Soooo bad, it hurts

I ran across this while browsing YouTube this morning - it's an audition for Stanley Kubrick's classic Vietnam film Full Metal Jacket.

Wow, how did Brian Atene (the guy in this video) NOT get the part?

Thank God he didn't, or we would have been deprived of a very well done movie about Vietnam if this guy would have been in it.

As it is now, I rate Full Metal Jacket right behind Platoon as the best Vietnam movie to date.

I have to say this about Atene, though - he gives hope to horrific actors everywhere, because just about anyone could make a better audition tape than this one.

Surprisingly, when this first hit the Internet, Atene was contacted, and he's no longer acting.

Aren't we missing out on a wonderful talent?

New dollah makes me hollah

So, the U.S. Mint is taking yet another run at the dollar coin. This time, they will retain their gold color, but in lieu of the Sacagawea Dollar, now we are getting Presidential Gold Coins.

Bravo!

I love the idea of a dollar coin. The failures at past attempts to have a successfully circulating dollar coin are well documented, but I believe the failure of the Sacagawea coin is primarily because the U.S. Government refuses to take the $1 bill out of circulation, and also because many vending machines, parking meters, etc. aren't equipped to take the coins.

We aren't going to see the dollar bill disappear any time soon, but at least this time around, it looks as if vending machines are finally beginning to change; many are being modified to accept the new coins, and most new machines that are built will accept the coins. Cool.

And I love the idea that the mint is putting presidents on the back of dollars, similar to the State Quarter Program that was begun in 1999, which proved to be successful and well received.


I love the back of the new coin - the Statue of Liberty is depicted, and from a neat angle.

Another cool new feature - the coin's edge. The phrases we are used to, "In God We Trust," and "E Pluribus Unum," along with the year of issue, are all on the coin's outer rim, instead of on its flat surface.

I think this new dollar coin has the best chance yet for a successful U.S. dollar coin. Mint officials certainly are optimistic, sounding the right themes when the coin was introduced.

"We see this as offering consumers choice," said Becky Bailey of the Mint's public affairs office. "In some situations the dollar bill works better, and in some situations coins work better. With these coins, it's just a wonderful history lesson."

"The new presidential $1 coins are an educational way to learn about former presidents," Edmund C. Moy, the director of the U.S. Mint, said at the coin's introduction to the press. "We hope students will take to them as they did with the state coins."

Presidents who served two consecutive terms will get a single coin, but Grover Cleveland will be honored twice because his terms were separated by Benjamin Harrison's administration. The schedule for release of the coins goes to 2016, when the Richard M. Nixon coin will be rolled out. If the mint had any balls, they would depict him flashing his victory salute as he boarded Marine One after his resignation. Hey, one can always wish, right? I'm just kidding, though. By all accounts, the program is being administered in a non-political way, as it should be.

A quick footnote to my thoughts on coins. I'm glad that by law, presidents can't be honored until a certain time after their deaths. I not so fondly remember a movement by Republicans to replace FDR on the dime with Ronald Reagan shortly after the latter's death. Thankfully, his widow, Nancy Reagan, proved to be the voice of reason, saying she didn't support such a move so soon after his death. And how symbolic would that have been? "FDR bumped by Reagan" - Imagine those headlines. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell may well have been moved to kiss each other.

Vegas here we come!

I'm sooo far behind on blogging - I've got about a million things I want to write about, but most of it will have to wait until this weekend, when I will most definitely catch up. Anyway, just a few quick posts this morning.

I'm pretty excited to say that we are going to Vegas at the end of January; it will be my first trip to Las Vegas. I'm going to be speaking at the Far West Popular Culture & American Culture Association Conference the weekend of January 26-28.

In case you're curious, here's what I'll be speaking about:

Title: American Idle: How Pop Culture Pap is Hindering Real Debate in
U.S. Elections

Abstract: National U.S. elections are increasingly driven by pop culture, specifically reality shows. Election coverage, as well as campaign ads, are rife with examples of reality TV's influence on American political discourse. Gone are the days when the issues mattered most; contemporary elections are now dominated by superficial non sequiturs. This tilt toward the mundane is a decades-long movement, but reality television and pop culture have conspired to dramatically increase this troubling trend.

**
It will also be my first time speaking at a conference, so I'm pretty excited about that, too. I'm really look forward to writing my paper, too; anyone who spends five minutes on this blog knows how passionate and driven I am about politics.

We are also going to wedge in some time for a short trip to the Grand Canyon and Hoover Dam. I've never been to either one, and neither has Vandra.

So, this promises to be a pretty big trip. Oh, and you know that I'll be sharing lots and lots of pictures on here when we get back.

Psst - while I'm there, I'm going to be putting a few greenbacks down on the Cowboys winning the Super Bowl (if they are still in it by then!) and the Oilers winning the Stanley Cup. Hey, why not? I think both teams have a shot.

More great political cartoons

It's been a little while, I but I wanted to bring you some terrific political cartoons from Newsweek Magazine over the last three weeks. I know I've said this before, but there's nothing like a powerful, brutal political cartoon - they can say so much with so little.

I love this one - it will be very interesting to see how the press treats Rudy if he decides to run. He doesn't exactly have a squeaky clean image. Let me guess - his past will be irrelevant, much like Kerry's and Clinton's was, right?

More on Michael Richard's racial rant in a bit. What a dope.

I loved this one! Rupert Murdoch - purveyor of media pollution.

So long, Rummy - America will miss you as Defense Secretary about as much as it missed Robert McNamara.

Trent's back, and he's a BIIIG fan of Karl Rove and the White House. That might be upsetting to some, but not to me.

Gold.

One of the most memorable lines of the Bush Presidency will live on, for decades to come, I'm afraid. Makes "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky" seem insignificant and irrelevant, doesn't it?

Coming Soon: A Fox "Daily Show"?

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Considering that, Jon Stewart must be having a pretty good month, as well as Comedy Central.

The Hollywood Reporter has revealed that Fox News is considering airing a show as a response of sorts to Comedy Central's wildly successful Daily Show with Jon Stewart. The show, dubbed This Just In is set to air in January as a two episode pilot. TJI, a half-hour show, will reportedly be executive produced by 24's Joel Surnow and Manny Cota and creator Ned Rice, who previously wrote for Politically Incorrect.

I can't WAIT to watch this show. Imagine how funny Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, Bernie Goldberg, Jerry Falwell, Sean Insannity, Michael Savage, etc. will be. Yea, those intolerants are a barrel of laughs.

I predict it will fall flat on its face, but I hope it won't. Nothing makes a show better than competition - so maybe it will make The Daily Show even better. Well, come to think of it, This Just In won't really be competing with TDS. Watching humorless right wingers trying to be funny could be amusing though.

Couldn't it?

Lucent - what might have been...

