Hillary's got Indiana

But earlier Obama was active with automated e-mails.

Colin --

We just won a decisive victory in North Carolina thanks to people like you.

Indiana remains too close to call. But what is clear is that we did much better than all the pundits predicted, despite Republicans changing parties to support Senator Clinton, believing she would be easier for Senator McCain to defeat.

Operation CHAOS.

Indiana: too close to call

Well, it's after midnight on the east coast, and nobody knows who's going to win Indiana. Based on the county-by-county breakdown, Hillary Clinton is making one hell of a Republican. She's already gotten blown out in North Carolina, and absolutely must win in Indiana to stay alive. Unfortunately, that might not even be enough. Blitzer is saying on CNN that HRC is going to move on to West Virginia next week. So I'll go with that for now. The past few weeks have been fun, though.

Operation CHAOS

Rush is going to get a kick out of this one, but it seems the media is finally beginning to acknowledge the impact of Rush Limbaugh's Operation Chaos on the Democratic primary.

How big of an impact did Rush Limbaugh’s ‘Operation Chaos’ have in Indiana? Did GOP voters really cross over to create havoc in the Democratic primary by voting for Hillary Clinton, as he’d asked his listeners to do?

Roughly one in ten of the state’s Democratic primary voters were Republican — and that group did vote for Hillary Clinton, 53 to 47 percent over Barack Obama. But hold on: registered Democrats, who made up two-thirds of Tuesday’s primary voters, gave roughly the same edge to Clinton, 53 to 45 percent. Only Independents — who made up about a quarter of the electorate — voted for Obama, 53 to 47 percent.

For whatever reason, self-identified conservative voters did overwhelmingly support Clinton – two out of three cast their votes for the New York senator.

Schneider is trying to minimize the statistical impact of Operation CHAOS, but you've got to consider the absolute disdain of many Republicans towards the Clintons. Without Operation CHAOS, would Senator Clinton even gotten 40% of the Republican vote?

I guess I should give some background on Operation CHAOS, before the media manipulates the goals some more. Essentially, what it boils down to is that since John McCain is already the Republican nominee, conservatives have no stake in that primary. Sooooooo, in comes Rush Limbaugh, urging "operatives" to strategically vote in order to keep the clusterfuck of a Democratic primary going. Since HRC is the apparent underdog, Rush is urging operatives to vote for her to prolong the process. Operation CHAOS has not favorite in the nomination process, but merely exists to prolong it enough to bloody up the two Democratic candidates before the November election.

Let's take a minute away from the presidential race

to look at the House. While I'm fairly confident the GOP nominee, John McCain will take the White House in November, the House and Senate don't look so good. This article on the Politico confirms it, in the way of a series of special election losses. (By the way, I really like stroking my tensions.)

House Republicans who hoped to be on a slow climb back to the majority by now are reeling from Democratic victories in special elections in Illinois and Louisiana, and sources say another loss in Mississippi next week would roil an already poisoned relationship between House Minority Leader John A. Boehner and National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Cole.

Although there’s no love lost — and plenty of blame to share — between the two leaders, a well-connected Republican operative said that Boehner probably lacks the “muscle” to push Cole out.

But Boehner and other Republicans have already expressed a lack of confidence in Cole by raising money for GOP candidates and incumbents outside the NRCC’s purview, and they could further marginalize the NRCC chairman if he can’t keep now-Sen. Roger Wicker’s seat in the Republican column next Tuesday.

This is a trend that doesn't bode well for Republicans in November. The problem arises in the fact that McCain tends to draw a lot of Dems and independents who aren't likely to vote straight-ticket, whereas whoever the Democratic nominee is, they are likely to draw plenty of support for their local counterparts. Of course, with a Republican in the White House to scapegoat, I would be very surprised if the Dems didn't do all they could to impede any sort of national progress.

Obama grabs NC, HRC looking good in Indiana

The title says it all. What gets me about all the demographic breakdowns is that Barack is supposed to be the candidate who transcends race, yet when you compare white/black voting patterns, over 90% of black Democratic primary voters are going for Obama while somewhere in the ballpark of 60-70% of white voters are going for Hillary. On an unrelated though, I think Michelle Obama is going to do much more damage to the Obama campaign than Teresa Heinz-Kerry did 4 years ago.

Further, some Dem babe on Fox News, while minimizing the impact of God-damnergate on Obama was asked what kind of catastrophic event could give the nomination to HRC, and she said some sort of economic/financing scandal. Tony Rezko much?

The cost of free health care

Awesome article here about how universal health care is much less economically viable than leaving it to the private sector.

Somehow they propose to offer and subsidize more health care without raising costs for the majority of Americans who already have it.

What next? Consume more calories, weigh less?

Both Democrats suggest that prevention will contain costs. But as the Washington Post reported last month, with a few exceptions like childhood vaccinations, health economist Louise B. Russell's 1986 work, "Is Prevention Better Than Cure?" found that "prevention activities tend to cost more than they save. Since the book's appearance, her observation has been borne out by studies of hundreds of interventions - everything from providing mammograms for all women and prescribing drugs to people with high cholesterol to requiring passenger-side air bags in cars and shortening the response time of ambulances."

Preventative medicine, on an individual basis, probably saves some money, but a government mandate for preventative measures is going to cost something. At least according to this source, a cost greater than that of leaving people to their own devices.

The McCain plan would provide an annual tax credit of $2,500 per individual or $5,000 per family. The idea is to encourage families to buy their own health care plans - preferably plans that save consumers money when they follow healthy lifestyles and make smart economic choices.

Unlike Clinton and Obama, McCain would not require that insurers cover people with chronic illnesses. Instead, McCain proposes state "guaranteed access plans" for those patients.

Politically, Plan McCain may be suicide. Clinton and Obama have kept to the current employer-based system - which gives workers the happy illusion of not paying for their health care, when in fact it comes out of their paychecks.

Like President Bush, however, McCain has concluded that the best way to curb health care costs is to return the incentive to save to patients. Because when you know a doctor's visit will cost only $25 and that you won't have to pay for a test you may not need, you have no incentive to economize. That's the problem with the status quo: The cheaper we make it look, the more it ends up costing.

It makes a lot of sense in a tragedy of the commons sense. If everyone has to pay for everyone else's health care, it only makes sense for people to utilize the available system to the greatest extent they can. If people were forced to pay for their tests/treatments, at least in part, it curbs the incentive for any unnecessary medical care.

Change I can believe in

I love the fact that Reuters has a special tab for news related to the environment, because everyone needs to laugh. Here's another great article.

The Arctic and Antarctica are poles apart when it comes to the effects of human-fueled climate change, scientists said on Friday: in the north, it is melting sea ice, but in the south, it powers winds that chill things down.

I'm really sick of the "climate change" moniker. Can we just start calling it, "global we-don't-know-what-the-fuck-is-going-on-but only-government-regulation-can-stop-it-ing" By the way, doesn't anyone else find it funny how difficult it is for certified meteorologists to predict the weather more than 48 hours in advance, yet Al Gore, with a BA in government, knows with a certainty that the world will end due to climate change?

John Edwards: Now with added irrelevance!

Since, according to this article, John Edwards has lost all his leeway in the Democratic Party, perhaps he should vie for influence in the Hair Club for Men.

For all the speculation surrounding John Edwards’ conspicuous silence on the eve of his home state’s primary, one important fact has been overlooked: According to North Carolina’s political class, the former Democratic presidential contender has virtually no clout at all in his home state.

John Edwards' post-Senatorial career has gone in a slightly more sophisticated "LOOK AT ME!!! I'M STILL IMPORTANT!!" direction. Although it would appear any semblance of popularity is waning.

The former senator and 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee, they say, was like a political comet. He seemingly appeared out of nowhere, inspired awe with the intensity of his talent, blazed through a single term in the Senate, then disappeared from the radar almost entirely.

Let's see here... Neo-liberal Senator/Prince Charming loses presidential bid to a Senator from the northeast with about as much charisma as a train, and completely drops off the political radar due to absolutely no depth. Barack-o-philes should be quaking in their boots, hoping HRC doesn't steal this from Obamessiah, because it could happen to him. Of course, Illinois is waaaaaay more liberal than North Carolina, so Barry should at least be a Democratic Senatorial bastion for decades. I just wonder if Illinois voters of today are going to finally see through all the "hope" and "change" bullshit 30 years from now, sitting on their deathbeds, realizing the only imminent promised land is post-euthanasia. I know I sound a tad bitter, so excuse me while I go cling to a gun.

Blogging Trinity United Church of Christ

Since Rev. Jeremiah write seems to think his quotes are being taken out of context and what not, I'm currently visiting the official church website to get some context on his thoughts on the "US of KKKA" and "God damn America." I'm starting with the "About" page.

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.

Sounds like a cry for Liberia. The page for Africa Ministry is somewhat interesting; hardly controversial though. In fact, most of the ministry seems well-intentioned and typical of any church. They even have yoga.

