thus, the two left over possibilities?: Senators Biden (D-Conn) and Bayh (D-Ind).

Neither excite me for reasons argued previously on this blog. However, despite Biden's penchant for having a mouth that runs into problems, I'd take him over Bayh; Hands down any day of the week and twice on Sundays over Bayh.

Bayh is an Indiana Democrat, and a boring stiff piece of shit at that (and while Gore had a brain back in 1992, Bayh has none). Being an Indiana Democrat means, he's essentially a Republican, especially when looking at his Senate voting record. With recent polls showing McCain basically has that state locked up 60%-40%, Bayh doesn't offer any serious possibility of taking Indiana with him in the Selectoral College.

If we are going to send Obama up for 8 years of Liberal bliss, I don't want that to potentially be followed by a Democrat in Republican clothing.

Other names have been floating around, but none as frequent as these two within recent weeks, so this may be the choice Obama is contemplating on his vacation this week.

So, if I MUST chose between those two, it's Biden all the way.

Ticketmaster: The AntiChrist

Anyone who knows anything about entertainment events (eg: sports, concerts), knows that Ticketmaster is the "motherfucking AntiChrist" (to paraphrase Paul Giamatti's character in "Private Parts").

I look forward to the day when the good people at Brown Paper Tickets wedge their way into Ticketmaster's territory and kicks the shit out of those Ticketmaster a-holes.

If you are a small organization, and are in need to sell event tickets, look to this company as a more cost-friendly, customer-friendly alternative to those a-holes.

A Simple Rant

If you drag your ass home, proceed to ask me if I want to hear a "funny story" and I say "No."...then don't get pissy mother-fucker!

You asked a question, I answered. Clearly, next time you shouldn't ask. Not everyone likes to hear your stupid stories all the fucking time. Geez!

Autism Spectrum Disorder & the Public

An interesting article popped up on MSNBC.com today about Autism.

Adam Race, a teen who weighs over 200 pounds, was recently banned from his families' church (I cannot pass at taking a free jab at those damned Christians who continue to not practice what they preach). A judge upheld the ban on Adam, citing the Priest's claims of some behaviors that would most people would consider to be very disruptive.

I'm not here to argue Adam should be allowed back in the church; His mother, Carol, says the claims were exaggerated, but who knows really?

I will, however, continue to be amazed by the sheer stupidity of parents in this country. There are clearly some Autistic students who should NOT be taken into general public areas by the parents, but there are some who can handle such things.

If the claims were true about the peeing his pants, I can see the church's case. However, kicking a student out of church because he occasionally makes loud noises and may bolt for the doors as soon as church is over...these are lame excuses. It's called compassion you Christian asshats!! It must have been widely known within the church that Adam had some problems, and people who attend said church would know to ignore his flare-ups when they occurred. Moreover, they could have dismissed church for Adam and his family first before everyone else, that way he didn't "run people over."

If his mother/family didn't let the church know about Adam's diagnosis, then they made a serious mistake. Parents with children identified with Autism MUST take some responsibility here both for their children, and for the public to be aware.

Finally, as noted earlier in this post, there are some students who are so afflicted with the disorder that they become untenable to take into public (I worked with a little girl who I would never take into public without some strong adult reinforcements). But, the comments of Jason Goldtrap, who has a brother identified with Autism, is a total duchebag.

He's right that there is a place for institutional supports/centers, but when he talks about his brother who seems reasonably self-sufficient and able to identify that he wants to stay out and about...there's a disconnect in his brain where I don't think he "gets" the difference between functional Autism and non-functional Autism (not real words, but my made up type of diagnosis). Also, it is clear that some changes need to be made when it concerns Goldtrap's older nephew (who he says is 21), saying that there are times the police need to be called because he gets so violent.

This is another facet of how the health care insurance and general industry are screwing Americans. There should be some insurance funding there to get this 21 year old some help.

Bottom Line: As always, parents need to have some freaking discretion and take some responsibility for the health and well-being of their children. Socialization is an important goal for Autistic students, but not when it becomes violent and overly disruptive.