The other day I read that President Bush has ok'd the proposed merger of Lucent Technologies with French telecom giant Alcatel. The new company will be led by Pat Russo, Lucent's CEO, and will be dubbed Alcatel Lucent. (Will Republicans move to ban the company's products, vis a vis Freedom Fries?) Bush had to approve the merger because of concerns about patents; Lucent's crown jewel is Bell Labs - one of the premier R&D organizations in the world. Many were concerned about the possible loss of technology and even military secrets. Evidently, there will a special panel set up to deal with any transfer of potentially sensitive secrets and technology.

I only bring this up because it brings back many memories for me. It seems like a million years ago that I began working for Lucent, in June '00. The future looked so bright, for me (in the corporate world) and also for the company. I was there exactly five weeks, and Lucent announced it would spin off its Microelectronics Group to form Agere Systems. Great, I thought - the ink isn't even dry on my Lucent business cards and now I'm working for... Well, it took a while to find out that our company would be named Agere Systems, but it might as well been named Anchor Systems, because that's exactly the direction the company went - to the bottom.

The company promptly went from about 19,000 employees to its current level of about 6,500. I was one of the employees involved in the nasty downsizing.

Anyway, just seeing the Lucent "Innovation Ring" in the news always brings back mixed emotions. I bear no ill will toward the company (after all, it helped me get my master's degree), but I still can't help think what might have been had the tech bubble not burst at the end of the 1990s.

However, in the end, I don't miss the corporate world and all the bullshit that goes with it - the politics, the backstabbing, infighting, CYA mentality, heartless and gutless layoffs, and bottom lines meaning more than employees' lives.

Blowhard Bill contradicts himself, again

Check out this little nugget of wisdom from Bill O'Lielly the other day on his radio show (courtesy of GamePolitics.com):

I don’t own an iPod. I would never wear an iPod… If this is your primary focus in life - the machines… it’s going to have a staggeringly negative effect, all of this, for America… did you ever talk to these computer geeks? I mean, can you carry on a conversation with them? …I really fear for the United States because, believe me, the jihadists? They’re not playing the video games. They’re killing real people over there.

After reading this, I went to O'Lielly's Website to check out the comedy. It took me all of 30 seconds to find a premium membership that any empty-headed conservative can subscribe to, which includes a podcast!

I'm wondering just how stupid O'Lielly thinks his listeners are? Must be pretty stupid, probably about as stupid as Ann Coulter thinks her readers are. They both should join forces and use the motto We decide, you just watch and read. And don't forget to listen to our podcasts on your demonic iPod.

I poked around his online store and couldn't help clownin' on it. Not only does O'Lielly think his readers and listeners are dumb, but he must think they're rich. Check this out...

Now you, too, can be a culture warrior, for $14.95. Fifteen bucks (+ shipping) for a stupid coffee mug? Hey Billy, it's bad enough you lie, distort, sexually harrass and intimidate (or at least try to), but you're now adding robbery to your dossier? Uh oh, wait - is Fox Security going to be knocking on my door? I'm sorry, Bill - I didn't mean it!

Sheesh - anyone who can stomach listening to your blarney night in and night out ought to get a free mug, as long as your mug isn't on the mug, Culture Warrior. Thank God Congress is finally going to do something about the minimum wage (and it took Democrats taking over Congress to make it happen). Pretty soon, poor slobs who actually believe your bullshit will only have to work about 2.5 hours to get one of these red beauties, plus tax and shipping.

What a deal.

An insightful Al Gore interview

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I hate to cut/paste stuff onto this blog, but this one's pretty topical, since I just got done writing how I hope Gore runs in '08. He's hedging his bets right now, but I do hope he throws his hat in. A few things from this interview: 1. Interesting how he won't say it's 100% he won't run, 2. I found his comments about 9-11 particularly poignant. I can't even tell you how many absolute morons I heard say, "Thank GOD Bush is president" in the immediate aftermath of 9-11 (as in, THE NEXT DAY). I wonder how many of these geniuses would say that now? Not anyone who's been following current events in the last five years.

Anyway, take a read - it's not too long. GQ's Questions are in orange, and Gore's comments are (obviously) below them.

*****

AL GORE: MOVIE STAR

A former vice president tells the Truth, ignites a global debate, and suddenly looks like a dark-horse candidate. GQ.com presents the complete Al Gore Q&A, including what he really thinks about George W. Bush.

GQ Magazine

By Lisa DePaulo

You look great.
Uh, thanks.

I like the, you know, broader look.
[laughs] That’s soooo nice of you to say. (to staff) I’d like a Heineken, if you have one.

Can I ask you something? What’s with the Regency Hotel and you guys?
John Kerry and Teresa stay here, Evan Bayh, all the big Dems. You know, I started this years ago…

Do they keep a set of clothes here for you?
No! I wish I could.

They keep Larry King’s clothes here for him.
They do? Where? Now, that is something I did not know.

There’s something you did not know? Incredible. Is there a burden to being so smart?
That’s the exact converse of, “When did you stop beating your wife?” There’s no way to answer a question like that without seeming pompous and conceited. I have a battery-powered hubris alarm on my belt. And it’s set on vibrate, and it’s going crazy.

So, did you ever think your movie would be this successful?
Noooooo. You know, I hoped it would be. But I had questions about whether it would really be possible to turn a slide show into a movie.

And a slide show by Al Gore! Isn’t it interesting how, throughout the 2000 campaign, the media beat you up, calling you wooden and robotic and all that, but somehow you had the charisma to carry a movie?
[laughs] Well, I have always had close friends say, during those political years, “Why don’t they see you the way we see you?”

Yeah, why is that?
I think one part of it is, in a campaign, there is an adversarial context. Your opposition is constantly painting negative caricatures. And also, the audience—or, the voters—are naturally looking at you through a more skeptical lens. And that’s not all bad. But that’s a different lens than the one used by people watching this movie.

It’s funny. You constantly hear people say, “If only he were the way he was in the movie, he’d have been president.” Does that drive you crazy?
No! No, I appreciate that.

Do you agree?
Well, I certainly take my share of whatever blame is to be apportioned for not having more skill as a communicator. Maybe there are some things in politics I’m just not good at.

So if you decide to run, do you think we would see the Al Gore from the movie? Or the Al Gore from 2000?
Well, I don’t plan to run. I don’t plan to run. And I don’t expect to run.

How many times a day does somebody ask you this?
Well, I’m doing a lot of interviews and it’s on the list of questions. For every one of them. And I appreciate that. I appreciate that people think enough of me still in that world to ask that question. It’s true that I haven’t, uh, gotten to the point where I am willing to completely rule it out for all time. But, that is really more a matter of the internal shifting of gears. I’m not making plans to run again.

But you’re not ruling it out?
Uh… no. [smiles]

Do you know if President Bush has seen the movie yet?
Well, he claimed that would not see it. That’s why I wrote the book. He’s a reader.