All and all, there's nothing out of the ordinary here, kind of boring, frankly.

Dems want more food aid

In a stunning attempt at not actually addressing what is causing the food crisis, the Senate Democrats want to increase the amount of money given towards international food aid.

A group of U.S. Senate Democrats called on the White House on Monday to support a $200 million increase in international food aid this year beyond the spending boost President George W. Bush has already requested.

"This is the worst global food crisis in more than 30 years. It threatens not only the health and survival of millions of people around the world, many of them children, but it also is a threat to global security," said Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Senate Democrat.

C'mon, Dick, why don't we cut the ethanol crap and actually solve this problem?

Row v. Wade, South Dakota style

This should prove to be quite interesting if the referendum is passed and eventually challenged.

Voters in the midwestern US state of South Dakota will vote in a November referendum on abortion, reviving the country's already polarized debate on the issue, state officials said Monday.

Voters in the conservative state narrowly rejected a total ban on pregnancy termination in 2006, with 56 percent voting no, but exit polls showed a majority would have backed a ban if it had been less strict.

The 2006 text allowed for exceptions only if the life of the mother were in immediate danger. The 2008 version takes into account cases of rape, incest, or risk of grave health effects for the mother.

If this passes, which I believe it will, the ACLU will probably challenge the ruling, and it will go all the way to the Supreme Court.

SCOTUS supports photo ID requirement for voting

The logos behind the opinion is that the benefit of reducing fraud outweighs the inconvenience it may cause some voters.

States can require voters to produce photo identification, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, upholding a Republican-inspired law that Democrats say will keep some poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots.

Simple solution, get an ID.

Stevens said that Indiana's desire to prevent fraud and to inspire voter confidence in the election system are important even though there have been no reports of the kind of fraud the law was designed to combat. Evidence of voters being inconvenienced by the law's requirements also is scant. For the overwhelming majority of voters, an Indiana driver's license serves as the identification.

The article doesn't mention this, but I had read earlier that the plaintiff in this case had actually been found to have attempted to fraudulently vote in the past.

My thoughts on the North Carolina ad

The North Carolina GOP is taking the whole "six degrees of separation" hypothesis to another level in an advertisement linking Jeremiah Wright to Barack Obama to two Democratic gubernatorial candidates. McCain's already condemned the ad.

Personally, I think the ad is stupid and sets a dangerous precedent. While I believe it is perfectly acceptable to question Obama's relationship with Wright, to try and tie it in with local races is a stretch. However, the constant back and forth between the candidates this campaign cycle to demand apologies for the actions of their subordinates is repulsive.

Derb on Expelled

John Derbyshire, possibly the most scientifically-inclined writer for the conservative mag, National Review, has an awesome response to the creationist movie, Expelled, here.

And now here is Ben Stein, sneering and scoffing at Darwin, a man who spent decades observing and pondering the natural world — that world Stein glimpses through the window of his automobile now and then, when he’s not chattering into his cell phone. Stein claims to be doing it in the name of an alternative theory of the origin of species: Yet no such alternative theory has ever been presented, nor is one presented in the movie, nor even hinted at. There is only a gaggle of fools and fraudsters, gaping and pointing like Apaches on seeing their first locomotive: “Look! It moves! There must be a ghost inside making it move!”

The creationist agenda hiding behind the facade of intelligent design, is something I think conservatives would be wise to distance themselves from. It's one thing to believe in God, but to try and pressure that belief in a science classroom under the moniker of something savvy, like intelligent design, is a complete disservice to what science is. Derb gets at the heart of this in his article. I urge any Ben Stein apologists to read the response of a scientific conservative to Stein's movie.

Well imagine that

At times, I'm tempted to only cover the asinine environmentalist policies which fail, time and time again. I like to challenge myself though. However, I'm not immune from the joy of taking a couple of potshots at the greenies.

A proposed solution to reverse the effects of global warming by spraying sulfate particles into Earth's stratosphere could make matters much worse, climate researchers said on Thursday.

They said trying to cool off the planet by creating a kind of artificial sun block would delay the recovery of the Antarctic ozone hole by 30 to 70 years and create a new loss of Earth's protective ozone layer over the Arctic.

I seem to recall a particular Simpsons episode where Montgomery Burns blocks the sun from shining on Springfield much to the dismay of the townspeople.

Now this right here, this is what I call a dream job

The headline says it all.

Mike Hammond was bombarded with offers after advertising in his village post office for someone to accompany his 88-year-old father Jack on visits to a southern England pub from a nursing home.

He offered the lucky winner 7 pounds ($14) an hour plus expenses and, after sifting through the applicants, decided on a job-share. Drinking duties are to be divided between a retired doctor and a former military man.

Interested applicants should send a resume, cover letter, and outrageous drunk Facebook photos to Hammond.

Oh no you didn't

Well since the environmentalist crusaders patched up the ozone hole, we might face stiffer global warming. (Link courtesy of Fark)

A full recovery of the stratospheric ozone hole could modify climate change in the Southern Hemisphere and even amplify Antarctic warming, according to scientists from the University of Colorado at Boulder, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.

No. Fucking. Way.

The study authors calculated that when stratospheric ozone levels return to near pre-1969 levels by the end of the 21st century, large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns now shielding the Antarctic interior from warmer air masses to the north will begin to break down during the austral summer. The circulation patterns are collectively known as a positive phase of the Southern Annular Mode, or SAM.

The scientists found that as ozone levels recover, the lower stratosphere over the polar region will absorb more harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun. This could cause air temperatures roughly 6 to 12 miles above Earth's surface to rise by as much as 16 degrees Fahrenheit, reducing the strong north-south temperature gradient that currently favors the positive phase of SAM, said the research team.

Don't be surprised if the whackjob Captain Planet worshipers start urging us all to use more hairspray and revert back to pre-1950's refrigerants.

Mexican/Canadian wisdom

With the three-ring circus of anti-trade, protectionism, and pandering to the Rust Belt, it comes as no surprise that our neighbors to the north and south see through the facade of the Democratic primary talking points in trying to accrue votes in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

The leaders of Canada and Mexico on Tuesday brushed aside threats by the U.S. Democratic presidential candidates to try to renegotiate NAFTA and adopt a more protectionist approach to trade.

Democratic contenders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama -- blaming the 14-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement for U.S. manufacturing job losses -- say the United States could quit the pact unless Canada and Mexico agree to major changes.

No idiots, it's the political pressure the unions place on the Democratic legislatures of blue-collar states that drive up the price of labor to an unsustainable level, making it more advantageous for corporations to outsource labor to countries without such a union stronghold, despite any stigma they may get. By outsourcing labor, companies are able to sell goods at prices consumers deem reasonable for manufactured goods.

What the libs can't seem to understand is that labor is just as much of a commodity as food or gas, and is rightly dictated by supply and demand economics. The reason someone with a college degree stands a much better chance at finding employment is that they are of more value as a worker, and as the demand for their labor increases, so does the price.

Technological innovations are also partly responsible for the decline in jobs in these places, but you'd be hard pressed to find Democrats decrying automated machinery as taking away hard-working Americans' jobs.

After two days of wide-ranging talks among Mexico, Canada and the United States, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said reopening the trade deal would cost the United States.

"I'm confident that when the facts are looked at, any president ... will quickly conclude how critically important NAFTA and Canadian-American trade relations are to jobs and prosperity on both sides of our border and, in particular, the importance of energy security," he said.

Canada is the single largest supplier of energy to the United States, Harper noted.

"With gas prices ever on the rise, and more and more American jobs being exported across our borders, which candidate do you trust to answer the phone at 2 a.m. to ensure that our goods sent to Canada and Mexico face steep tariffs? Which candidate would enact Smoot-Hawley-esque policies to make sure the oncoming threat of a recession becomes more than a liberal exaggeration to a full-fledged reality? Which candidate will make sure only the richest Americans can afford to fly on commercial airplanes and fill their gas tanks?"

Bush, Calderon and Harper argued that the agreement has created new jobs, lowered prices on goods for consumers, and made the region more competitive at a time when the Chinese and Indian economies are starting to accelerate.

Interestingly enough, the three leaders also have statistics to back their assertions. Now onto COLOMBIA!

Colombia already has duty-free access to the U.S. market for most goods under a U.S. trade preference program that dates back to 1991. The pact would scrap many tariffs on U.S. businesses that export to Colombia and phase out the rest.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat who put off the vote on the Colombia pact, said Democrats want to consider domestic economic issues first.

"Democrats have repeatedly told the president we are willing to work with him in good faith to create jobs and restore our economic strength," she said in a statement.

The first and easiest step in restoring our economic strength might possibly be to not stand in the way of a free-trade agreement with Colombia. Companies such as Caterpillar and other construction suppliers would greatly benefit from their exports not being taxed to infinity by Colombia.