Unity Partnership

I love Englanders, and would adore making a pilgrimage to the UK at some point. They are so sexually-less-repressed.

This is the type of "unity" I can get behind. These people shouldn't be punished, they should be given two days off though to have some romping in an undisclosed location.

This just in....(part deux)

(It's "part deux" because I'd already used the title "This just in...")

Per Olbermann & Countdown and this ABC News article, Michael Mukasey, the Attorney General of the United States of America uttered this doozy today: "But not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime..."

According to dictionary.com the first definition of a crime is?: "an action or an instance of negligence that is deemed injurious to the public welfare or morals or to the interests of the state and that is legally prohibited."

So, not every violation of a law...is a crime eh? WOW! Who knew??? I feel like stealing a car and using that argument in court. I'm sure that'll go over well.

I would agree not every crime deserves to be punished (see post I have scheduled for later), they call that prosecutorial discretion, but if you violate A law, it is indeed A crime. Period.

Very farking odd.

Children & Allergies

As a teacher and a professional in the education field I have run into students who have the so-called "peanut allergy."

My annoyance at stupid parents, who I believe have sparked such allergies through insane germ-o-phobia when their kids were babies, is paramount.

As i may have noted before on this blog, I used to play outside rigorously as a kid, we had a dog, my babysitter had a big German Shepard with long dog hair, and I never had problems with allergies. Once the school work got so heavy, and once I started watching too much of the tele, the "allergies" began to emerge.

I believe most allergies are a result of hyper-cleaning our students' and childrens' environments. I have personally known teachers who have a significant problem/phobia with germs and they are psychotic.

I do not support peanut bans in schools, and I agree with The Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network, having bans on peanuts in schools or even individual rooms is the wrong approach. It doesn't teach these students how to react when they enter the "real world" (granted it will be a while before my kiddos get there).

What we should be doing instead is to teach our children self-advocacy and self-awareness that they need to take control of their own health concern. As a kid, I had other concerns that I was aware of and was a self-advocate for, as my parents taught me to be. If I needed something, I spoke up and said so.

We cannot be putting these children into what is tantamount to a freaking bubble. There is no realistic way to protect ALL kids from ALL things harmful, it's part of learning, and it's part of life.

Oh goodness....the pain!!!

Just started watching Countdown w/ Olbermann and I am in serious physical and emotional pain after finding out I actually agree with Neo-Con William Kristol on ANY issue....serious pain and emotional torture!!! The horror!

In today's NY Times Op-Ed page, Kristol writes: "But Georgia, a nation of about 4.6 million, has had the third-largest military presence — about 2,000 troops — fighting along with U.S. soldiers and marines in Iraq. For this reason alone, we owe Georgia a serious effort to defend its sovereignty. Surely we cannot simply stand by as an autocratic aggressor gobbles up part of — and perhaps destabilizes all of — a friendly democratic nation that we were sponsoring for NATO membership a few months ago."

Essentially what I argued less than 18 hours ago!!! Painful, indeed!

A crushing blow to my liberal ego...DOH!!!

Saving some cash

Eating out at a good restaurant is an expensive endeavor. No, no, no...I mean really eating out; Not "fast food."

To be considered eating out, you must:

1. Be sitting at a table, or a bar.
2. Have a waiter/waitress and/or bartender.
3. You must order some type of entree, or at least two appetizers, or an appetizer and dessert (okay, this is fairly lax, but you get the jest).
4. You must need to leave a tip, barring ridiculously bad service (or no service).

I was highly perturbed when I ordered my food at a fantastic establishment recently and was given this plate:



I wonder how much money is literally wasted each year on parsley. Seriously. Take a freaking penny off the cost of my meal, take the parsley and shove it up your keister!

Your damn parsley is in my way! Not to mention the lemon. Ask if I want a lemon, don't make assume your going to give me a useless lemon is invariably wasted, and I dislike wasting food.

Why not save the growing fields and use them for something more productive than freakin' parsley? We need natural resources to grow REAL food people!