What page do you think he’s on?
I would encourage him to see the movie and read the book. I wish that he would.

Don’t you find it appalling that he won’t?
Well, you know, he’s probably no more objective about me than I am about him.

So have you been offered any other movie parts?
Yes! I actually just performed a voice-over role in a movie last week. I am reprising my role as a disembodied head in Futurama, which is being made into a movie. There are a significant number of people who appear not to know or care that I was Vice President of the United States, but who are very tuned into the fact that I uttered the immortal line, “I have ridden the mighty moonworm.”

And that’s so much more important. So do you think you’ll get an Oscar nomination?
For the disembodied head?

For An Inconvenient Truth.
Well, I think the movie deserves one. I’m not eligible; the movie is. But I don’t want to jinx it by talking about it.

Do you think you have ever been more popular?
Ahhhh. I think non-candidates are inherently more popular than candidates.

What is your relationship with the Clintons like now?
Good. Fine. Uh, I saw him today. We see them every once in a while.

Do you like her?
Sure. We worked together for 8 years, and uh, I think she’s, uh… very capable.

Could she win?
I’m not gonna get drawn into speculation about the potential candidates in 2008.

Okay, then let me ask you this. If you had to have a drink with someone tonight, and it was Bill or Hillary, you couldn’t pick both but you had to pick one, whom would you pick?
Well, Bill doesn’t drink.

Are you sure?
I’m pretty sure, yeah. So, if that were the criterion, to have a drink with them and she’s the only one that does, then it would be her. You know, it’s not the same now as it was, of course. A lot of water under the bridge. But we have been through a lot together and I wish them both well.

Do you want your daughter Karenna to go into politics?
I want her to do what she wants to do. I think her judgment is so good, and if she were to decide to go into politics, she would be soooo good. If I had half of the skills that she has, I would definitely be in my second term as president right now.

What does she have that you don’t have?
Perfect pitch.

Okay, on to 9-11. What were you really feeling? Was there a part of you that felt a sense of relief that you weren’t in charge that day?
You mean a sense of relief that I didn’t have to deal with it? Oh no. Not at all. Not for one second. Not for one second. Why would I? I mean, well first of all, it just didn’t occur to me to feel anything like that. What did occur to me was to feel what every American felt, the outrage and anger and righteous anger, and support for the President at a time of danger… And, honestly, I was focused on the reality of the situation. And I wasn’t president, so, you know, it wasn’t about me. Now, I do wish, now that we have some distance from the events, and we have all this knowledge about what this administration did do, I certainly feel that I wish that it had been handled differently, and I do wish that I had somehow been able to prevent some of the catastrophic mistakes that were made.

Do you feel that we would be safer today if you had been president on that day?
Well, no one can say that the 9-11 attack wouldn’t have occurred whoever was president.

Really? How about all the warnings?
That’s a separate question. And it’s almost too easy to say, “I would have heeded the warnings.” In fact, I think I would have, I know I would have. We had several instances when the CIA’s alarm bells went off, and what we did when that happened was, we had emergency meetings and called everybody together and made sure that all systems were go and every agency was hitting on all cylinders, and we made them bring more information, and go into the second and third and fourth level of detail. And made suggestions on how we could respond in a more coordinated, more effective way. It is inconceivable to me that Bush would read a warning as stark and as clear [voice angry now] as the one he received on August 6th of 2001, and, according to some of the new histories, he turned to the briefer and said, “Well, you’ve covered your ass.” And never called a follow up meeting. Never made an inquiry. Never asked a single question. To this day, I don’t understand it. And, I think it’s fair to say that he personally does in fact bear a measure of blame for not doing his job at a time when we really needed him to do his job. And now the Woodward book has this episode that has been confirmed by the record that George Tenet, who was much abused by this administration, went over to the White House for the purpose of calling an emergency meeting and warning as clearly as possible about the extremely dangerous situation with Osama bin Laden, and was brushed off! And I don’t know why—honestly—I mean, I understand how horrible this Congressman Foley situation with the instant messaging is, okay? I understand that. But, why didn’t these kinds of things produce a similar outrage? And you know, I’m even reluctant to talk about it in these terms because it’s so easy for people to hear this or read this as sort of cheap political game-playing. I understand how it could sound that way. [Practically screaming now] But dammit, whatever happened to the concept of accountability for catastrophic failure? This administration has been by far the most incompetent, inept, and with more moral cowardice, and obsequiousness to their wealthy contributors, and obliviousness to the public interest of any administration in modern history, and probably in the entire history of the country!

But how do you really feel?
(cracks up)

What’s the nicest thing you can say about George Bush?
He made a terrific appointment of Ben Bernanke as chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Ok, Is there a second best thing?
I can’t think of another one, actually.

When you see the state things are in now, don’t you feel an obligation to run?
Well, I don’t think I have to apologize for devoting my life to trying to solve the most serious challenge our civilization’s ever faced. But I do understand the nature of the question, and as I said, I haven’t completely ruled it out. It’s just that I don’t expect to—and I don’t really believe that that is necessarily the best use of my skills and experience. [sticks his tongue out and crosses his eyes]

Do you like yourself more now? Do you have more fun now?
Well, you know the old Kris Kristofferson song that Janis Joplin made famous, “Me and Bobby McGee”? It has a great line: Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose. There’s some aspects of that involved here.

What kind of freedom do you feel now that you didn’t feel when you were running?
You know my all time favorite Onion headline—you read The Onion?—sometime in the summer of 2001, the lead story on the front page had a picture of Tipper and me, and the headline was, “Gores Enjoying Best Sex of Their Lives.” And she said, “How did they know?”

Do you have any advice on keeping a marriage together?
I think basically Tipper is the key to it.

Really?
Yeah. Love is such a complicated force, I don’t have the words to speak intelligently about it. I don’t even want to try to universalize what feels true to me, because everybody’s different and—

Yeah, but you know what? A lot of people are real different. You’re devoted. People look at you two and you never wonder if there’s anything stupid going on. What is it about you two?
Well, I think that communicating clearly, and making intelligent decisions about the time that you set aside for one another, not time with you and your spouse and the entire family. That’s also very important, but it doesn’t count in that category of time you need for the relationship itself. Communicating clearly, emotionally, spiritually, intellectually. That’s just really important. And if you need help, get help.

Have you been to therapy?
We went in the aftermath of our son’s accident. We had family therapy. And you know, Tipper has a graduate degree in psychology, and she has had a fairly intensive psychiatric practice for 40 years—with one patient. I’m seriously not joking when I say the secret is mostly her. She’s just an amazing partner in life.

What’s the last really romantic thing you did for her?
I made her an iTunes list that communicated things that are important.

What was on it?
That’s too personal.

How often do you think about 2000?
Uhhhh… (feigned shock) The 2000 election?