My apologize for the lack of updates

But, between battling an upper-respiratory infection, and having a 10-page paper in Metaphysics due today, I have been unable to remain diligent to this blog. Now that it's hotter than the 6th circle of hell here in Austin, I'm probably going to be more sedentary than usual, giving me more time to devote to the blog, in the short run. However, with this semester coming to an end, I am no doubt going to be extremely busy the second half of last week. So, expect the number of posts per day to increase at least through the weekend, and another hiatus starting in about a week, with a full-fledged amalgam of wit, political incorrectness, and Reuters links to follow starting in May.

Don't pay attention to what Obama says

Of course it's way out of line to look at Obama's legislative record while working for the state of Illinois, now evidently we can't judge him by his words.

Wednesday night, in a debate here, Barack Obama complained a number of times about the presidential campaign process and how some people spend way too much time “obsessing” about some of the things he and others have actually said.

They obsess about remarks he admits he “mangled” about people in small towns who, he said, “get bitter” and “cling” to “guns or religion.” People also obsess about his pastor for 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who once said the U.S. government brought on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks “with its own terrorism.”

My question is, what the hell are we supposed to judge him by?

It pays to run for president.

Barack Obama earned $4.2 million in 2007.

In tax returns the campaign released Wednesday, the Obamas reported a significant jump in their income from the previous year as profits from the books "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope" accounted for some $4 million. The Obamas paid federal taxes of $1.4 million and donated $240,370 to charity.

It's really hard to be bitter when you make that much money.

I'm back

I broke my laptop last Thursday, and have had only limited access to a computer over the weekend, but thankfully got my comp back today. That explains the dearth of posts the past few days. Let's see here though, we had the Compassion Forum over the weekend or as I like to call it "Demmies do diety" also, I didn't really discuss the Petraeus hearings last week, so I'll hopefully try to get something in on that. Then of course there's Barack's weekly "I'm going to put my foot in my mouth" statement regarding the "bitter" working-class voters of Pennsylvania. Finally, the Rezko trial has been going on and Obama's name has come up a couple of times. Over the course of the next two days, I'll have something on these topics.

An expert's take on the Colombia/NAFTA issue

One of my current government teachers (who I'll let remain anonymous for now, because I didn't ask his permission to publish his words in this blog) specializes in Latin American politics, so I thought I'd shoot him an e-mail regarding the stalled trade agreement with Colombia. Here's what I asked:

I'm a student currently in your GOV 312 class, and knowing that your specialty
is Latin America was wondering if you had any perspective on the partisan
nature of a potential free trade agreement with Colombia. I've read plenty of
arguments from the right in support of an agreement, but am struggling to get a
perspective on the Democratic opposition to this issue. Being a person who
trusts our legislators in good faith (a naive position, perhaps), I am hesitant
to apply the Ginsberg/Schefter hypothesis to this, that their tight connection
with unions is preventing anything from being accomplished. However, the fact
that the bill is now about to be tabled due to a rule change is leading me more
and more to the conclusion that this bill would probably benefit both nations
and pass if put up for a vote.

It being an election year, and the need to appeal to union-oriented swing states
of Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc. seems to be the only reason for opposition
from the Democrats. The lewd waffling of Obama and Clinton on the NAFTA issue
further leads me to this conclusion. If you could offer any perspective on the
Democrats position, even if you support an agreement and have to play devil's
advocate, I would appreciate it.

To give a little background, we had to read the book Politics By Other Means by Ginsberg and Shefter, who's thesis is essentially that politicians don't really care about the issues, but only retaining power entrenched in their institutions. A classic example for the right would be the military, while the Environmental Protection Agency is one for the left. A dismal hypothesis, which I tend to disagree with on most issues, but in some it seems evident. Anyway, here is my professor's response:

I am afraid I must agree with the cynical Ginsberg & Shefter interpretation on this issue! US Trade with Colombia is very limited, around 18 Bio $/Year, I believe, ie the issue is primarily symbolic. But it has been caught up in this primary campaign, in the way you state -- and you mention the irresponsible insinuations about NAFTA, which can't really have been sincere [but they did get the Mexicans & Canadians worried]. In general, so much of US trade policy is driven by fairly narrow interest groups, not only unions but also protectionist sectors of business. It's a shame in this case because from the perspective of broader US interests, it's important to "reward" a staunch ally like Colombia's Pres. Uribe, especially because Uribe faces so much "heat" from leftist leaders such as Hugo Chavez. If the US cannot consistently support its friends, its adversaries will be happy! This whole process really doesn't look very good, from the perspective of broader US interests!

It's good to know someone with much more insight and knowledge than me also sees through the politicking of Obama and Clinton on this issue. Again, I feel vindicated.

UPDATE: Sorry about the horrid formatting of my portion of the dialog, but that's the way it pasted and I can't figure out how to make it more readable.

Facts really are troublesome things

Regardless of political affiliation, you've got to read this. Being that it's a chart,and my formatting skills are below par, I can't embed it here, but it's short, so check it out.

I guess that means it's time to fire Bill

In the strange case of the Penn being mightier than the words, HRC recently fired one of her top advisors, Mark Penn, because he rationally supports a free trade agreement with Colombia, which differs with her position. This statement really doesn't do the firing justice, because he was actually working with the Colombians discussing a trade deal.

News of Penn's March 31 meeting with Colombian Ambassador Carolina Barco Isakson, in which they discussed a free trade deal, first surfaced on Friday.

Penn apologized for the meeting, which he held in his separate role as chief executive officer of Burson-Marsteller Worldwide, a lobbying firm hired by the South American country to help win the approval by the U.S. Congress of a free trade agreement with the United States.

And then comes Bill.

The presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that her husband, the former president, supports a free trade agreement with Colombia that his wife strenuously opposes.

The acknowledgment adds new hurdles to the New York senator's bid to woo Democratic voters in Pennsylvania and elsewhere who believe free trade agreements have eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs. On Sunday, she demoted her chief campaign strategist for his role in promoting the Colombia pact.

That second paragraph cuts right to the meat of her position, and Obama's for that matter. When campaigning in Ohio, both made themselves out to be staunch opponents of NAFTA, something contradictory to common sense, as well as their political precedents. Now that they are in Pennsylvania, they are appealing to the major unions who oppose any form of free trade and globalization.

Frankly, I'm fairly certain a free trade agreement with Colombia will be reached shortly, because all the numbers I've read make it seem beneficial to both countries. If this weren't the middle of an election year, Clinton and Obama would undoubtedly support it. When this does reach the Senate floor for a vote, I am really interested to see whether any Democrats outside of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan as well as those in the party leadership actually oppose the trade agreement.

Really Hildog? Really?

Here's an interesting e-mail I got from the HRC campaign, titled "Everybody counts in this country"

Dear Colin,

Please take the time to listen, as I have, to the voices of our fellow citizens in Michigan and Florida.

A supporter from Marion, MI put it simply: "We want to have our voice heard! We want to vote!" Another in Delray Beach, FL reminded Americans of what we all believe, "Our votes should count. We went to the polls in good faith that our votes would count and our voices would be heard."

Tens of thousands of people in Michigan, Florida, and all over the country are standing up and speaking out, urging that we live up to our democratic ideals. In our hearts we know that voters everywhere deserve the chance to make their voices heard.

Hillary Clinton respects all voters and their right to participate in this historic contest. Their votes, along with all the others, will and should determine when this contest is at an end. It's the American way -- everybody counts in this country.

Seeing as how Obama currently has the pledged delegate count, and a substantial popular vote count, isn't HRC disenfranchising voters in the Democratic primary by staying in?

Oh wait, there are superdelegates. If there is a more perfect example of denying the people the right to choose their nominee, I have yet to find it. To give a bit of a backstory, the superdelegate idea was spawned in response to the Democratic nomination of Walter Mondale by popular vote in the 1984 presidential primary. Against Reagan in the general election, Mondale faired reasonably well in his home state of Minnesota as well as the District of Columbia. Unfortunately he lost every other state, and the overall electoral college 525-13.

In light of how most of the American public didn't agree with Democratic primary voters, they came up with the superdelegate system to ensure another Mondale wouldn't be nominated. Taking the electoral responsibility away from the people, and giving it to the superdelegates (comprised of Democratic politicians and party leaders) is the embodiment of disenfranchisement.

It takes a lot to laugh, it takes a liberal to fuck up the Olympics

Well since China is hosting the Olympics this summer, the birkenstock-wearing "FREEEEEEE TIBEEEETTT!" crowd is going to be out in full force to make a statement about the People's Republic of China during the torch ceremony.

On the same day activists scaled the Golden Gate Bridge protesting China's policies in Tibet, presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., called on President Bush to boycott the opening ceremony for this summer's Beijing Olympics.

I wasn't aware that PCP replaced marijuana as the drug of choice for hippies.

"The violent clashes in Tibet and the failure of the Chinese government to use its full leverage with Sudan to stop the genocide in Darfur are opportunities for Presidential leadership," Clinton said in a statement. "These events underscore why I believe the Bush administration has been wrong to downplay human rights in its policy towards China. At this time, and in light of recent events, I believe President Bush should not plan on attending the opening ceremonies in Beijing, absent major changes by the Chinese government."