Ehhhhhh????

What EXACTLY is the Resident in Chief doing here?

I'm just sayin'...I'd "hit" it.

Irony and gas

Is it just me that the price of oil appears to be headed south AGAIN...during the fall of a serious election year...and I can't help but shake my head @ stupid Americans.

Sickening...ugh!

Bush will fail this test too...AGAIN!

As Russian forces obliterate the independent state of Georgia, they wonder where the West is at.

Ironically, Georgia was one of the real members of the "Coalition to Liberate Iraq," being the country to come in 3rd place when providing resources when the US Government called.

So, guess what? Now it's our turn to help them. I predict Dubya will wave buh-bye to the Georgians, and watch them go down in flames...literally. I'd hate to get into a pissing match with Russia (another "Cold War"), but we should help these people with whatever we can, as soon as we can.

McCain-Lieberfreak (part duex)

Exactly 8 days ago, this blogger laughed audibly out loud...okay, it was hysterically out loud...when Lieberfuck could not stop giving McCain oral pleasure in numerous television appearances.

It has recently been "leaked" or possibly just discussed on Drudge that McCain may actually have Lieberfuck on his VP short-list.

Considering my scoffing of the Jew-bag himself, I never thought much of it. However, it is at this early hour of the morning (or late hour really of Sunday) that this thought occurred to me:

McCain choosing Lieberfuck would be him essentially choosing a Democrat. Although Jew-bag is technically an "Independent" now, he would appear as an "Independent" when people entered the ballot box in 90-some-odd days. It would look good, and it would play to McCain's "maverick" image and working across the aisle rhetoric.

Moreover, I wonder how many voters would distantly recall that the Jew-bag, just eight years ago, was on the Democratic (Gore) ticket and technically was elected VP. If they remembered this, it could change this race. Not to mention the possible Jew votes Lieberman would pluck away from Obama.

Certainly, I despise the Jew-bag. But, looking at the pure analytical politics of it, it would be a smart move. It would impress more so than the choice of the CLEARLY phony Mitt Romney, and the Jew-bag would offer name recognition. Not only that, Jew-bag is a "safe" choice...much more so than the popular Sen. Biden pick that Obama seems to be leaning towards.

Sen. Biden's great, but as noted before, he's got a big, lose, cannon for a mouth. He's a soundbite slip waiting to happen.

Content Rules & TCOMM Act of '96

Perhaps the biggest disappointment for me during the Clinton Administration (beyond “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”) was the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCOMM) that he passed. I have a feeling that, in retrospect, he even may regret this decision now, though that is pure speculation on my part given that Bill came in being a free-trade kinda guy.

The TCOMM was a horrific piece of legislation that essentially deregulated the entertainment industry. Business “advocates” (*cough* lobbyists) argued that this would be good for consumers. They argued the same lame arguments they always throw out: Increased competition, lower prices, better customer service, etc.

And what have US consumers gotten the past dozen years since the inception of this albatross? Let’s see:

1. The small baby bells and other small companies that were doing great work were swallowed up by the big boys and assimilated. Eliminating any real sense of competition.

2. Shittier customer service than we could have possibly imagined from BOTH the cable and phone companies.

3. Prices for basic services have gone through the roof (eg: I had Comcast Cable for one calendar year, for the 2004 Presidential Election (I’m such a political-whore I HAD to have cable). In the span of that one year my bill started at $38-39 per month and when I canceled it was at $52 per month).

4. And until recently, shittier television programming, and shitty movies choices.

Lotta shit there. The fallacy of the free market system is that when the big boys eat the young, it allows the big players to essentially collude and set the market price and quality of customer service, and why would they set prices lower and offer good customer service when the only other choice is the same crap with a different brand name? There’s no incentive to give customers truly good service at a REASONABLE price.

However, this blogger new the time would come: The britches a given company chooses to inhabit by taking over and/or merging with another Goliath company…the shit starts a runnin’ o’er. Finally, it appears in some areas of the telecommunications/entertainment industry, the britches have proven too big to fit all the shit in them.