Yes, that little tiny thing that happened in American history.
I’d almost forgotten! Oh, gosh.

You are so much more relaxed now. I think you’re having more fun this way.
Um, compared to what?

To being a candidate.
Gee, how could anything be more fun than that?

###

I love great interviews like that. Run Al, run! If you're interested, here's the Draft Gore 2008 Website.

Final thoughts on mid-term election

Now that the election has been over for a few weeks, I thought I would offer up some final thoughts on what it all means. I spent a ridiculous amount of time watching, reading and writing about the election, so many things struck me as particularly poignant.

I found the whole media outcry and outrage over John Kerry’s comments amazing. Yes, he unleashed a goofy gaffe, but when taken out of context, it sounded a whole lot worse than when you listen to it in its proper context, it’s not nearly as explosive or insulting to troops as the GOP noise machine made it out to be……Hey, didn’t you used to be the Contract With America?……So much for the Republicans’ “October Surprise,” i.e. – Kerry’s gaffe. I have conservative friends who really thought Kerry’s ill-advised goof would “fire up the conservative base” and bring out the right wingers in droves to help the GOP retain control of part or all of Congress. Not this time……Is it me, or did some leading polls & pollsters turn out to be remarkably accurate? For instance, Stu Rothenberg, a respected Washington, D.C. pollster who frequently appears of CNN, predicted a 51-49 Senate, and lo and behold, that’s what we got. The Votemaster at www.electoral-vote.com predicted a Democratic majority in the House, predicting 231 Democrats, 198 Republicans and six ties. We still don't know the exact number in the House yet with a few recounts pending, but he was pretty close; and he too accurately predicted a 51-49 Senate controlled by the Democrats. Looks like these two guys will get lots of attention in 2008. The Votemaster also came very close to calling the '04 presidential election, so he's establishing a nice little track record - his site uses an incredible number of polls as a predictor, so it's not just opinion.

Anyone else heard about the 18,000 votes missing in Florida? It's a textbook example of why we need election reform. I urge all of you to write your legislators, both federal and state, and tell them that the time to reform is NOW. I can guarantee you that I will have lots and lots more about this very soon, complete with a form letter to write your legislators and more of what all Americans can do about this to demand reform. Why should we wait for the next electoral disaster or controversy to get something done? Our very democracy is undermined when we have such incidents. I'm sick and tired of hearing about problems at polls every election; people being denied the right to vote, machines not working, etc. It’s inexcusable, especially since there are two years between every major election. Has anyone every heard of rehearsal? How about a dry run?

What enrages me even more is right before and election, when I see stories in the news about election officials "anticipating major problems." I always ask myself, why weren't these problems anticipated months, if not years ago? It's high comedy that the U.S. Government is always sending people to other countries to monitor elections, yet we can't even take care of our own elections here.

Something else caught my eye during the election – Arizona is now giving away cash jackpots in order to get people to the polls. What a joke. Considering what went on at electronics stores this weekend, maybe offering a Sony PlayStation 3 would have been a better strategy. The fact that state governments have to entice people to the polls is laughable and inexcusable. It's another reason people around the world must be laughing their asses off at us – the most powerful and influential democracy in the world has to give away money to entice more people to the polls. In other countries, people are dying and fighting for the right to vote and have their voices heard, yet too many Americans take it for granted.

I have high hopes for the Democrats, now that they control both houses of Congress, but their success is by no means assured, nor is their continued control of Congress. As my friend Jim, a conservative, said to me right after the election, "It’s put up or shut up time for the Democrats now." Right you are, Jim. They've been complaining about the Republicans for so long and have been out of power for 12 years (save for a short time in the Senate earlier this decade), that it's time for the donkeys to deliver. And at times, what they will do is block President Bush from what he wishes to do. Opponents will decry it as "obstructionism," (many already have, like the bloated, gambling-addicted Bill Bennett) and sometimes that may turn out to indeed be the case, but I call it "checks and balances," one of the principles this country was founded on. Gone is the rubber-stamp, Republican-controlled Congress, that in most cases moved legislation right on through that Bush wanted passed. What's more, and I know it isn't fashionable to say it, but payback has got to be in the back of the minds of some Democrats, specifically when it comes to confirmation of Court of Appeals judges, and maybe even a Supreme Court justice. (There have been rumors that Justice John Paul Stevens is considering retirement, but I hope he holds out until 2009.)

I not so fondly recall the politically dead Rick Santorum, in 2000, saying that there was little reason to bring President Clinton's Court of Appeals judges up for a vote with an election looming. Honestly, that sort of hubris came back to bite the Republicans in the ass once George W. Bush was appointed president by the Supreme Court. Since then, Republicans have done nothing but bitch and complain about judges not being brought up for a vote. What goes around comes around. Who will turn the tide by turning the other cheek? Don't look for that from this Democratic Congress; Bush has done little with judges other than trying to push through extreme conservatively nominees, and he's met with little success. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out over the next two years.

The time for ethical reform is now, and I hope the Democrats take this very seriously. Americans want radical change to a political system rife with corruption, influence peddling and dirty money. So far, so good, as leading Democrats, from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Above, center pic, on left) to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (above, right pic) and also

Barack Obama (above, left pic), but once January rolls around, it's time for deeds, not words. I'm sick to death, as are most, of all of this corruption in Congress. It's time for dramatic reform, and I'm not completely confident that the Democrats will pull it off. Neither party has shown a willingness to completely overhaul our system to remove the influence of money. I'll have more very soon on ethical reforms in a separate post – my Wish List for this Congress. History has also proven that power corrupts, and Democrats certainly aren't immune. One of the biggest causes of the Republican takeover of the House in 1994 was a corrupt Democratic Party that had ruled the House for 51 years & that had many scandals of its own.



I get a kick out of hearing Republican pundits saying how "the Democrats will overreach." I don't know what they are basing that on, unless you look to the Republicans victory in 1994, when they tried to impose their political and religious beliefs on all Americans. U.S. voters mostly yawned, reelecting Clinton in 1996, and voting for Gore in 2000, but not getting the leader they wanted. Check out the clip above of Newt Gingrich, who made it his and his party's priority to railroad Clinton. Mission not accomplished.

The media "coverage" over Congressional leaders since the election has been pretty entertaining. I’ve already blogged about it at length, but the coverage has been a joke – chiefly the "liberal media" making a big deal about the power play between Steny Hoyer and John Murtha, whereas Trent Lott's selection as Senate Minority Whip has gotten very little play. In the last few days since Hoyer's victory, this "controversy" seems to have died down. Hopefully, Pelosi and Hoyer will find a way to get along – press reports have detailed how the two historically have not been the best of friends. But, since the coverage has been so ridiculous, it's hard to gauge how accurate this supposed rivalry is.