Man, you want to talk about pandering to the kumbaya-kids, she references Darfur, Tibet, and failures of the Bush administration, in a speech dealing with the Olympics. Next time she should just sing John Lennon's "Imagine" for the same effect.

In San Francisco on Monday, three protestors hung banners from the bridge's cables just two days before the arrival of the Olympic torch in the city.

"They are doing it at all the landmarks in the cities that are hosting the Olympic torch," said Tenzing Dasang, a member of Students for a Free Tibet, an activist group which he said planned the action.

Wearing helmets and safety gloves, the three apparently experienced climbers hung the banners between three parallel red cables after a careful ascent. Two helpers below on the bridge were later detained, Dasang said.

"One World, One Dream: Free Tibet," read one of two banners, protesting China's recent crackdown on Tibet. A second sign read "Free Tibet 08." Several smaller Tibetan flags fluttered in the wind.

I was going to call them "one-worlders" for sarcastic effect, but they beat me to the punch. I just hope their safety gloves and helmets were made from industrial hemp.

Oh Jesus

Crucifixes submerged in jars of piss is one thing, but this takes the cake.

They knew it would be risky to exhibit a homoerotic version of Christ's Last Supper, but curators at museum of Vienna's Roman Catholic Cathedral weren't ready for a barrage of angry messages and calls to be shut down.

The source of the dispute, which Austrian media has dubbed Vienna's version of the Mohammad caricature row, is a retrospective honoring Austria's cherished artist Alfred Hrdlicka, who turned 80 earlier this year.

Yeah, but for some reason I have trouble imagining Pope Benedict calling for the death of the artist and the bombing of the museum.

"I don't see any blasphemy here," he said, gesturing at a Crucifixion picture showing a soldier simultaneously beating Jesus and holding his genitals. "People can imagine what they want to."

I don't think "beating" was the best choice of words here. As far as his liberal use of the word "imagine" goes, I don't think anyone imagined seeing a soldier fondling their dying savior, but tit-for-tit.

But the most disputed work was 'Leonardo's Last Supper, restored by Pier Paolo Pasolini' which showed cavorting Apostles sprawling over the dining table and masturbating each other.

Hrdlicka says he represented the men in this way because there are no women in the Da Vinci painting which inspired it.

Oh well now it all makes sense. Since most dinner parties around the year 32 devolved into Bacchanalian orgies, it only makes sense to have the apostles beating each other off. Jacking Peter to fist Paul, a new colloquialism.

A communist and atheist, Hrdlicka has said the Bible is the most thrilling book he has ever read and that religious imagery forms a central core to his work.

Funny how you have to get to the third page of the article to find out the artist isn't even himself a Christian.

Boehler says the angry emails he has received remind him of how some reacted to Mel Gibson's 2004 film "The Passion of The Christ". In his opinion, critics of the film's violence and physicality also missed the point.

"The Crucifixion was brutal and it would be a lie to say everything in our world is nice," he said, pointing out that Hrdlicka is an anti-war activist who has seen the effects of Nazism and violence first hand.

Brutal, yes, but erotic? Everyone acknowledges the brutality of Christ's passion, but I guess most of us looked over the verse regarding a soldier cupping Jesus' balls.

The only real substance anyone can take from this article is the disparity in reactions to this art and those to the Danish Mohammad cartoons. The religion of peace's imams respond by calling for the destruction of the newspaper which published the cartoons, whereas the crusading infidels merely ask for it to be taken down, since it is in a church museum.

The ultimate trump card

With all the hoopla surrounding the impending Democratic presidential nominee of either a black man or a woman, adding a black woman on the bottom-half of the Republican ticket certainly would diminish the demographic implications of the Dems minority header. On comes Condoleeza Rice.

On Sunday, Dan Senor, a Republican strategist and former spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority that governed Iraq after the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion, said Rice was courting conservatives for the job.

"Condi Rice has been actively, actually in recent weeks, campaigning for this," Senor told ABC's "This Week" program.

Rice fueled speculation when she attended a meeting at the end of March with conservatives from an anti-tax lobbying group run by conservative activist Grover Norquist.

The first obvious attack against her is going to be the ad hominem, Aunt Thomasina approach, which probably won't work. However, her close ties to the Bush Administration certainly won't help in a general election.

I don't see this happening, because, frankly, when it comes to domestic issues, she has been essentially out of the loop the past few years. Her perceived strength is foreign policy, which also happens to be John McCain's. While Rice might be tempting, I just don't see her as a good match for McCain.

I vvvaaannt to suck your inbox

Every so often, UT sends us these neat warning e-mails about certain dangerous events on campus. Usually its related to a mugging, bomb threat, or a drunk hobo who ended up going the wrong way down 21st and can't find the drag. Well, now it's BATS!

Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) and the Office of the Vice President for Employee and Campus Services (ECS) want to remind you that Austin has a significant bat population, and though they're really cute--they are considered a high-rabies risk species and should NEVER be touched.

If you find a live or dead bat in a building or a live bat that can not fly outside, please call Environmental Health & Safety's Animal Make Safe program at 471-BATS (2287).

Please remember to shut all windows and doors especially in the evening to help keep bats and other animals from getting into buildings.

For more information about bats on campus, please visit http://www.utexas.edu/safety/ehs/bulletin/batsrabies.html

The funny thing is I doubt they send these e-mails unless something actually happened to a student or staff member. If they were into preemptive e-mail safety, we'd get five warnings a day. I really, really want to meet the kid who was bitten by a bat.

The audacity of the 2nd Amendment

The headline, "Obama aims for pro-gun vote" speaks for itself.

But he is nevertheless making a play for pro-gun voters in rural Pennsylvania.

By highlighting his background in constitutional law and downplaying his voting record, Obama is engaging in a quiet but targeted drive to win over an important constituency that on the surface might seem hostile to his views.

Yeah, you know, who the hell cares how he actually legislates, when he can give a rousing speech to the contrary? For some perspective, in 2004, the NRA gave him a failing grade when it came to gun issues.

The need to craft a strategy aimed at pro-gun voters underscores the potency of the issue in Pennsylvania, which claims one of the nation’s highest per capita membership rates in the National Rifle Association.

It was politically advantageous to decry the fouls of NAFTA when the Ohio vote was important. Now that the Second Amendment is a crucial issue, Obama is trying to appear pro-gun. What he did is the essence of pandering to a special interest, something he claims to be against. Throwing in his affiliation with Rev. Jeremiah Wright's congregation, at a time when he needed the disgruntled black vote to earn a seat in the Illinois state legislature, it's apparent that Obama is the absolute personification of political opportunism. Slurring an endless barrage of political buzzwords like "hope" and "change" help accrue the Messiah-seeking idiot voter demographic, but if he is elected and the opaque shield of campaign speeches is lifted in favor of actual policy, it will be a fairly seamless transition to the politics-of-old he is decrying.

I guess that means it's back to being a tort lawyer!

Former Senator and serial ambulance chaser, John Edwards said he would not accept a VP bid if offered.

Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards said on Thursday he would not accept the nomination for U.S. vice president as he did four years ago.

I got a gut feeling they weren't going to give it to you, John-boy. Oh well, Edwards is young enough that he still has plenty of time to run a couple more losing presidential campaigns. There is still hope to remain somewhat relevant, John.

Ohhh Clinton lied, people died... to fire her

In another astoundingly shocking revelation, Hillary Clinton lied. This time it wasn't about sniper fire, being named after Sir Edmund Hillary, or anything trivial. These lies got her fired. (Link courtesy of Ed Morrisey at Hot Air)

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Misery loves company and for all the misdeeds and lies her husband Bill has been accused of, Hillary may actually be more disingenuous. The real question is whether or not HRC subordinates give a damn. For the most part, the HRC camp is filled with people who loved Bill. Hence her utter inability to compete with Obama for the youth vote.

The beef of the rest of the article goes into her involvement in the Watergate investigation, and pretty much how she pissed off a bunch of ethical Democrats (no that's not an oxymoron) with her actions.

Like I said earlier, I doubt this is going to phase any supporters, because frankly, like a child subjected to endless violence on TV, they're probably immune to her actions and see it more as a political status quo than something to be abhorred with and ashamed by.

Ohhhh hyperbole much?

If Bush is Hitler, then the next obvious fallacious liberal rhetorical comparison would be of Barack Obama to Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King Jr. I'll get to that reference later, but here's a great unsubstantiated charge of subliminal racism to hold you over from Alice Walker:

I made my first white women friends in college; they loved me and were loyal to our friendship, but I understood, as they did, that they were white women and that whiteness mattered.

If anyone can tell me what the hell that means, please do.