Vertical Integration refers to the idea that a business (eg: General Electric, or Time Warner/AOL) has the ability to develop, produce, and then distribute its product all in house within one giant over-reaching company. Soon after TCOMM, this became the industry model to maximize profits because you don’t need to outsource any part of your business, thus keeping all profit. Other examples would be the Oil Companies and American Apparel who tightly controls their product from the shirt making, to the designs, to the sale of the apparel.

Time Warner (TW) liked this idea, as did other giant conglomerates back in the late 90's. And they attempted to develop, produce, and then distribute their own content, via in-house offerings like MTV, Warner Bros., TNT, and even AOL through internet-based content, etc. However, as they did this, they along with other companies found it untenable to seriously put good content forth because of the sheer bureaucracy and red tape within their own companies…and they have suffered.

Great article in this Sunday Times by Tim Arango looking at how TW’s new CEO, Mr. Jeff Bewkes, has begun to rehab the company and sell off portions that he found too much of a pain in the ass to run and do it well. He’s looking to sell off or share a minor partnership share in AOL with another company.

More telling is the interesting note on GE and how after the Olympics, they may be looking to sell off parts of their conglomeration. Unfortunately, I am betting that these companies will simply trade problems, as Bewkes and TW may be looking to buy whatever GE may offer…but, at least this may be a demonstration of the industry finally "getting it" and moving in right direction.

I am, sad but true, a brand guy. In general, I love brands. I have seen improvement in the writing and content of television on cable because of some of the shifting focus on establishing great content. These companies may finally be realizing they cannot rely on their own writers, and having diversity within writing and producing leads to better content, a better product, and ultimately, happier consumers who WILL buy their content if they get their act together.

As the saying goes: “Baby steps, baby steps.” Let’s hope more CEO’s in the industry see the message: Pay writers and pour money into diverse content. As I’ve argued before, it’s not big name actors/actresses that matter in the ultimate success of a film, it’s great writing. As the writers of “My Big, Fat Greek Wedding,” and more recently, “Juno” can attest. As they were two "sleeper" movies that became blockbusters due to word of mouth about the great movie (the great writing).

Moreover, ask HBO and Showtime how they became as big as they are today. It wasn’t because HBO aired old movies, and it wasn’t because Showtime aired soft-core porn every Saturday night…it is because they spent money on finding/developing shows that brought great writing, and then great actors to the forefront.

Brian Giles - Sissy at large

Brian Giles is a 37 year old Major League Baseball (MLB) player who has spent the majority of his good MLB career (not Hall of Fame career, but good) in the National League between two shitty, shitty teams. From 1998-2003, he played for the shitty Pittsburgh Pirates, and from 2003-til present he has played for the largely shitty San Diego Padres.

In his 10+ major league career with these two powerhouses of pitifulness, he has NEVER played in the playoffs.

And when he had the opportunity to come to a real contending MLB team, my Boston Red Sox, he pussied out and nixed the deal through his no-trade clause. Any player who has played for 5 years with any club is, per the Major League Baseball Player's Union Contract with MLB, is given the right to stop any trade he wishes not to happen.

So, Giles nixed this trade to Boston, showing he is a complete sissy-boy who wants no part of real competition. You could have come to a contender Giles, hope you continue enjoying your career in shitville.

What a mook.

To paraphrase the Soup Nazi, "NO RING FOR YOU!"

So Long Bernie

Just learned comedian Bernie Mac passed away earlier today, he was 50, funny, and will be missed.

Putin's soul

This non-intrepid, intrepid blogger is curious.

7 years ago or so when Dubya met Putin and "looked into his soul," I wonder if he saw tanks invading Georgia during the start of the freaking Olympics 7 years later?

I'm just sayin...

Update 8/10/2008: Per MSNBC...brilliant. Ugh!

Onto stage 2? of grief

After quickly digesting the news of the day about my boy Edwards (the ONLY candidate I've given money too), I moved onto Stage 2 of the grieving process: Anger.