Of course, the biggest issue of all is the War in Iraq, and where we go from here. Almost daily, when I watch the news or read articles about the war and what politicians are saying, I think to myself, almost every time, "This is another Vietnam, you idiots!" I’ve said it before, and it bears repeating again - Vietnam analogies have been wildly overdone, but not always. As time goes on, the similarities grow more and more stark when you compare the two wars: seemingly no way to win; calls for more troops by politicians who are too afraid to say we're "losing"; a civil war in both cases (Iraq is headed there, if it isn’t there already); not knowing who we are fighting or who the enemy is; insurgencies in both cases; rising combat deaths for a cause that isn’t really supported by the American public (a trend that is increasing by the day); a bitterly divided public over whether we should be there in the first place; and politicians who support the war declaring that if we leave, America’s security will be threatened. It's that last point that perhaps rubs me raw the most. In Vietnam, it was the faulty and ultimately false Domino Theory – if Vietnam fell, all of Southeast Asia would also succumb to Communism, thereby threatening our security. Never happened.

In Iraq, we're told that if we leave now, our security will be threatened. That's probably truer than in the case of Vietnam, but what is the alternative - our staying there indefinitely, with our troops in a shooting gallery? Of course, many who support this course of action point to Germany and Korea as similar examples of this type of commitment by our armed forces. That's just incongruent - how many of our troops were killed in Korea or Germany last year?

Arizona Senator and presidential wannabe Judas John McCain is calling for an overwhelming number of troops for Iraq. That's NOT the answer. And I'm sick and tired of people saying that we shouldn't investigate why we went into Iraq in the first place. That's unadulterated bullshit. More and more evidence streams forth every day that this administration, led by President Bush & Dick Cheney, leaned very hard on the intelligence agencies to come up with intelligence to fit their policy – invading Iraq, which was this administration's policy BEFORE 9-11. And it's not merely political pundits saying that, it's former administration insiders like Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neill.

Speaking of why we went into Iraq and other Bush screw-ups, I'm somewhat peeved that Democratic Party leaders have publicly stated, both before and after the election, that impeachment is "off the table." I'm not saying that Bush should be impeached, but there are several things that need to be investigated, and wherever those investigations lead, so be it. To come right out and say that impeachment is off the table before anything has even been looked into is premature and foolish. And the public not having the stomach for impeachment isn't an excuse, either. Congress has a Constitutional duty to oversee the Executive Branch. However, maybe declaring impeachment is off limits isn't a bad thing - if by some crazy circumstances Bush were to be forced from office, we'd have Dick Cheney. I'd rather have Saddam Hussein.

One thing I am encouraged about, before the Democrats even take over, is Nancy Pelosi's statement that her number one priority as Speaker is ending the War in Iraq. Well said. And notice what she’s not saying, if you click the link and read her comments, and that’s ending the war in Afghanistan. Finding bin Laden should still be a #1 goal in the War on Terrorism. All I ever hear about is how the Bush Administration has kept us safe since 9-11, but my argument (and I hope it will be one of Democratic leaders in Congress) is that we should be safer yet, and we would be, had our government not spent $350 billion on a misguided, unnecessary, preemptive War in Iraq.

Now that the election is over, the '08 campaign has officially begun. Of course, the day after the election, CNN conducted a poll asking who voters preferred in a Hillary Clinton vs. John McCain, race. McCain led in that poll 48% - 47%. It's essentially meaningless, though, with just under a year-and-a-half to go until the primaries really heat up, and about 14 months from the Iowa Caucus. But, this January will be very interesting, because that’s when the biggies are expected to declare whether they are running or not, including John McCain, possibly Hillary and Barack Obama.

I have reservations about both Hillary and Barack. Clinton is simply too divisive – I would vote for her in a nanosecond and think she would make a tremendously successful and effective president, but, more than anything, I think most Democrats want a candidate with a real shot to win the presidency. I fear that Clinton is not that candidate. I really like Obama, but I have reservations about his lack of experience, but he makes up for that in other ways, including his eloquent speeches and his tremendous talents as an orator. Obama had this to say at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, about the War in Iraq and the use of force:

When we send our young men and women into harm's way, we have a solemn obligation not to fudge the numbers or shade the truth about why they're going, to care for their families while they're gone, to tend to the soldiers upon their return, and to never ever go to war without enough troops to win the war, secure the peace, and earn the respect of the world.

When you contrast that against the Bush Administration's handling of the War in Iraq , it's pretty stark, They haven't done most of what Obama rightfully calls for when sending our troops into battle.

I don't have a good inkling about who will run and get the nomination in either party, but my early favorite to run is Al Gore. I'm sure many, many people on both sides of the political divide will roll their eyes at that name, but '08 will mark eight years since his last campaign, and I believe he's learned many hard lessons. Plus, Gore has brought the number one threat to all of humanity, global warming, to the forefront of public discussion. There's no question that global warming will be an enormous campaign issue in the '08 race, and it's due in no small part to Gore's tireless efforts. Whoever the Democratic Nominee is, it'll certainly be a Democratic strength in the campaign. Bush has done nothing to combat the problem at all, even going so far as to break a '00 campaign promise to enact mandatory carbon dioxide emissions.

As far as John Kerry running again, I'm lukewarm at best. The last thing the Democratic Party needs is another Adlai Stevenson. He ran a horrific campaign in '04, surrounding himself with inept people. If he does make another run, I certainly hope he makes better decisions this time. He's rightfully stated that his October gaffe won't affect his run. It shouldn't. It's yet another sad example of the media blowing something out of proportion. Even Newsweek, a publication I normally enjoy and like for its balanced reporting, said Kerry's hopes in '08 were likely dashed by his gaffe. What a load.

Anyway, the '08 election seems like an eternity now. We all have bigger things to focus on first. I'm expecting the Democrats to give America the change we've all voted for; I pray they deliver.

Coming Soon: common sense in the Senate on global warming

Now that Rick Santorum is gone from the Senate (Rick who?), meet my new most despised senator - Republican James Inhofe from Oklahoma, who basically thinks that global warming is some fantasy. (See video above) Something tells me that Senator Barbara Boxer from California, who now chairs the Senate's environmental committee, is going to have plenty to say about that. She's already said that "time is running out," and that we need to urgently address the problem. That's a start, Barbara.

Bud Light - crappy beer, funny commercial

This funny Bud Light Commercial made me laugh. It's much better than those annoying new Budweiser Commercials with the crown implanted everywhere and the even more annoying music.

I get a kick out of the whole premise of beer commercials, though. Very rarely do they refer to the actual product, and it's pretty easy to see why. Most of the time, it's a "macro brew" trying to transfer the image of their crappy product onto something funny so you'll buy it. Budweiser is probably the best example - their beer is awful, but maybe if they make you laugh you'll pick up a 30 pack. Yea, right.