I am a supporter of Barack Obama because I believe he is the right person to lead the United States at this time. He offers a rare opportunity for the country and the world to do better. It is a deep sadness to me that many of my feminist white women friends cannot see him, cannot hear the fresh choices toward movement he offers. That they can believe that millions of Americans choose Obama over Clinton only because he is a man, and black, feels tragic to me.

This is a prime example of liberalism's divide and conquer strategy I mentioned a while back in another post. The irony of that last statement is that the core principle of the column is that Barack is black and that should matter. Here's that great comparison I was talking about:

When I have supported white people, it was because I thought them the best to do the job. If Obama were in any sense mediocre, he would be forgotten by now. He is, in fact, a remarkable human being, not perfect but humanly stunning, like King was and like Mandela is. He is the change America has been trying desperately and for centuries to hide, ignore, kill. The change it must have if we are to convince the rest of the world that we care about people other than our (white) selves.

Let's get some context around King and Mandela. Nelson Mandela fought against Apartheid in South Africa, was placed in prison for it, and King faced much of the same in America, and was put in jail in Birmingham (anyone who's taken an 8th grade English class knows this story). Both men actively participated in civil disobedience. They, right so, thought the laws of the time were unjust and were willing to take the consequences for it. Unless you're a cocaine enthusiast, it's hard to come up with a time in Barack's life where he knowingly broke the law for a just cause. Furthermore, his being black, if anything, has propelled his candidacy, whereas Mandela and King were persecuted for their race. Of course none of this matters if you're a liberal.

King and Mandela were black and were persecuted for it. Obama is black, so he must have been persecuted for it (of course you have to discount his upper-class status and Ivy League credentials for this train of thought to appear logical). Therefore, we must support Obama so the persecution will end.

But wait..... the column gets even more batshit.

I want a grown-up attitude to Cuba, for instance, a country and people I love. I want an end to the war immediately, and I want the soldiers to be encouraged to destroy their weapons and drive themselves out of Iraq. I want the Israeli government to be made accountable for its behaviour to the Palestinians, and I want the people of the US to cease acting as if they don't understand what is going on. But most of all I want someone with the confidence to talk to anyone, "enemy" or "friend", and this Obama has shown he can do.

Those of us who use the common vernacular have a word for the part I bolded. It's called desertion. If all the soldiers destroy their weapons, the Islamofascists will be shitting their pants with glee, because an unarmed soldier is much easier to kill than one with his weapon held down, because he thinks you're sincere about surrendering. Of course again, she offers absolutely no evidence to support the claim that Obama can or will "talk to anyone."

Her last paragraph is so lewd, I'm going to take a sentence-by-sentence approach to analysis.

We have come a long way, sisters, and we are up to the challenges of our time, one of which is to build alliances based not on race, ethnicity, colour, nationality, sexual preference or gender, but on truth.

If she doesn't want to build alliances on "gender" why does she direct her column at women by using the term, "sisters?"

Even if Obama becomes president, our country is in such ruin it may be beyond his power to lead us to rehabilitation.

Jeremiah Wright: Now including a vagina and feminine touch! The reason unabashed Obama supporters are so dismissive of the Wright controversy is that they share his views, so it's impossible to be outraged.

If he is elected, however, we must, as citizens of the planet, insist on helping him do the best job that can be done; more, we must insist that he demand this of us.

Imagine going in for a job interview, and when asked for documentation to prove American citizenship, you replied, "I'm a citizen of the planet!" You'd be pissing in a cup about three minutes later.

Ohhhhh let's play God

If this doesn't disgust you, you probably haven't read The Island of Dr. Moreau. Gotta love how this is in their "health" section. I guess the "Disgusting Abuses of Scientific Power" section is temporarily down.

Embryos containing both human and animal material have been created in Britain for the first time, a month before the House of Commons is to vote on new laws to regulate the controversial research.

A team at the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne announced tonight that it had successfully generated “admixed embryos” by adding human DNA to empty cow eggs, in the first experiment of its kind in the UK.

Test-tube bestiality. What a development! Donkey shows in Mexico are going to lose some of their more educated clientèle.

Admixed embryos are widely supported by the scientific community and patient groups, as they provide an opportunity to produce powerful stem cell models for investigating diseases such as Parkinson’s and diabetes, and for developing new drugs.

Their creation, however, has been vociferously opposed by religious groups, particularly the Roman Catholic church. Cardinal Keith O’Brien, the head of the Catholic church in Scotland, described the work last month as “experiments of Frankenstein proportion”.

I don't think Frankenstein quite does this justice. It's more along the lines of Dr. Mengele working at Planned Parenthood.

Ohhh evil oil companies

In another brilliant move by quasi-Swedish Congress, they're politely requesting that the major oil companies contribute to a fund that would help the poor pay for increasing energy costs.

Two U.S. senators on Tuesday asked big oil companies to voluntarily contribute to a fund that would help low-income consumers pay for this winter's high heating bills and transportation costs later this summer.

Republican Olympia Snowe of Maine and Democrat Jack Reed of Rhode Island said record energy prices have been a windfall for big oil companies and they need to share some of their profits with consumers who are in need.

According to who? This is a principle Karl Marx would be proud of. The obvious ramification of the oil companies don't curtail to the government's demands is higher taxes. Here's a brilliant idea for the poor: save money and buy shares in big oil. Even if the stock market collapses, you can always trust the government to bail you out.

Ohhh Subprime Legislation

What. A. Joke.

In a surprise announcement, Senate leaders Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Harry Reid (D-Nev.), cast aside the procedural politics and agreed to bring a foreclosure prevention bill to the Senate floor. Both parties have agreed to move ahead and allow the bill to come to the floor, with each side offering amendments as long as they relate to housing.

The breakthrough is extraordinary if only because the Senate has been so accustomed to gridlock on major issues like Iraq and foreign intelligence. But clearly, senators from both side of the aisle realized that legislating is better than political rhetoric as the housing market continues in a meltdown.

Foreclosure prevention? Let me get this straight, people sign on to a mortgage with a "predatory lender" (I still don't know what characteristic exactly defines a lender as "predatory") and live in a house they're never going to be able to afford. So here comes big government to the rescue! After this gets passed, Congress needs to work on legislation preventing people from losing substantial amounts of money betting on football games and gambling at casinos, and punish these predatory bookies.

Back to my thoughts on the so-called "predatory" lenders. People need to understand what the "adjustable" in adjustable rate mortgages means. My instinct tells me that the rate may fluctuate. Let's not be silly though; expecting the American populace to understand the meaning of what a fourth-grader would refer to as a ten-cent word might be a little too much.

Oh Astros!

Well tonight was opening night for my beloved Houston Astros in San Diego against the Padres. With the exceptions of Lance Berkman, Carlos Lee, and Brad Ausmus, the lineup is completely revamped from last year. With all the money spent on hitting this offseason, you'd think we'd be able to at least get a runner to third, let alone score. That wasn't the case as last year's Cy Young award winner Jake Peavy trumped us and we fell 4-0. New centerfielder Michael Bourn had a great game in any measure, but leadoff guys don't score runs on their own. The scorn of being tied to the Mitchell Report didn't affect our new shortstop Miguel Tejada seemed unphased, going 2-4, but when they needed him to get a hit, he was suspiciously absent. Lee, Berkman, and Hunter Pence went hitless, something I don't expect much of this year. Even though starter Roy Oswalt didn't have a good game, I think the next few games will really show who belongs on our pitching staff, as we have assembled a rotation of young guys who have shown little to no potential at the Major League level and a has-been in Shawn Chacon.

Ed Wade can get all the damn Tejadas, Bourns, and Erstads he wants, but when he trades away legitimate pitching prospects like Troy Patten and thinks signings like Chacon, Geoff Geary, and Doug Brocail will improve our dearth on the pitching staff he is absolutely mistaken. This isn't the NBA, we're not the Golden State Warriors, and Cecil Cooper sure as hell isn't Don Nelson. Baseball is the one sport where just trying to outscore your opponent on a day-to-day basis won't get you into the playoffs. When the Astros go 74-88 this year and were out of the playoff picture by June, blame it all on Wade. Roy Oswalt and Jose Valverde alone maketh not a respectable pitching staff.

While my passionate support for the Dallas Cowboys runs supreme in my love of professional sports teams, none get my hopes up like the Astros. If you want an example of how to take a bad franchise make it good and then make it mediocre, talk to owner Drayton McLane. McLane seems to believe that the concepts of a strong minor league system and a good Major League team are mutually exclusive. I'm just pissed we lost, and don't look like we have much of a chance this year. Hey though, Tejadas, Lees, and Matsuis put people in the seats and ultimately that's all that matter to McLane. If he can feign like he gives a damn about winning and get away with it then so be it.

Oh Boycott!

Nancy Pelosi has suggested that President Bush boycott the opening of the Olympics in Beijing.

"I think boycotting the opening ceremony, which really gives respect to the Chinese government, is something that should be kept on the table," Pelosi, D-Calif., told "Good Morning America" co-anchor Robin Roberts in an interview airing Tuesday. "I think the president might want to rethink this later, depending on what other heads of state do."

