Am I going MAD, or did the word "think" escape your lips? You were not hired for your brains, you hippopotamic land mass.

My last post EVER on John McCain.

As McCain loses tomorrow there's going to be some wailing and gnashing of the teeth in Republican circles but what's going to be in short supply, especially as far the candidate is concerned, is a healthy dose of self-reflection.

McCain's going to blame the media, Acorn and even the moronic Sarah Palin (as if he had nothing to do with her being on the ticket) for his loss. The only person he won't be blaming is one John McCain. Arguably the person most responsible outside of Barack Obama.

If McCain really wants to know why his dream of being President plowed into the ground faster than one of those planes he used to pilot he need look no further than the mirror. Going back to well before the election even started or he tossed his hat in the ring.

The media had nothing to do with his regular support to George W. Bush and his capitulation on everything from torture to tax cuts. Acorn isn't responsible for the fact that McCain has been an Iraq war booster from the start. Barack Obama had nothing to do with McCain lack of temperament going back years when voters are looking for somebody a bit more... rational.

McCain will lose tomorrow because of choices he made not because of outside forces. He's a victim of nobody but himself.

He's too conservative for America.

INCONCEIVABLE.

We didn't make it down to the Obama rally yesterday as we simply ran out of time to do all the other stuff we had to do this weekend. I was at the Kerry rally in 2004 which was also at the waterfront and drew 50,000 people. No where near Obama's 75,000. :-)

Not to take anything away from Obama but I do think the eventual democratic nominee would've seen these sort of numbers here. The Portland/ Metro area is about as blue as it can get. It also was a confluence of a whole number of different things that came together perfectly for this event including the weather which has been unseasonally crappy for the last month.

A couple of picks I stole from Kos that I like below. This one reminds me that we may have kids in the White House again. It's been a long time since we had that.

Here's the rally from what looks like the top of the bridge or a copter. They do a Blues festival and Cinco de Mayo celebration at that area of the waterfront every year. A little bit further down the waterfront we have the Navy ships and fair for our Rose Festival. Portland really is beautiful.

I can't decide if I want to be the the girl or the Chihuahua in this picture. I'll probably go with the dog but it's a toss up.

You've taken something I did as a lark for a couple of years and turned it into a colossal waste of time.

It's hard to believe but I've been blogging for exactly one year as of this last Saturday. Nowhere near don's record, but still...

I've been spending free time tagging all the posts from last year. Basically I just wanted to see what film/ television wells I dip into for quotes most often. I think that may say something about me on a subconscious level.

Let's drop Star Wars (11 quotes) and Star Trek (11 quotes) of the mix right away since those numbers unfairly. Here are the films and television shows I've quoted the most last year-

The American President (3)

The Simpsons (3)

The Wizard of Oz (3)

This is Spinal Tap (3)

Young Frankenstein (3)

Aliens (3)

Back to the Future (3)

Battlestar Galactica (3)

Blazing Saddles (3)

Caddyshack (3)

V for Vendetta (3)

Saturday Night Live (4)

And my number one non-Star Wars/ non-Star Trek entertainment source for quotes-

The Princess Bride (5)

I'm a little embarrassed that there are few "serious" titles on that list but I'm comforted in the realization that most of those comedic quotes were often juxtaposed against rants on war and carnage so I think it's fair to say that if this list tells me anything about myself it's that 1) I love irony and 2) I really, really need to get a life.

There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive.

Who would've thought that something as simple as word tense can make all the difference in the world? Yesterday Robert M Gates the heir apparent to Rummy's empty seat told the Senate Armed Services Committee "is not winning the war in Iraq." This just so happens to dovetail nicely into the sensible centrist McCain/ Lieberman position of doing whatever it takes to "win," usually manifest in the form of sending in more troops. "Not winning" is the perfect expression politically because it not only implies that there's still a chance to "win*" but also plays neatly to the American sense of rooting for the underdog.

In the afternoon and after Gates took some hits from critics on the right in that "not winning" could be interpreted as "losing" he amended his comments to say what he meant is that we are "neither winning or losing" in Iraq. Way to muddle things further, Bobby.

It occurs to me that Gates' characterization of the war is so confusingly nebulous and our options so murky is that he simply is using the wrong tense of "to lose" when describing the situation. Myself and somewhere upwards of 60% of Americans recognize the war in Iraq is already "lost" in the sense the U.S. can achieve military goals that will bring political stability. The U.S. army is the finest fighting force in the world but it was built to fight conventional, not guerilla wars.