I'm not slamming all of the "macro brews," though. I do like Miller Light, but good old-fashioned Yuengling Lager, a Pennsylvania brew made at America's oldest brewery. I don't notice any funny commercials by that company; probably because their beer kicks ass and they don't need to resort to such tactics.

Olbermann on media coverage of Dems

I had to include a quick clip of Keith Olbermann this morning, talking about media coverage about the Democrats' selection of Steny Hoyer late last week. Again, I'm repeating myself, but you'd think the Democrats were having a fight to the death. Absurd.

Pelosi makes history while media takes a nap

Sally Ride. Sandra Day O'Conner. Dee Dee Myers. Madeline Albright. Nancy Pelosi.

Today, Pelosi (Above, Left) made history, joining the list of "women firsts," becoming the first-ever female Speaker of the House of Representatives in the U.S. Congress.

A funny thing happened on the way to history today, though. The press coverage has been at times idiotic, inaccurate and moronic. On a day history was made, you would have thought the Democrats were assaulting each other with sticks, bats and knives in the U.S. House.

Jack Murtha (Above, second from right) mounted a campaign against Steny Hoyer (above, far right) to be House Majority Leader. Pelosi endorsed Murtha, but today Hoyer prevailed. Big deal. Two men ran against each other, and there was a vote, with a clear-cut winner. But, the coverage has focused on the "in-fighting" among Democrats and how the party is supposedly "divided."

In my humble opinion, the coverage should be focused on two things: Nancy Pelosi's ascension to power in the House, becoming the most powerful woman politician to date in U.S. history; and how Trent Lott, after a racist, unforgivable gaffe in 2002, has returned to a position of power for the Republican Party in the U.S. Senate.

Instead, we get the supposedly liberal press focusing on the Murtha v. Hoyer contest. From what I can see, there is no story, and the trifecta of Pelosi, Hoyer and Murtha are ready to get on with the business of running the House and promoting the Democratic agenda.

I'm looking forward to seeing what these three accomplish. It's put up or shut up time for the Democrats in both houses of Congress. Not only do I hope they don't let me down as a Democrat, I hope they don't let the country down.

Yo, Carville - to the Dean's office!

Would James Carville and Howard Dean just shut up already? There's nothing worse than sore winners, an that's exactly what these two sound like right now. I wonder how much they'd be whining if the Democrats had been unsuccessful?

To be fair, I don't know all of the facts, but I think Carville (Above) makes a number of good points. To leave that much money on the table is inexcusable, especially when there were some very close races. I was very disappointed that Lois Murphy didn't prevail in her race vs. Republican Jim Gerlach in Pennsylvania's 6th District, a district I used to reside in. The race was so razor thin, I wonder if a little more infusion of cash by the DNC would have helped. It sure wouldn't have hurt.

Murphy was the victim of lots of Republican dirty tricks, too, including Robo calling by the Republican National Committee.



But, Dean deserves his due, too. The man's got balls and a backbone, something Democrats were sorely lacking when Terry McAuliffe was chair of the DNC. McAuliffe is a very smart businessman, but he couldn't deliver for the Dems. A pick-up of six governorships and both houses of Congress looks mighty good on Dean's résumé, and those pick-ups will play a critical role in the '08 election, too.

Dean's also a good fundraiser, but as Carville rightfully states, you can't leave money under your mattress in an important election, either. Money will play a critical role in '08, but it will come down to the party nominees, too. More on that in a bit.

I've heard of hating liberals, but wow

Just in case you haven't heard - this is quite a story. What some sickos will do in the name of politics. And I thought I got a little passionate about my politics sometimes.

I'll offer this - the rants of conservative talking heads like Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter do nothing to add to the political discourse in this country, and I dare say they prompt some people to act this way.

If you preach and screech intolerance and hatred 24-7, sooner or later you're bound to get through to some nut case.

Rednecks cost the GOP

As reported in Hotline, a Florida GOP Representative offered up his opinion on why Republicans lost their majorities in both houses of Congress two weeks ago:

"White rednecks" who "didn’t show up to vote for us" partly cost GOPers their Congressional majorities, Rep. Adam Putnam (R-FL) told fellow Republicans today.

Three Republicans in the room independently confirmed to the Hotline the substance and context of Putnam’s remarks. But Putnam’s chief of staff insists that the remarks were taken out of context.

Putnam's chief of staff, John Hambel, said his boss has used the word "redneck" only in the context of sharing polling data from last week’s elections. Hambel said Putnam was listing off different constituencies and ended with saying: "Heck, we even had rednecks who go to church who didn't come out to vote."

##

How great is that? I laughed my ass off when I read this; 1. because it might be true, and 2. I'm constantly reading about how Republicans are courting minorities, specifically African-Americans and Hispanics.

I can only hope that Republicans will have Putnam spearhead their Congressional election effort in 2008.

Armistice signed; no new War on Christmas

Oh yea, we got us a new War on Christmas! Wait, not so fast.

The Marine Reserves’ Toys for Tots program in Los Angeles has decided to accept a donation of Bible-quoting Jesus dolls, reversing its initial decision to not accept them in fear of offending children who don't practice Christianity.

Sigh - all's well that ends well. I'm happy this had a quick resolution , because I know those credible talking heads from the right, i.e. - Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Rush Limbaugh, would have had a field day, and let's not forget about Bill O'Lielly, who never met a War on Christmas he didn't like (and threaten a boycott over).

After all, you're either with Jesus, or you're with the terrorists.

Okay, I can't end on that note. For the record, I'm a Christian, and I believe in Jesus, but I don't have enough time to type what turns me off about organized religion and the radical religious right - some day maybe I'll have 48 hours to spare to type that post.

I'll put this to you rhetorically, but does any God fearing Christian honestly believe that Jesus would have been for:

-Spending money you don't have

-Going to war, not as a last resort, but as a pre-emptive move against a country that was no threat

-Caring little about the poor

-Ignoring nearly 30 million Americans who don't have health care

-Vetoing the FMLA Act, as Bush 41 did

-Capital Punishment

-Polluting the planet, global warming be damned

I think you get my point...

God is not a Republican. He may not be a liberal Democrat, either, but then again, I'm not pretending he is, like the other side does.

Hold up your end table for a Fin

Check out this deal - get a little piece of hatred and intolerance, all for just $4.99! What's more, it's a great way to hold up your wobbly end table or use it as a dinner table hot pad for that scalding hot pot roast.

That's right - this multi-use, hard cover masterpiece of shit can be all yours for the cost of a McDonald's value meal.

Got a person on your holiday list you want to give the metaphorical middle finger to? Ann's here to help. After all, this equal-opportunity offender takes on all comers with her courageous stands against 9-11 widows, any Democrat who dares question the legitimacy of our elections or the War in Iraq, or anyone who practices a religion other than Christianity.

Hurry and order yours today - after all, it's not like the price has been slashed 80% because it's a slow seller.