What better way to marginalize the true enemies we are fighting a war against than to make a political statement against a country that at some point in the near future may turn out to be an ally.

Ohh Momma!

Chelsea Clinton seems to be keen to taking offense to any question involving her parents and the Lewinsky scandal. (Here's a video of the first time she was asked about Monica)

"It's none of your business," she said. "That is something that is personal to my family. I'm sure there are things that are personal to your family that you don't think are anyone else's business either."

Right Hon, except my dad wasn't president of the United States and my mom isn't running for that position either. In fact, neither of my parents had extramarital affairs for that matter. Unlike the young Obama girls, who are just kids and are present just for photo-ops and probably don't know much about politics at their age, you, Miss Clinton, are a surrogate giving speeches on your mother's behalf, trying to convince the American people why she is qualified to become president. Questions involving her ability to manage her homelife are not out of reach when the people are assessing her ability to manage the nation.

The Lewinsky scandal was an integral part of Bill Clinton's second term as president, so questioning his wife's role and somewhat permissive nature regarding her husband's infidelity is not out of bounds when doing a Q and A with a campaign surrogate. Her response the first time the question was posed was similar.

Chelsea Clinton appeared taken aback by the question, saying, "Wow, you're the first person actually that's ever asked me that question in the, I don't know maybe, 70 college campuses I've now been to, and I do not think that is any of your business."

I guess "bitch" runs in the family. As a matter of fact, it appears the trait of revealing as little as possible about your private life, as well as being offended when the media places that responsibility upon themselves. Maybe it's time to employ the "Vast right-wing conspiracy" rhetoric again.

Out da club

This sounds like the beginning of a bad political joke, but what do 50 Cent and Bill Richardson have in common? Both come from minority backgrounds and have reached success with major contributions from others (Richardson with the Clinton Administration and 50 with Dr. Dre). Both have also now left the Clintons in favor of Barack Obama (Link via Drudge)

I heard Obama speak," the rapper told the MTV News crew assembled at his Connecticut mansion to hear the new G-Unit LP and talk about his upcoming video game. "He hit me with that he-just-got-done- watching-'Malcolm X,' and I swear to God, I'm like, 'Yo, Obama!' " He threw his fist in the air. "I'm Obama to the end now, baby!"

Word. Here's a ripe bit of sarcasm courtesy of the writer.

While Governor Richardson has begun to speak out on behalf of Obama at campaign stops and on television, it was unclear at press time whether 50 will receive similar requests from the Obama team.

I'm sure right now Fiddy's looking up words that rhyme with "hope" and "change".

UPDATE: I've been working on some lyrics and here's the best I can come up with

Yo, yo, yo
Turn the mic'phones up on all ya'll muthafuckin' headsets
I got two words: Fuck NAFTA
Bomb for multinationals but the nation gets tha shaft-a
I'm talkin' 'bout single-payer healthcare
To get ya'll bitch-asses offa welfare
Bush's domestic policies ain't fuckin' fair
Just talk to my boy, Reverend Jeremiah Wright
He'll put ya in yo place and get ya ready to fight our plight, AAAAAIIIIGGGGHT???


More to come, maybe.

Fitna

Well, I just watched Fitna today for the first time. For those of you not in the know, Fitna is a short film by Dutch politician Geert Wilders, juxtaposing verses in the Koran with Muslim acts of terrorism and quotes from the imams advocating such attacks.

Via Hot Air, I saw a link to an editorial written by a Muslim journalist, Fatma Aykut, who offers a response.

A desire to shock also compelled Wilders to include footage from the beheading of a hostage, uncensored and uncut. The camera fixes on the severed head as the scene fades out. The only problem is that the news value of this footage is absolutely zero. The viewer finds herself wondering: "When is Wilders actually going to shock me?"

I guess video-recorded decapitations have really lost their luster for Aykut. Maybe the terrorists should step it up a notch to actually "shock" Muslim journalists.

Wilders' accompanies these "shocking images" with quotations from the Koran, an effort to expose Islam's holiest text as a well-spring of hate. That makes it difficult for me, a totally average Muslim, to defend Islam as a peaceful religion. These quotations are not made up -- they can actually be found in the Koran. Passages from the holy book that rail hatefully against Jews have, unfortunately, long been misused as propaganda. That is tragic, as it is tragic that similar anti-Semitic passages are just as common in the Bible.

The most notable difference in the anti-Semitism in the Bible as opposed to that in the Koran is that Catholic bishops worldwide aren't using these passages as a rallying cry for another Jewish holocaust. Identifying Islam as "a peaceful religion" might be the most Orwellian phrase in common vernacular today. She goes on...

The film's title, "Fitna," can be translated as "chaos," and that describes the first 10 minutes of the film. An endless stream of fear-mongering images promotes the cliché of Muslims as savages -- a horde of bearded, dark-skinned men in long white robes. The viewer finds herself asking, "What is this film trying to achieve? What does the film maker want?"

I can only assume Wilders wants radical Islam portrayed in the media and by Western governments as a "horde of bearded, dark-skinned men in long white robes" willing to kill infidels at a whim and wanting to institute Sharia law on all nations.

But he chooses to ignore certain realities of Muslim life in Europe: The high rate of unemployment among immigrants, the slim chances of receiving a good education, the daily encounters with racism and the countless immigrant children -- particularly boys -- who are abandoned.

This begs the question then, why immigrate? If Muslim life is so terrible in Europe, why not stay put in the Islamofascist states? To quote my new hero, Mark Steyn:

"As one is always obliged to explain when tiptoeing around this territory, I'm not a racist, only a culturist. I believe Western culture -- rule of law, universal suffrage, etc. -- is preferable to Arab culture: that's why there are millions of Muslims in Scandinavia, and four Scandinavians in Syria. Follow the traffic. I support immigration, but with assimilation."

In the end of her assessment of Fitna, Aykut offers up this gem.

To that end, "Fitna" surprised me. One can argue that it is overhyped -- Wilders shows nothing but facts, even if they are somewhat one-sided.

How dare he poorly portray Islam by making a movie stringing together a bunch of facts.

An hour without power

I was torn between either watching the UNC-Louisville game last night or non-stop blogging for the duration of "Earth Hour" last night at 8. As you can tell by looking at the blog, I chose March Madness. Is there anything more annoying in our political climate than the self-righteous environmentalist wackos? Besides the closely related animal-rights activists at PETA?

I have another rhetorical question. Is there a more perfect way to sum up the absurdity of the "sustainability" fetish than by having all the ecotards turn off their electricity for an hour? Somebody should tell the wanna-be Captain Planets that the DVR is still using power to record The Amazing Race 14.

The Sydney Opera House to San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge went dark as people switched off lights in their homes and skylines dimmed around the world on Saturday to show concern with global warming.

China's plastic bag factory must have missed the memo.

Up to 30 million people were expected to have turned off their lights for 60 minutes by the time "Earth Hour" -- which started in Suva in Fiji and Christchurch in New Zealand -- completed its cycle westward.

More than 380 towns and cities and 3,500 businesses in 35 countries signed up for the campaign that is in its second year after it began in 2007 in Sydney, Australia's largest city.

"Earth Hour shows that everyday people are prepared to pull together to find a solution to climate change. It can be done," said James Leape of WWF International, which was running the campaign.

Nah James, Earth Hour shows that everyday people, by and large, don't want to adopt your fascistic agenda, but through your green-lensed glasses, all you see is your underlings keeping the H3 and Lexus Hybrid in the four car garage for an hour, while they eat some vegetable chips and hummus and read An Inconvenient Truth by candlelight, thinking that somehow they're saving the whales.

In a tip of its virtual hat to the event, the background of Google's home page turned to black from white on more than a dozen country sites including Google.com. A message on the site read: "We've turned the lights out. Now it's your turn." and directed visitors to conserve energy when using computers.

Unfortunately, making the background black, while an excellent symbolic gesture, actually uses more energy, thus displaying the detachment of liberal doctrine from practical application and end results. (Link courtesy of Steyn at The Corner.) Oh wait, they aren't detached from applicable results, they just don't care.

Organizers of Earth Hour said that while switching off a light for one hour would have little impact on carbon emissions, the fact that so many people were taking part showed how much interest and concern at the climate crisis had taken hold. They said they plan a similar event March 28, 2009.

Who needs to actually do thing to save the environment when you have thousands of mindless followers worldwide willing to bend to your every whim, provided you attach an unsubstantiated, bogus cause to it?

Oh Colin

I assume you say that that quote is ironic because you think Obama has no economic plan...

Shouldn't he be worried about HRC?

I guess looking past her is one way to make Hillary seem irrelevant, but Obama attacked McCain's economic approach.

"John McCain has admitted he doesn't understand the economy as well as he should, and yesterday he proved it in giving a speech on the housing crisis," Obama told an auditorium of supporters.