Full-boar rage has set in. Rage at Edwards to knowingly ran for President, knowing he had fucked another woman, and SERIOUSLY putting the party in danger, perilous danger if in fact he had become the nominee.

Worse yet, he succeeded enough in this the primaries to have possibly determined the outcome of the race. He stayed in the race for quite a while drawing votes from Hillary (and some for Obama, but he largely stole from Hill's base) and allowing Obama to look formidable.

But, it not just this rage, it is also a larger rage. He has damaged the brand of the Democrat, JUST when we have been resurrected due to the complete ineptitude of the Dumbass Administration. This will continue to stain the Democratic party and make the people herein irrelevant.

Why? The MSM, who stayed away from this story, and who ran with the Vitter & Craig story and eventually dropped after the humor value was gone, will now turn to this story and they will hammer it for two reasons:

1. The liberal-leaning MSM has this sickness where they put the Democrat up on the pedestal and they continually do not hold both parties' members' to the same ethical standards because they believe and they have a silent image of what the Democrat should look like. And when the Democrat doesn't, they will punish him.

2. The MSM is hyper-sensitive to appear not liberal, thus they will go waaaay out of the norm to hammer this to assuage any attacks that may come their way bitching that they didn't jump on the story fast enough.

This story could have far-reaching damaging effects in the immediate future prospects of the party. Whereas Craig and Vitter was laughed off and laughed at (they have largely been able to skate away and maintain their balance), this story will be cited by the moralists in the Republican party to beat Democrats over the proverbial head with the bible-thumpers.

This hurts in far-reaching ways, who knows how long. I am DISAPPOINTED in Edwards, but now I am more mad that he possibly could have caused such damage in the future.

Total Disappointment

I was wondering why the MSM hadn't jumped the Enquier story on the now true Edward's story.

I think while I wrote at the time I wouldn't be surprised...I am still stunned this broke today.

I loved his rhetoric, loved his message. I am supremely disappointed at this relevation. I don't much care about infedelity. But, to have this come now damages the party. Let's home this has a single weekend newcycle and it is over.

Apparently they met in 2006 in NYC, so if Kerry had pulleed it out in '04, this probably wouldn't have happened.

No matter though, this one hurts...really hurts.

Psssst...

I am currently standing in a church, and I feel dirty. I will need a shower after leaving such a place of dishonor and filth.

Paris' Retort

After McCain and his campaign put out a sleazy attack ad on Obama saying he was basically the equivalent of Paris Hilton. a celebrity in name only Hilton has her own comeback that is possibly completely scripted, but it's hilarious and brilliant...

I was rolling off my chair!!!!

Just saw it on Countdown w/ Olbermann...go on YouTube and look this ad up yo! That's hysterical!

(I'll post link if I find it.)

Edit @1:38am Wed the 6th: It's not YouTube, but here's the ad.

An Obama WTF? Moment

This blogger has been busy: first on a fantastic vacation with my people, then this little paper thing I bitched about 2 days ago...HOWEVER...

I have hit a WTF???!!!????!!!! moment with the presumptive Democrat nominee.

A week ago I believe, I read some headline about Obama being "open" to the offshore drilling...uhhh, 'cuse me?

"Open" to it? What the fuck is that????

I'm smelling a patented Democrat waffle the likes of Kerry in 2004.

Drilling offshore shouldn't be on the bleeping table. PERIOD.

While perhaps trying to "court" those dumbass white males voters with KKK-reptilian minds...he is destroying his base, and WORSE Obama looks like a TOTAL pussy on this and it makes him look feeble and weak in the "heartland" voters minds.

Any longtime readers of mine, or those who know who I am, I generally prefer the Bill Clinton method of triangulation.

However, that's when the election is razor thin. By all estimates, this SHOULD be a cakewalk for Obama.

When ahead by as much as Obama should and WOULD be...you don't give up policy ground, especially when you are correct and the argument for your decision is so blatantly clear.