One down, one to go

What a day for justice, or lack thereof -- Jack Abramoff and OJ Simpson. One's finally in jail, and the other's flaunting the fact that he's not.

I'm not even sure what to make of the whole Abramoff Scandal anymore; it's one of the biggest influence peddling scandals ever to hit Washington. On one hand, I hope that everyone who is guilty is brought to justice, Democrat or Republican, but on the other hand, can Abramoff really be trusted? It's hard to say.


OJ is another matter altogether. We aren't talking about corrupt politicians - we're talking about two dead people. I don't know who to detest more, OJ for writing a book, If I Did It; or Fox for giving this human scum the publicity he craves. I urge everyone to not only not buy the book, but to not watch the interview.

I don't know who to feel sadder for - the Goldman family or OJ's children, all of whom have to be subjected to this latest indignation. It's a gut-wrenching, heart-breaking outrage.

Someday, this murdering sonofabitch will get what's coming to him - let's just be sure it isn't in the form of a fat paycheck for writing a book or giving an interview. Of course I'm interested in reading and hearing what a murderer has to say, but I'm not lining his pockets to find out.

Bush White House flagged for stupidity

Evidently, the dopes at the White House think the flag above is the Vietnamese flag. The official White House Website, posting a story about President Bush's visit to Vietnam, posted this flag with an accompanying story. Too bad it's the flag of South Vietnam, a country that hasn't existed for 31 years. What's worse, the flag is highly offensive to most Vietnamese, and most definitely to the leaders of Vietnam.

Had these morons done ANY checking, they would have discovered...


...that THIS is the official flag of Vietnam. And it took me inside of two minutes of poking around on Wikipedia. Real tough stuff. Hey, maybe the Internets were down at the White House the day they posted the story. Then again, maybe not.

This isn't the first time that the president's staff has suffered an embarrassing faux pas. Earlier this year, Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit to Washington was marked by a string of missteps, slights, carelessly thought out events and downright stupidity.

The low point during his visit, as reported Here in the Washington Post, was when the White House issued press credentials to a Falun Gong activist, who interrupted the Chinese leader's press conference, shouting, "President Hu, your days are numbered!" and "President Bush, stop him from killing!"

Making matters worse, the Chinese had warned the White House to be careful about who it permitted to attend the press conference. As it turned out, the same activist who interrupted Hu's press conference had heckled his predecessor in Malta five years ago.

Nice job researching and securing a visit by a world leader, people. Can you IMAGINE the uproar in the press had this happened to a U.S. President visiting China? Fox News would want to declare World War III on China.

But, the administration's uncouth manner didn't stop there. How about Dick Cheney donning sunglasses for a ceremony for Hu, or the announcer saying that the band would play the "national anthem of the Republic of China" - the official name of Taiwan. Taiwan!

Bush also wouldn't even give Hu an official state visit - no formal dinner in the State Dining Room, no Chinese flags flying near the lampposts, as is customary.

This is how we treat the next superpower? People and countries don't forget this stuff.

My point is that the Vietnamese flag mistake isn't some isolated incident. Many in this administration are simply morons; college-educated idiots. Just because you have a college degree doesn't mean you're smart - President Bush is the embodiment of that principle.

I have no way to confirm this, but I hear the White House has an article with an accompanying flag ready for Bush's next visit to Germany.


Honestly, would you really put it past these people?

Sometimes liberals just don't get it

There is such a thing as "lowering yourself to their level." By "yourself," I mean Arianna Huffington, and by "their" I mean Republicans and GOP pundits who make mountains out of molehills (see Senator Kerry's gaffe, the week before the election for a sparkling example).

I'm cruising around the Huffington Post yesterday, and this is what I find (pictures above). It's an article on first daughter Barbara Bush drinking at a college party. Its was a juvenile piece, aimed at taking a swipe at the president. There's no place for this kind of bullshit on a Website like Arianna's, which presents itself as a serious site for political discourse (albeit a liberal one). This is fit for The Onion's site, if that. Here are my thoughts:

1. Leave the kid alone - what college kid hasn't been at a party with a Solo cup in her/her hand?

2. This "incident" is not related to her father, and she is not overtly political.

3. I always know when someone's truly being a jackass when kids or spouses are brought into an argument or discussion.

This is the kind of crap that Democrats and liberals harped about when Clinton was president. Anyone remember Rush Limbaugh calling Chelsea Clinton "the White House dog"? I do - despicable and inexcusable. Just like this piece.

Speaking of the president and alcohol, I've got another liberal to rant about who I cannot stand. Bill Press, formerly of CNN fame, has a radio show on Sirius. I forget the exact name of the channel, because I just started listening last week, but I think it's "Talk Left" or "Left Radio" or something like that.

Anyway, I was listening to Press a day or two after the election, and he was cackling like a hen about the election results. Okay, fair enough - so was I. But, then he starts talking about how the president might be back on the booze, and he takes an audio clip of Bush talking and slows it down deliberately so it sounds like Bush is slurring. (More to the point, he mentioned that he "heard" how Bush might be drinking again.) Just how stupid is this guy?

Really, Bill? Really, Arianna? Is this the kind of bullshit that liberal voices have to resort to? And wasn't this the gutter commentary that the sanctimonious and hypocritical right resorted to when Clinton was in office?

My point - Bush's policies are bad enough to criticize without resorting to stuff like this. It's pointless, juvenile, and awfully Matt Drudge-esque. If you can't find enough things to criticize the president about without going after his battle with alcoholism, you aren't looking hard enough.

Alcoholism is a disease, and those afflicted with it face a choice every day that isn't easy to make - and by most accounts Bush is making the right choice every day. On that point - bravo to him for overcoming it.

Shame on those who make light of him for his alcoholism or, worse yet, his daughter, because she got busted for underage drinking, all in a completely lame attempt to score a few political points.

When liberals resort to these tactics, they're no better than Limbaugh, Falwell or Robertson. And that's some pretty awful company.

What a shock from Fox

Found this last night, and it's making its way around the 'net. I found it on Arianna Huffington's Website, and I'd like to think that if she ran with it, she had a good source. According to her site, it's a leaked internal memo (below) obtained from a source at Fox News. Penned by the network's vice president of news, John Moody, it reveals Fox's game plan the day after Democrats won control of both the Senate and the House. Really, should anyone be surprised by this?

The Department of Homeland Security should put out an APB for all Republicans how still piss and moan about "Rathergate," the incident prior to the '04 election where Dan Rather did a report on President Bush's time in the National Guard. It was revealed the story was based on forgeries and false documents. "Bias! Bias! Bias!" righteously indignant Republicans screamed. I'm not sold on Rather's bias, but it was sloppy, stupid reporting, and Rather should have known better. But, if Rather's reporting was biased, that would make this Fox News memo WHAT?