Obama pointed out that McCain "said the best way for us to address the fact that millions of Americans are losing their homes is to just sit back and watch it happen. In his entire speech yesterday, he offered not one policy, not one idea, not one bit of relief to the nearly 35,000 North Carolinians who are forced to foreclose on their dreams in the last three months."

The irony is delicious. Furthermore, all this mortgage garbage is making me sick. I'm fairly certain that this issue will be resolved before McCain, Obama, or Clinton are president. It's just a hot-button issue now.

Pennsylvanity

Unless a shocking revelation about HRC comes out, Obama's going to get waxed.

Just how bad is documented by some key findings from a series of polls, including the Franklin and Marshal College Poll, all released recently. Almost none of the results bode well for Obama. Across the board Clinton is winning and winning big. She has decisively stopped Obama's earlier momentum in Pennsylvania--and seems set for a romp.

Statewide among Democrats, Clinton holds a lead that ranges from 16 to 26 points. The Real Clear Politics consensus estimate is roughly 16 points. She is winning every major region of the state except Philadelphia, while Obama has actually slipped slightly with blacks and more substantially with younger voters--two demographics that are critical backstops for him in the contest. He has also lost support with other key constituencies including white males and evangelicals.

The fact that Obama is losing ground among black voters is shocking. This of course begs the question that if the Democratic primaries were redone in most states, would Obama still have a delegate lead? It's obvious he may not stand as much of a chance as HRC in a general election against John McCain, something worrying to members of the DNC. It might not be as bad as it seems though.

For all these reasons, it's far too soon for the full figured lady to get ready to sing in this race. Obama is at his nadir in Pennsylvania. It will not get worse for him, and it could still be a very close contest. He has not begun to seriously engage in the state. Moreover his plausible path to victory through the Philadelphia suburbs remains an opportunity to be tapped.

To a remarkable degree for a candidate down by double digits, Obama may still control his own fate. In the next couple of weeks, we will see what he makes of that opportunity.

He's going to have to work hard and get high turnout in urban Philadelphia in order to change the outcome though. Obviously the ramifications of the Jeremiah Wright association are far-reaching.

Divided we're liberal

I saw an interesting commercial for the Divided We Fail PAC, who's mascot provides and interesting take on genetic engineering, by combining a donkey and an elephant. I decided I'd give their website a gander. (Noting that it's connected to the AARP should set off some warning signs.) Of course fronting as a group for some form of unity makes for a nice admirable cover-up, but if you look at their issues page, something stands out.

We believe...

Wellness and prevention efforts, including changes in personal behavior such as diet and exercise, should be top national priorities.

Forget protecting our civil liberties and securing our safety abroad, the state should make sure you don't eat too many Big Macs and hit up the gym every now and again! An unfit citizen is an unnecessary one!

We believe...

Workers should be provided with financial incentives to save, should have access to effective retirement plans, and should be able to keep working and contributing to society regardless of age.

Having money for when you need it later isn't incentive enough to save, the state should pay people to save! Even when you retire, you shouldn't tour the country in an RV, you should stay productive and help the state! The state is your friend and caretaker!

Hell Hath No Fury...

Than a Clinton in a political battle. This article basically sums up my feelings. Pardon my french, but fuck this bitch. After Texas/Ohio, if she had just quit, Obama would probably still be ahead of McCain, and would stand a good chance of winning the general election. Now? Not so much. I guess I can't say that I'm surprised, just a little disappointed, so say the least. Hope she's proud of herself when she becomes the new Ross Perot/Ralph Nader of our generation.

More stream-of-consciousness ranting

I'm not sure this is entirely fitting with the general political theme of this blog, but much as my conversion to conservatism seemed without any particular motivation, so too does my conversion, I suppose reversion, back to Christianity. The parallels I can attribute to nothing more than, no offense to liberals and non-theists, simply maturity.

I guess the best place to start with this exercise is self-exploration would be to answer a question I posed, as an atheist/agnostic, to those with more traditional religious belief: What would be the end result had you been born into a family espousing a different set of religious dogma? The obvious answer, one our multicultural, politically correct society would abhor, would be that I would then simply be wrong. Of course, this brief answer is patently chauvinistic, but what is more chauvinistic than any religious conviction? (I'll leave the Unitarians out of this assessment) I suppose saying other religions are "wrong" isn't the best terminology, and requires some qualification. Essentially, by taking on a particular theology, one acknowledges that their belief system is the most right, and that in some way or another, the others are wrong to different degrees.

Getting back to my story, even when I felt the strongest conviction against monotheism, I still felt that at one day I would eventually adopt a more traditional metaphysical worldview. I seriously doubt any folks with religious conviction come to terms with a notion that they will one day become atheists or agnostics. This doubt alone should have left me questioning the tenants of a non-theistic position.

Of course, many conversion stories involve some traumatic event contributing to a change of faith or the impact of someone deeply religious in ones life, but I have none present. My change was more spurred on by a general nagging feeling deep within the annals of my consciousness that even though empirical and in some senses, logical evidence leads towards atheism, there was something missing. My adoption of nihilism lead towards many sleepless nights wondering what the point of waking up the next morning was, what the point of studying was, what the point of having friends was. Many atheists and agnostics are able to continue with their day-to-day lives, not specifically addressing these concerns, but putting them on the backburner, and keeping up with their responsibilities. I wasn't able to do so, and it troubled me. If life ended the moment I died, and my entirety transformed into nothingness, then there would be no sizable difference between being a homeless person and being president of the United States. All would be the same in the end: nothing.

Of course when there's no metaphysical meaning to life, it makes it a hundred-fold easier to find meaning in all differing forms of hedonism. Some try to find meaning through sex, kleptomania, recklessness, violence, etc. I tried to find it looking down an empty bottle of Jack Daniels. Frankly, I could write thousands of words on how college life fosters and promotes a life of alcohol abuse, but this isn't the point I'm trying to make. Actually I don't really even know what point I'm trying to make.

Anyway, I'd wake up Saturday, Sunday, and sometimes Monday morning with a splitting headache, recalling the supposed fun I had had, and granted, many times I had thoroughly enjoyed myself the night before. However, recalling the question asked to Edward Norton towards the climax of American History X, when asked about his racism, "Where has this gotten you?" Where has the party lifestyle gotten me? Of course I have more friends now than I ever have had, but what common ground do we share? The never-ending quest for another party, another beer. I definately cherish all the friendships I have made, and no doubt, even if I stop partying (something which won't happen suddenly) they will remain. What I am critiquing is the lifestyle that goes along with our actions. The active suppression of intellectualism that is married to the numbing of the senses. I know I can have an intelligent conversation about geopolitics, literature, music critique, etc. with every one of my friends. However, if we were to engage in this at a large enough party, no doubt we would face scorn. Not necessarily direct objections, but rather a more indirect headwind in the form of just simply not meeting anyone.

After that last sentence, I just realized I have no significant interest in meeting anyone who does not share my passion for the deeper things in life. I suppose, next time I am at a party, maybe I will engage in conversation along those subject lines. Of course, my intellectual friends with overly-active libidos might object, but oh well. This essay has really diverged heavily from the original subject matter. I guess I'll finish and try to get it more on point.

Maybe I'm subject to the atheistic contention that religion is merely a tool to help people cope with the everyday strains of life, and to have purpose. It sure as hell beats the alternative.

Divide and Conquer

Here's an interesting article on Politico about racial divisions among Obama supporters.

For working-class whites — whose coolness toward Obama helped tilt Ohio to Hillary Rodham Clinton — Obama spoke with understanding about why they dislike busing and affirmative action. “Like the anger in the black community, these resentments aren’t always shared in polite company,” he said.

For Hispanics, who have sided with Clinton in the vast majority of states this election, he lashed pundits scouring polls for signs of tension between “black and brown” and said the two communities face a common heritage of discrimination and inadequate public services.

Finally, Obama sought to connect with white Jewish voters — potentially one of the rawest nerves of all amid the Wright controversy — denouncing those blacks who see “the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.”

Now I know that it's important for politicians to appeal to different demographics with an impending election. However, these three paragraphs highlight the strategy among Democrats to divide people based on racial, religious, class, or sexual distinctions and make them feel like victims, who need government intervention to right their wrongs. Obama's candidacy is becoming a joke the more and more I read about his embrace of victimology.

Since we're talking about Al Gore...

There's a nice column by Lorne Gunter on the National Post website about climate change and the incessant exaggeration portrayed by "scientists."

A slight drop in the oceans' temperature over a period of five or six years probably is insignificant, just as a warming over such a short period would be. Yet if there had been a rise of any kind, even of the same slightness, rest assured this would be broadcast far and wide as yet another log on the global warming fire.

The context Gunter uses for his data are from buoys referred to as the Argo Buoy Movement which take different measures of ocean water around the globe constantly submerging and reemerging to provide new data. What they've showed is a general cooling trend over the past few years and Gunter analyzes it to a tee. Here's more:

Just look how tenaciously some scientists are prepared to cling to the climate change dogma. "It may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming," Dr. Willis told NPR.

