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.