I understand why Obama's advisors may have let this out, even if they have no intention of really going along with the policy. But, with those white males we have learned that they respect your decision when you at least claim it's because you base it on a principle...whether it really is a principle or not (*cough* Dubya).

Whites males were sold that principle shit, at they at it up with nar a doubt.

Stick to this principle Obama, you look better and are better when you do so.

Example of jeans being hot on your average American female

Taken juuuust after 10am this morning. Random girl, random street.

Gotta love her

As I still sit here writing my report (*mutters* damnit) I have the tv on mute and I initially tuned it to CBS for 60 Minutes, as always. Now airing is that essentially-cheap replacement of $25,000 pyramid with "Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeg."

Betty White, who is like 1000 years old, is still getting it done. She's as sharp as ever. That's some tough word-association for an old lady, and for her to be able to keep up with that shit is very impressive. You go girl!

McCain-Lieberfreak

Clearly, this MUST be true...John McCain and Joseph Lieberman are having some serious anal fucking sessions. Lieberman cannot stop giving McCain an oral rim job when his fat face is on the tele.

I want some Senator to recuse himself from Obama, go on Meet the Press with Lieberman and turn to him at some point and flat out ask him: "So Joe, how's the sex with you're wife, because you are clearly fucking McCain at least three times weekly in the anus?"

I am dead serious, OY.

A baseball told ya so!

As I noted waaaaay back in April, I completely disagreed with the decision to make Joba Chamberlain the set-up man to the HOF (Hall of Famer) Mariano Rivera on the MFY (Mother Fuckin' Yankees). I respect the heck out of their General Manager, Brian Cashman, but I felt this was a mistake at the time.

After a while, injuries piled up and Joba had to be moved into the starting rotation as I thought he should have been.

I note this is a small sample size, but I still think it is instructive to give a glimpse of how good Joba has been and how good he could be in the starting pitching role:

In his first 10 starts in MLB, Chamberlain, who also struck out a season high-tying nine, improved to 2-1 with a 2.30 ERA.

There are missing pieces here that I could not find in a simple search, considering I am busy at the moment. I'd like to see how many of those 10 are Quality Starts (QS - defined by many as a start where the starting pitcher goes 6 or more innings and allows three or fewer runs). The phenomenon of the QS as a stat has been a relatively recent invention and is somewhat controversial stat for some. I'd like to know Joba's WHIP, which is defined by walks+hits per innings pitched (anything under 1.00 is considered good). It also doesn't account for errors in the field that can limit his earned run total and thus, ERA.

But no matter what is missing from the stat line, the 2.30 ERA is impressive. The W-L record is useless because we don't know how much run support he got in those 10 starts. For example, in his 10th start he beat my Sox 1-0, which counted as a win for him. But, his 1 loss could have been a 2-1 game, where he pitched well. From my memory, I think the MFY had been struggling offensively for a period like my Sox have, and this could be the reason for only 3 W-L decisions in 10 total starts.

No matter, I think Joba has proved he can be a darn good starting pitcher who could develop into a dominant pitcher if he keeps working at his craft. This, all despite the season where his father collapsed due to a heart problem and died. He's had an emotional year so far, but he appears to be doing well and he's only 22 years old.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong....wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong

(Ed. Note: Title is supposed to be a simulation of the Seinfeld episode where Jerry sings it).

Perhaps it's my nasty mood that I unleash this pseudo-whopper (yes, that's 2x in one day for that word):

But, I can honestly say I've held this opinion for years. It is just when these things happen in the current news cycle, it makes me remember my position...so this perhaps, could be harsh...yyyyyyyeah...perhaps.

Is it wrong of me to not really give two whits about those dumb-ass hikers who are missing on "K2"? Is it wrong for me to be happy they have YET to find that nitwit Steve Fosset dead or alive?

I'm sorry, but we have a lot of resources here in this country. We have a lot of people who get shitty pay to protect people from real danger...like fires, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, etc.

No hiker busting his or her ass up "K2" or some other mountain (*cough* Everest) should expect jack-squat to come looking for their sorry ass when they get "lost!"