Yeah, you know, like when you put your car into reverse you are causing it to enter a period of less rapid forward motion. Or when I gain a few pounds I am in a period of less rapid weight loss.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

In nearly 30 years of operation, the satellites have discovered a warming trend of just 0.14 C per decade, less than the models and well within the natural range of temperature variation.

I'm not saying for sure the models are wrong and the Argos and satellites are right, only that in a debate as critical as the one on climate, it would be nice to hear some alternatives to the alarmist theory.

I don't understand why there's such a "consensus" for the sensationalist theory of global warming when data suggests otherwise. I took a class last semester pushing the alarmism and was totally shocked at how the professors pushed the "consensus" without any sort of opposing views.

An inconvenient fluke

Link courtesy of Drudge.
The Democrat electorate is split about 50/50 as to whether they want Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton as president, so if there's a deadlock going into the convention, the obvious choice is Al Gore.

“If it (the nomination process) goes into the convention, don’t be surprised if someone different is at the top of the ticket,” Mahoney said.

A compromise candidate could be someone such as former vice president Al Gore, Mahoney said last week during a meeting with this news organization’s editorial board.

If either Clinton or Obama suggested to a deadlocked convention a ticket of Gore-Clinton or Gore-Obama, the Democratic Party would accept it, Mahoney said.

Besides an idiot, Mahoney is a Democratic representative from Florida. I guess when your state has no say in the nominating process it doesn't matter if you actually select one of the primary candidates as your nominee. The common thought all along has been that if HRC is the nominee, all the Obama people will be pissed off and do something rash, and if Obama is the nominee, the HRC people will do the same. Anyone who's taken any basic logic class knows that the obvious conclusion that follows from these premises is that Al Gore should be the nominee.

I know it sounds like I'm against Al Gore as the Democratic nominee, but this would actually be a great event. The Obama and the Hillary people are both going to be in a tizzy if something like this happens, so McCain would all but have the presidency locked up.

UPDATE: Whenever I read an article involving a member of the House of Representatives, I like to see how they measure up on Club for Growth's RePork Card, which measures how the legislator voted to strip needless spending added on to bills. Mahoney scored an impressive 4%.

Any marginalizing of your party you can do, I can do better

A friendship that emerged under similar circumstances as the kids who aren't really friends, but sit together at the school lunch table, because none of the other tables want them there, John McCain and Joe Lieberman have been buddy-buddy.

When McCain needed a quick reminder in Jordan last week on how to characterize Islamic radicals in Iraq receiving aid from Iran, Lieberman was there to whisper into his colleague’s ear. A day later in Israel, the Connecticut senator proved equally helpful, stepping in to help McCain clarify the meaning of the Jewish holiday of Purim.

Whether wearing yarmulkes together amid the throngs at Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall, meeting reporters outside 10 Downing Street in London or sporting matching suit-and-sweater combos at a snowy New Hampshire town hall meeting, the two have been nearly inseparable since Lieberman endorsed McCain last December.

The second paragraph makes the duo seem less like political allies and more like retired gay vacationers. The Democrats' rejection of Lieberman a few years ago may come and bite them in the ass when trying to portray McCain as another Bush lackey. In fact, McCain probably has more in common, in terms of policy, with Joe Lieberman than many of the Republican evangelicals in Congress, a fact the DNC is trying to mask.

That depends on what the meaning of the words "sniper fire" is

Courtesy of Ben Smith's blog at Politico, in an absolutely shocking turn of events, it turns out a Clinton told a lie. I'm not sure where this ranks in relation to the "I did not have sexual relations with that woman," but HRC is guilty of a little embellishment.

Earlier this afternoon, Sen. Hillary Clinton came to the Daily News and Inquirer building here in Philadelphia -- where she's seeklng the Daily News editorial board endorsement -- and I had a chance to ask her about a controversy that's increasingly dogged her campaign the last few days: Whether she misrepresented the danger of her March 1996 trip to a U.S. military base in Bosnia in an effort to boost her foreign policy credentials.

Clinton acknowleged today for the first time that it was a "misstatement" when she said in a major prepared foreign policy speech last week that "I remember landing under sniper fire" but also tried to brush off the entire issue as "a minor blip." She also gave a revised account of her airplane landing and her tarmac greeting at the Tuzla Air Force base 12 years ago -- seeking to explain a picture re-published this weekend in the Washington Post showing her and daughter Chelsea calmly greeting an 8-year-old girl.

When the telephone at the White House rings at 3 a.m., who's going to bullshit the most?

In the week since that remark, whicj echoed other recent statements about her trip, several journalists - most notably Michael Dobbs of the Washington Post -- have found holes in what Sen. Clinton said. In particular, Dobbs said none of more than 100 contemporaneous accounts mentioned sniper fire and that the Associated Press reporter on the trip had no recollection of any weapons fire. Dobbs also reported that CBS news footage shows the then-First Lady walking calmly from the C-17 transport plane as well as a number of dignitaries -- in addition to the 8-year-old Emina Bicakcic, a Muslim girl who read a poem in English -- waiting there.

Hey when you're running against a man who spent five and a half years as a POW in Vietnam, any effort to make it seem like you were in some dangerous foreign experience has to be a plus. Of course it's a given that in order for any sizable impact to be had, it helps when there's some validity to your claims.

Ohhh THAT liberal media

Compare CNN's coverage of Kwame Kilpatrick and Larry Craig.

Here's some excerpts from the Craig article outlining his politics and party affiliation:

A Republican senator pleaded guilty earlier this month to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge stemming from his arrest at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, according to state criminal records.

...

In recent years, Craig's voting record has earned him top ratings from social conservative groups such as the American Family Association, Concerned Women for America and the Family Research Council.

He has supported a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, telling his colleagues that it was "important for us to stand up now and protect traditional marriage, which is under attack by a few unelected judges and litigious activists."

In 1996, Craig also voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal recognition to same-sex marriages and prevents states from being forced to recognize the marriages of gay and lesbian couples legally performed in other states.

Craig has also opposed expanding the federal hate crimes law to cover offenses motivated by anti-gay bias and, in 1996, voted against a bill that would have outlawed employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, which failed by a single vote in the Senate.

Craig has endorsed former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in the 2008 presidential race. The senator was named in February, along with Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah, as Romney's liaison to build support among GOP senators.

It mentions that he is a Republican, social conservative, etc. Now here's some excerpts from the Kilpatrick article outlining some similar information in lieu of his own sex scandal. Oh wait. There isn't any. It doesn't even identify Kilpatrick as a Democrat. Splendid balanced coverage CNN. Kudos to you. I think I'm going to stop linking to CNN from now on.

My platform for any elected office

I hereby solemnly swear to the great reader(s) of this blog that if I am ever elected to any public office, the only vagina my penis is going to come in contact with is that of my future wife.

That said, we've got another political sex scandal on our hands, this time courtesy of Detroit.

A Wayne County prosecutor said Monday she will seek felony charges against Detroit's embattled Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick.

Kilpatrick, who is married, has been snarled in a well-publicized sex scandal since January after The Detroit Free Press reported he exchanged romantic text messages with his then-chief of staff, Christine Beatty.

The Detroit Free Press reported in January that in an analysis of nearly 14,000 text messages on Beatty's city-issued pager, it found some from 2002 and 2003 that indicated the two were having a romantic affair.

The newspaper report contradicted testimony Kilpatrick gave last August in a court case brought by police officers against the mayor and the city of Detroit alleging the mayor retaliated against the officers for their role in investigating his office. Critics alleged that Kilpatrick committed perjury in the case and called for his resignation.

In testimony during that case, Kilpatrick and Beatty both denied having a romantic relationship.

Will this ever end? I mean I knew politics and sex scandals go hand-in-hand, but this is starting to get ridiculous. Based on the little article about the charges against Kilpatrick, this sounds a lot like what happened to Clinton. Maybe Kilpatrick needs to work on biting his bottom lip a little harder so he looks marginally more sincere next time he lies to his constituents.

Oh really, Barack?

Anyone who saw Obama's supposedly magnificent speech on race and what not probably remembers this attempt to contextualize Rev. Wright's bigotry.

Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

Of course I never heard anything controversial from any minister of any church I attended, and I doubt John McCain did either. Reuters did an article on Dan Yeary, McCain's minister today.

The 69-year-old Yeary adheres to the Southern Baptist belief that gay marriage and homosexual relations go against Biblical scripture, hot-button issues for many in the United States.

"The Bible is pretty clear about it, in my opinion it specifically calls it a sin. I also am a sinner and you are a sinner. ... Did Jesus Christ love homosexuals? I'm sure he did," Yeary said.

For something he is theologically opposed to, this isn't nearly as strongly bigoted language as "God damn America." Granted, knowing he is doing an interview with Reuters, he is going to curb his tongue, but I doubt Rev. Wright would be this restrained.