Still- I have to give Gates and others credit for demonstrating signs that they're beginning to understand what's going on by entertaining the idea of losing in Iraq. It's just that they're about two years behind everybody else when it comes to deciding what needs to be done.

But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.

How I voted...

(Not that anyone cares)

Ballot Initiatives

I'm personally not much of a fan of the initiative system which has strayed far and wide from it's progressive roots. It's simply too easy in Oregon to get an initiative on the ballot and the potential for mischief just too great. I particulary have a problem with amending the state constitution by ballot and vote against measures I might be more inclined to support if they take a marker to the state constitution. The initiative system needs a fix.

With that in mind I voted "yes" on only Measure 42 this year which prohibits the use of credit ratings in determining insurance rates. The measure has a lot going against it- Bill Sizemore is it's chief petitioner for example - but in the end I was unswayed by the arguments of insurance companies that there is a correlation between bad credit and bad driving.

The ballot initiatives are always that little asterisk to election evening that can take the wind out of the high I get out of big wins by candidates I support. This year the biggest threat we face is Measure 48 which puts a Colorado style TABOR law in place in Oregon. Real potential for damage if that passes.

Candidates

It will come as no surprise that I'll voted to re-elect Democratic Governor Ted Kulongoski. Kulongoski's been a mediocre Governor but Oregon could do much worse. That "worse" goes by the name Ron Saxton.

On other lines I voted straight Democratic candidate for probably the first time in my life. I just went down the ticket and checked the names with a "d" next to them. If they were non-partisan positions such as judges I'd write a "d" next to the candidate that had a democratic-sounding name and vote for them.

---------

I have some videos, quotes and stuff planned to post Monday that pretty much sums up my current feelings about the state of America and the importance of this election. As always I look at our system of elections - with the peaceful transfer of power - with awe and reverance. But mixed in with that this year is a certain amount of dread of the "waiting for the other shoe to drop" variety. The time has long since passed to put some sort of accountability on the people in power and my faith in the willingness of the American people to demonstrate the revolutionary roots that founded this nation in facing down power is just about extinguished.

If the Democrats win at least the House I will be drinking champaigne. If they take the Senate I'll get something a little better than Cooks to drink.

She is alive, or was an hour ago. If she is otherwise when I find her I shall be very put out.

Ah, Senate Democrats. Always the last to get it and even then they come across as namby-pamby with their threats.

“I think there’s a lot of concern,” said a senior Democratic aide who has discussed the subject with colleagues. “I think the first step is if the Lieberman thing turns into a side show and hurts our message and ability to take back the Senate, and the White House and the [National Republican Senatorial Committee] manipulate him, there are going to be a lot of unhappy people in our caucus.”...

There's too much. I sum up.

Some good stuff...

Over at Steve Gilliard's News Blog Steve quotes Marc Shields as saying Republicans now see a 30 seat loss in the House. Steve takes a great jab at Democrats for not taking advantage of the current situation to deliver the killing blow:

What the DC Dems don't get is how alienated Americans have become with Bush and the GOP. They are begging for aggressive leadership, and people are still worried about NASCAR dads.

Folks, you need to worry about Walter Reed dads. They want the war to end, they want a resolution to the War on Terror and not the ham handed methods Bush is using.

...

Jane Hamsher started a mini-brouhaha over at her site over a post she did citing that CNN poll that shows most Americans would prefer Bill Clinton was still running the country rather than the Chimp. Jane referred to Bill as "the finest Republican President of my lifetime" and got the predictable round of ire from progressives.

Personally I think Bill Clinton was far from a perfect President but when I consider our current position in the world and what it was to have a President surrounded by grown-ups who looked at the facts and made grown-up decisions I feel pretty nostalgic. Not all of our foreign policy was correct, in my estimation, but at least in was based on a rational approach rather than the President's "gut."

...

Digby takes on the same CNN poll comparing Bush and Clinton with the goal of deconstructing the roots of voter's disenchantment with Bush:

Bush by contrast has had a free hand. He had an historical moment that could have brought the country and the entire world together --- which he decided instead to use as an opportunity to aggressively assert arrogant partisan and American power. Rather than being a "uniter not a divider" as he promised in the campaign, he roared into office with his one vote majority and treated the Democrats like lackeys, behaving as if he had a mandate to enact the most extreme items on the GOP agenda. He used patriotism as a bludgeon to intimidate all dissent against his inexplicable war with Iraq. At every turn he behaved with insolence and hubris and his failure has been manifest. Now he lives in a bubble, wandering around dazed and confused about what is happening to him --- which is not the result of Democratic partisanship, I might add, but rather the assessment of the American people. (The Democrats were paralyzed during most of his term.) Perhaps that's why his fall has been so steady --- the slow realization among the people that being a leader takes more than a manly swagger and a down home accent.