If Rupert Murdoch has any balls whatsoever (and we know he doesn't), he'll immediately fire John Moody and apologize to all of FN's viewers. Moody is the new Dan Rather, but on official state TV, there are no consequences.

Two quick afterthoughts here. On the drive home yesterday, thinking about this memo and how it relates back to Dan Rather and his forged documents, two things struck me:

1. I wonder if Rather was trying to get back at Bush 41 with the report on W in September '04. Anyone remember when Bush Sr. was running for president in 1988 and he got in a shouting match with Dan Rather, and Bush really got the best of him by mentioning when Rather walked off the set in the early 1980s?

2. Speaking of documents, I wonder why the forged documents, hyped as "proof" by the Bush administration, are never brought up in the phony Iraq purchase of yellow cake in Niger? (An incident which gave rise to the whole Valerie Plame affair, by the way.) Rather was duped by forged documents, just like the Bush administration was. One led to war and the senseless death of tens of thousands, the other to embarrassment, not of Bush, but of Rather.

I only bring up Rather now because the analogy is already being made between the so-called bias at CBS and the blatant bias at Fox News. They are not analogous, but I can guarantee that Republicans will try to make that distinction. Christ, I could practically write Sean Hannity's show for today.

It's gonna be an interesting two years of Democrats ruling Congress.

DeLay has a Lott of Trent in him. Speaking of which...

Yesterday, former Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay told an audience at the Time Magazine Person of the Year luncheon he believes presumptive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi deserves to be awarded the magazine's cover and title this year.

Wow, a kinder, gentler DeLay, you say? Of course not. Read on. Here are his comments:

"I'm going to shock you on two levels. One is I think the real Person of the Year ought to be Nancy Pelosi....I think it's unfortunate that you said I created the culture in Washington. The Democrats, when they lost power, it was like, as John said, it was like losing your plantation - they refused to work with the Republican majority. Back in the good old days they always talk about the Republican minority mindset like the slaves of the plantation and as long as they kept that, the Democrats, they all got along. It's when things got up and changed that we all got more partisan. Nancy Pelosi, I have to give her credit."

Thanks for reminding us how much of an imbecile you are, DeLay, and why you no longer have a cushy job in Congress.


DeLay's comments reminded me of the whole Trent Lott fiasco in 2003, when he praised former segregationist Strom Thurmond during his 100th birthday celebration (see above).

And the GOP wonders why African-Americans don't vote Republican. Duh.

To make things even more interesting, it was announced that today Lott was elected Senate Minority Whip, beating out Lamar Alexander by one vote. Talk about sending a good message ~ and Republican talking heads were bitching about Senator Kerry's gaffe last week, which, when taken in the context of his whole speech, was clearly a botched joke?

Trent's the real joke.

I seen it at MicDonalds

I dropped by McDonald's to get lunch today (big mistake, I'm still paying for it), and from the counter I could see a sign hanging in the employee area by the time clock that read:

Be Courteous!
Be Aware of What Your Doing!

Just when I think I'm having a bad day (and I am) and things aren't going my way, I see something like that and I'm really thankful about how lucky I am. Lucky that I have a roof over my head, and that I've received a decent education. I'm serious.

Da Da Da Da Daaah...

I'm lovin' et!

This random thought brought to you by Immodium-AD - When that Quarter Pounder makes you flounder, reach for the IAD!

McCain's misguided Iraq proposal

Here's judas John McCain pontificating on how we are going to win or lose in Iraq in the next "several months" on Sunday's Meet the Press. What a truckload of crap. I'm sick and tired of hearing politicians say we can win in Iraq, all for political gain. There IS NO WINNING IN IRAQ, period, and the sooner our leaders realize it, the better. What, exactly, would constitute a victory? The terrorists laying down their arms and pledging not to kill any more Americans or Iraqis? That will never happen.

McCain is insane if he wants to send in more troops to that hell hole. An overwhelming majority of Americans oppose the move, and in this case, I think the opinion polls have a point. McCain correctly points out that you can't conduct foreign policy from opinion polls. I'd add "most of the time" to that phrase, though. And in this case, I'm afraid the American people are right.

What are more troops going to accomplish? More combat deaths. It's funny, as I listened to the whole episode of MTP, I was struck by the overtones of Vietnam in McCain's choice of words, i.e. - using phrases like "sweep and hold" and talking about the need for more troops. His reasoning, that chaos would spread in the area if we pulled out, is reminiscent of Vietnam; the Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon administrations all felt that if Vietnam fell to the communists, then all of Southeast Asia would fall to communism. This "domino effect" never happened, and we paid for that mistake in a tragic amount of American blood - over 58,000 war dead. I hope and pray that we don't ever make that same mistake again, but we may be on the verge of doing just that. I feel analogies to Vietnam have been wildly overdone in the press, but it seems like we get closer and closer every day to that analogy becoming all too real.

What really riled me was when Russert pressed McCain on why the American people should believe him, or believe that his strategy would work, the Senator replied that people should trust him because of his military background. Spoken sotto voce, McCain is implying that because he spent 5 1/2 years in the Hanoi Hilton, we should trust his foreign policy proposals? Sorry, I ain't buyin' it. I'm not Swiftboating McCain here - he's a hero and I can't even begin to imagine what he went through as a POW. But, that doesn't qualify him to set Iraq policy, or be president.

Just as an aside, where were the Democratic Senators on MTP on Sunday? I realize that Harry Reid, the soon-to-be Democratic Senate Majority Leader, was on Face the Nation, but I'm sure Tim Russert could have found someone from the Democratic side of the aisle. Joe Lieberman barely qualifies, since he's a self-identified "I.D.," as in "Independent Democrat," as he told Russert.

I wax and wane on whether I like Russert or not - it depends on the week, the guests, and the show, but most times he does a pretty effective job at taking politicians to task on their answers, especially when it differs from their past answers on the issues. One thing's for sure - Russert is always prepared, researched and ready to interview his guests, and most of the time, he's not afraid of the hard-hitting question, and that applies to Democrats and Republicans alike. Journalists of his ilk are in shockingly short supply these days.



Just a quick blast from the past. This is McCain on Meet the Press earlier this year, explaining that Jerry Falwell is NOT (emphasis mine) "an agent of intolerance." The Senator has a nice dodge at the end of this clip, too, when Russert asks him if he thinks Falwell is just that: "I think Jerry Falwell can explain his views on this program when you have him on."

I sure hope Democrats store away this video clip for the '08 campaign - this is shameless pandering to the far right for votes, and it sickens me. I won't even waste my time explaining why Falwell is so despicable, save for one example: following the 9-11 attacks, he opined that gays and abortion doctors were part of the reason the attacks happened.

Does that sound like intolerance to you?

Senator McCain, please run. Please.

He'll get torn to pieces, if the Democratic Nominee has any backbone.