Friday, February 22, 2008

To a kid, time always drags. Suddenly you're fifty.

On our 14th 15th 16th anniversary of marriage I just want to send a special thought to Mrs. Wormer. If ever two weirdos were meant to find each other it was us.

Thanks for everything, babe. Especially the three stooges.

This is a time for serious people, Bob, and your 15 minutes are up

Did you watch the debate last night?

Did you see it?

Did it finally sink in with you that either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton will be the next President of the United States?

Did it hit you that the next president will begin pulling our troops out of Iraq?

Will appoint Supreme Court Justices who don't take the constitution to be silly-putty?

Will see science as something to be supported not subverted?

Will finally try and do something to fix the health care mess?

We're going to have a president who can ride a Sedgway without falling off, can string together more than one sentence without coming across as a total idiot and won't be challenged by the push/ pull factor when opening a door.

We're going to have a president who, by the very act of their swearing in, will send the message to the world that when America talks about things like opportunity and equality it's more than just talk.

We're going to have a President who, when they get a briefing saying "Bin Laden determined to attack in the United States," will do something about it.

Cynic all you want. Lord knows I've done my own share of that. You wouldn't have to read far through these pages to find instances of me tearing into both Obama and Clinton. They are politicians after all.

But when I watched that debate last night I couldn't help but see IT. It was standing squarely in the middle of the stage behind Obama and Clinton and it was impossible to miss.

It was hope.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

As my old pappy used to say, a fox isn't sly; he just can't think any slower.

On the McCain thing---

I'm sure a lot of you guys had the same reaction I did when hearing about this: who cares? It's not like I didn't know the guy was a scumbag and had already had no intention of voting for him.

But a quick glance at this afternoon's news is making me extremly uncomfortable. This whole thing is starting to remind me of the George Bush National Guard/ CBS/ Killian Memos controversy in which the story became the story. The results of that brouhaha effectively innoculated Bush from legitimate questions about his military service for the remainder of the election.

I'd hate to have a lack of proof of scumbaggery on McCain's part innoculate him in the same way from much more substantative accusations of scumbaggery later in the election. Much of the almost unanimous push-back by conservative howler monkeys against this story can be attributed to their recognition that they may be able to get the larger media to think twice before reporting on McCain's ethical problems in the near future.

As for the media participation in the push-back (most of the cable news networks are rushing to McCain's defense) the consensus on progressive blogs seems to pin this on conservative bias. It could be that. More likely it's the fact they they want the Presidential election to be a horse race. That will hardly be a possibility if McCain goes down in flames so early in the election.

Remember: it's always all about them.

That wasn't very nice, Ramsay!

On my list of the "Top 100 Celebrity Sex Tapes" I'd like to see Gene Simmons is oddly nowhere to be found. On the other hand he's number three on my list of the "Top 100 Celebrities That Would Creep Me Out Watching Do The Nasty." So I suppose this is an odd win somehow.

Update - Add John McCain to that last list. He'd be right at number 8 between Bea Arthur and Wil Ferrell.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

They're stuck with each other and they've got to ride all the way to the end of the line and it's a one-way trip and the last stop is the cemetery.

While we're in the midst of one of the most contentious primaries I can remember one cannot help but stop in and visit the comments sections of any of the major "neutral" progressive blogs without reading some form of the following remarks espoused by supporters of one or the other of the two remaining democratic candidates:

"I will never vote for Senator xxx if they win the nomination. I'd sooner vote for John McCain."

Curious as to why self-identified Democrats would prefer a Republican Senator and new BFB (Best Friend of Bush) to a Senator from their own party I quickly came to the conclusion, as I often do, that I must be in the dark about something. As an example: that whole line dancing phenomenon a few years ago caught me completely flat-footed. Don't even get me started on the Hannah Montana thing.

The obvious solution would be to dive into the candidates positions and try and figure out what is about John McCain that is so appealing to so many Democrats. There has to be something more than his pension for angrily swearing at fellow Senators and propensity to akwardly hug George W. Bush that appeals to blue-state progressives.

So I did a little research. By which I mean I screwed around with "the google." What I found surprised me. Clearly my fellow Democrats were right and McCain was the superior choice. Just consider the following issues --

Abortion/ Stem-Cells

Barack Obama voted against the ban on late term abortion. He supports "legalized abortion in accordance with Roe v. Wade." He has voted against parental notification and for expansion of Embryonic Stem-Cell lines.