Bill Clinton may have been an imperfect human being but he was a president. This guy is, and always was, just a brand name in a suit.

...

The inevitable attack on Iran moves a step closer. Of course the moving of these two carrier groups could be just bluster on the part of the administration.

Right.

...

A little over a hundred posts with adjoining pop culture quotes and now three of them have been from the same character in the Princess Bride. I can't help it. I just love Inigo.

Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father: prepare to die

I'll say this much for Bush: when he gets his script in the morning with his "word for the day" he sticks to it.

Yesterday the President blasted 'wild speculation' over Iran plans. (pronounced SPECK-U-LAY-SHUN)

Funny, but that seemed to be awfully close to what White House spokesman Scott McClellan said earlier at morning press gaggle.

QUESTION: But are nuclear strikes on the table? You're familiar with the --

SCOTT McCLELLAN: I answered that -- I answered that in my remarks.

QUESTION: Yes or no?

SCOTT McCLELLAN: I answered that in my remarks. I won't -- I'm not going to comment further about it. It's just engaging in kind of wild speculation to get into commenting further about it.

And later...

QUESTION: But don't you also expect the Defense Department to be -- the kind of attacks that would be necessary for an --

SCOTT McCLELLAN: You're trying to get me to jump into all this wild speculation from some of the stories that came over the weekend.

I'd like to channel Jon Stewart and say that if you're the President or the Spokesman for the President of the United States and you're asked if the U.S. will pre-emptively use tactical nukes against a Middle-East country the correct answer isn't some dismissive, politically calculated non-answer. The correct answer is something along the lines of: "Fuck no! What, are you nuts?"

They're trying to be cute. Problem is their prevailing public persona by design is crazy guy and you can't be cute AND crazy. Unless you're Robin Williams, of course. He's hairy, cute and crazy.

But don't try and call them on the "wild speculation" thing or you'll get what this reporter got from McClellan:

QUESTION: It isn't wild.

SCOTT McCLELLAN: Sure it is. It's not based on knowledge of the administration's thinking. That's why it's wild speculation. It's based -- I saw one story that had numerous anonymous former officials and outside advisors being quoted in the story. How they possibly could understand what the administration's thinking is, is beyond me.

See,we can't BEGIN to understand what this bellicose administration that's gotten involved in two wars in two years is thinking. That's just wild speculation. But since we're speculating anyway:




Dick Cheney






Donald Rumsfeld





George W. Bush

Mawwiage.

I'm not sure how many people were aware of Mark and Brian's Two Strangers and a Wedding saga this last few weeks but I'm wondering if anybody else found it as oddly compelling as me.

The premise was typical radio gimmick stuff. They screened and interviewed applicants to be a bride and groom at a wedding in which they were to meet for the first time at the altar. I know, I know, it just makes you want to throw up a little in your mouth just thinking about it.

What has me scratching my head is that I found all of their finalists incredibly annoying, ESPECIALLY the ultimate bride and groom, yet I still couldn't keep myself from listening to the wedding on the way to work this morning. In fact I got all verklempt as they exchanged vows.

Perhaps I'm just going Brokeback. Come to think of it I did watch "Pride and Prejudice" last night. Hmmmm....

I do not sink it means what you sink it means.

President Bush drew a line in the sand yesterday over the UAE ports deal AKA Operation Sell Out Our Security. Bush said

"If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward." (emphasis mine)

I guess it depends on the meaning of "jeopardize." If by jeopardize you mean "put the the security of the United States in danger by turning over the operation of a number of U.S. ports to an Arab state with a dubious record on terrorism, including ties to the 9/11 attackers," then you might have a small point.

However if you apply the President's definition of jeopardy which is to "keep me and my buddies from making millions off a sweetheart deal" then you can see the port sale offers no real danger to the United States.

UPDATE: I love this succession of headlines off of Google:


Bush defies attempt to stop ports sale (3 hours ago)


Port Foes Unfazed By Bush Veto Threat (2 hours ago)


Lawmakers Claim Numbers to Override Bush Veto on Port Deal (55 minutes ago)


White House says Bush didn't know about ports deal (28 minutes ago)


What a bunch of chickenshits these boys are.