YOU WENT UP A FREAKING MOUNTAIN YOU A-HOLE! People who get shitty pay, should NOT be risking their lives because you felt the need to show the world (ahem...Fosset) or yourself how big your proverbial balls are.

You are a complete jackass for putting people in such positions of danger just to come find your ass. You deserved to die. Welcome to Darwinian ethic mo-fo's.

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!

A rant, to be sure:

I am currently working on a research proposal that asks me to come up with at least a dozen research articles on my topic. I am with a university, so I have full access to some of the premier journals in the country, including the vast ERIC database.

However, at this juncture, I am fuming like Dick Cheney after being told he cannot invade Iran.

As a student at University, I must say I should be given free access to any fucking journal I require to do my research. I have found an crap-load of potentially good material, but what do I run into?...oh, yeah...sorry...this is only available via an abstract.

A abstract? Why not pick you nose, and flick the big whopper in my face!? What the fuck good is an abstract when dealing with a University professor?????

As a student I should be able to get any article from any professional organization for free. Period. Not pay $32 for some research from the organization's website. This is total horse-pucky. It's not not like the research is from even 2005...it's old enough it should be online.

I did not and will not pay for this research and I am fed up. I am turning in what I have and shit be damned. I'm a jackass enough to include a list of things I could only get abstracts of just to show I have a good 20 sources I COULD HAVE GOTTEN.

Fuck me.

Doors

Why oh why must establishments, in some cases, feel the need to put a handle on a big door, which makes it appear as a pull when you in fact must push?

Bizarre and annoying.

Manny and the Sox

Last afternoon at 4pm EST, the MLB trade deadline came, and a big name went buh-bye.

As I noted back in June, Manny needed to go because of the inexcusable push of the 66 year old traveling secretary of the Sox.

Since that time, the wheels had come off this bum. Back in 2004, the Sox traded/dumped Nomar Garciaparra after he became a problem and he refused to play during a Yankees' series that year. Manny refused to play against the Yankees, this last series, claiming he was having that problem with his knee again.

The Sox called his bluff, and made him go for an MRI on both knees, and they showed no damage. Manny slowly ran to home, when he could have scored this past week. He gave management and the principal owner John Henry crap in the media, after he has been paid a whopping $160+ million over the course of 8 years he spent here in Boston. His teammates had to talk him onto the team charter (plane) after they played the series against the Angels in LA/Anaheim...showing Manny had been quitting on his team.

I was sick of him last year, but was willing to live with it. But after the most recent problems, it was sickening. If we don't win the World Series, or even go far into the playoffs because of this move, I am okay with it.

The Sox gave up a bit much just to get rid of this asshat, but it's addition by subtraction as it was when they got rid of the problem that was Nomar and they went onto win their first championship in 86 years.

By all accounts, from experts across the nation, it has been understood for at least the last decade: Manny is one of the best right-handed hitters of our generation. His numbers are damn good, sickeningly good.

But, only one could imagine what they would be if he was as fully motivated as he could be all season. When Manny was motivated, as he was early in the season, he becomes a gigantic monster at the plate that can literally hit anything. But, his lack of effort in recent years has caused his performance to degrade to the point that his numbers for the past 3 years are strikingly similar to Jason Bay (the player he was traded for at over half the price per year). Bay is a nice player, but his numbers should be nowhere close to Manny.

This fact alone is damning in Manny's overall attitude recently, and I am glad he's gone. Good riddance Manny, and don't let the door smack you up the backside of your head as you leave. Go "F" yourself.

Late Edit (per the Boston Globe): A source from the Boston Red Sox said, "If the Sox dropped the option years on his contract - which they had agreed to do if they traded him - Boras said Ramírez would not be a problem the rest of the season. ...

Ramírez's pledge of good behavior only served as a tacit admission that his disruptive conduct of the last couple of weeks had been calculated, and they had had good cause to suspect more was in the offing if they did not trade him. The Sox told him thanks but no thanks, what was done was done, and pack plenty of sunscreen." -- 8.2.08, Gordon Edes, Boston Globe