Hillary Clinton voted against the ban on late term abortion. She voted against parental notification and for expansion of Embryonic Stem-Cell lines. She has a 100% NARAL voting record.

John McCain voted for the ban on late term abortion. He voted for a continued ban of abortion on military bases, for mandatory parental notification, has indicated he would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned and has a 0% NARAL rating.

Clearly John McCain is the best choice for those of use who want to protect the right to choose.


Barack Obama voted no on confirming Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. He voted no toconfirming John Roberts as Chief Justice.

Hillary Clinton voted no on confirming Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. She voted no to confirming John Roberts as Chief Justice.

John McCain voted yes on confirming Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. He voted yes toconfirming John Roberts as Chief Justice.

Once again McCain appears the clear choice for progressives who fear the court has moved to far to the right in recent years.


Barack Obama promises to "...immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda."

Hillary Clinton promises to "...end our military engagement in Iraq's civil war and immediately start bringing our troops home. As president, one of Hillary's first official actions would be to convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff, her Secretary of Defense, and her National Security Council. She would direct them to draw up a clear, viable plan to bring our troops home starting with the first 60 days of her Administration."

John McCain promises to keep us in Iraq for a hundred years.

Obviously for those of us who want U.S. troops out of Iraq McCain's the answer.

I could go on and on about this but I think it's clear that, on issue after issue from global warming to ethics to the economy John McCain would obviously make a better President than that Democratic Senator running against your candidate who you hate with every fiber of your being.

I don't know why I didn't see that sooner.

It turns out the results of Joe's I.Q. test had caught the attention of the highest levels of government.

Just another small reminder of why a Democratic president (Clinton/ Obama) would still be preferable to McCain. On Saturday the scientific advisory teams of Clinton and Obama had a debate sponsored by the American Society for the Advancement of Science. Wonder of wonders they pretty much agreed on everything --

Either Clinton or Obama would reverse the Bush administration ban on federal funding of certain embryonic stem cell research and both have multiple plans to ameliorate climate change through technological advances, carbon trading and more engagement with other nations.

Both representatives promised more scientific freedom, ending what they characterized as extensive political interference in science and technology policy decisions. Ross said "instead of having politicians make those decisions, let's have scientists make those decisions," and Kalil adding Clinton "is committed to signing executive orders to prevent political appointees from muzzling scientists."

Nothing in the article about Obama's previously stated preference to cutting space exploration so I don't know if that ill-considered position still stands.

I did love this bit where Republicans were apparently invited to the debate as well but just couldn't make it--

...John McCain's science advisor had declined due to scheduling problems and that they had not received any reply to the invitation from the Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul campaigns

Huckabee's science advisor couldn't attend because he's busy doing field research into "The Water-based Effects of Submersion of Supernaturally Tainted Women with Black Pointy Hats."

Ron Paul's advisor couldn't get a hall pass from his middle school.

Sunday, February 17, 2008

Glory be to the Bomb, and to the Holy Fallout. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. World without end. Amen.

Okay fellow Obama supporters it's time to give up the charade. The fine investigative journalists over at Taylor Marsh's place have figured us out. The jig, as they say, is up.

Marsh and her team have put together airtight logic on this one. Since no reasonable person could compare the records of Senator Clinton and Senator Obama and come to the conclusion that Obama might make a marginally better President (even when it simply comes down to her vote for the war) then there has to be something else in play. Mass insanity? Religious fervor? Food poisoning?

None of the above. The answer is that we must be in some sort of cult or something.

Don't believe me? Check out some of the comments from this thread--
It's amazing to me the amount of stuff in the ether about the OC,AKA the Obama Cult. I think this CNN piece us just devastating. I can't imagine how someone in a small town in Wisconsin watching this won't get the willies at the OC weirdness, or as they say the "creepiness."
You cannot hide from us. We are the OC. We are legion.

At first when I did searches for Obama's Cult, there was little to be found. Every day, there is more and more on it.
I'll admit it's been a difficult task to shield our political subterfuge even as our movement was growing.

There is no Barack Obama -- just a chameleon who changes personalities to blend with his surroundings.

Not a chameleon so much as a toad...

A Hypnobomatoad.

Stare into the eyes of the Hypnobomatoad and --