On the heels of The DrudgeReport poll, Senator Barack Obama has all but settled on his choice for a running mate and will give an early morning alert to supporters, perhaps as soon as Wednesday morning.
Obama's deliberations may have remained remarkably closely held, but DailySkew spies have found out his four choices, and the odds stacked for each one. Members of the DailySkew network reported that perhaps a half-dozen advisers were involved in the final discussions.
Going into the final days, Obama was said to be focused mainly on four candidates: Gary Allen Vollink of St. Paul, Minnesota, Tony Vahl, of Alligator Alley, Dick Weinstein of Hallandale, Florida, and Rasael Gomex of Weston, Florida.
This stuff has been getting a large amount of press. I guess you can say it's a good distraction for all the problems in the world. Yup, let's mix politics and entertainment. That's the ticket.
The Wall Street Journal has been running an anti-Obama campaign, this time focusing on his height and weight proportion.
Here are excerpts from the article, note how the WSJ is making the news, not reporting it. Notice how they printed quotes with their leading questions.
...in a nation in which 66% of the voting-age population is overweight and 32% is obese, could Sen. Obama's skinniness be a liability? Despite his visits to waffle houses, ice-cream parlors and greasy-spoon diners around the country, his slim physique just might have some Americans wondering whether he is truly like them.
"He's too new ... and he needs to put some meat on his bones," says Diana Koenig, 42, a housewife in Corpus Christi, Texas, who says she voted for Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary.
"I won't vote for any beanpole guy," another Clinton supporter wrote last week on a Yahoo politics message board.
...According to Sen. Obama's Chicago physician David Scheiner, the senator works out regularly, jogs up to three miles a day when he can, and has "no excess body fat."
Dr. Scheiner didn't disclose his patient's exact weight, but medical observers estimate that the 6-foot-1.5-inch-tall senator appears to weigh at least 10 pounds less than the roughly 190 pounds that the average American man of his height weighs. The Obama campaign declined to comment for this article.
...While most voters don't base their decision on physical appearance alone, a candidate's height, weight and overall look can play a big role in what Americans perceive as "presidential," says Thomas "Mack" McLarty, former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton.
...During a July family appearance on "Access Hollywood," Sen. Obama's 7-year-old daughter, Sasha, revealed that her dad doesn't like ice cream or sweets. "Everybody should like ice cream," she said.
Any mainstream news article that actually quoted a Yahoo message board post to use as "evidence" should lose any "credentials" they have. Observe how the writer uses quotes around "no excess body fat", so an overweight reader would get insulted and disbelieve it. Obama's daughter's quote is being used in the same context. The WSJ article is pretty much a hack job that doesn't accurately express any trend or perception.
To show you have truth is stranger than fiction, here was the Onion video from last year, predicting this:
You will not be seeing the actual prayer note in this post, nor will I tell you what was on the prayer note. Nor will there be a link to the story. The reason is that prayer notes in Jerusalem's Western Wall should never be read or taken by anyone. It's a personal message from the person to God. Not only is it sacrilegious and forbidden in Jewish tradition, but it may be (or rather should be) illegal. In the U.S., it's possible there would have already been laws that granted ownership of the Wall and its prayers to someone or something. The prayers are NOT discarded garbage, which can be taken, read, and published.
Yeah, Vulcans, I doubt there's a written law against it in Israel, but the newspaper should not have run it.
The Israeli newspaper's name is Maariv. Since the New York Post ran the "story", I can only assume the Maariv has as much class as the Post (none).
I'd like to think Obama truly had a spiritual experience with God, and didn't think someone would steal his prayer. But with politicians, you just can't ever tell (yes, I am a cynic). That being said, he was victimized in this case, regardless of his intentions.
1) Biblical scholars using the historical-critical approach of the New Testament's Book of Revelation have known for centuries that the book doesn't try to predict the End of Times in the 21st century, and has absolutely nothing to do with American politics. When the book says that "the time is near"- it was being literal. That "near time" has long passed. One credible theory is that the book is about the Roman tyrant Nero.
2) The term "antichrist" (plural or singular) only appears 5 times in the Bible. John wrote that antichrists deny "that Jesus is the Christ", "the Father and the Son", and would "not confess Jesus came in the flesh." One antichrist denies the Father and the Son. Paul calls a similar person a "man of sin" (or "son of perdition"). Paul describes his characteristics: he will be sitting in the temple, working all kinds of counterfeit miracles and signs, and doing all kinds of evil. Many later evangelical traditions like to link that one antichrist mentioned in Paul to "Satan", "Serpent", "Devil", "Lucifer", "The Antichrist", etc. As comic book fans know, that term is called a "retcon"- retroactive continuity. Serious historical scholars know that such "prophecies" were concerned about the immediate future, and did not try to "predict" a Democratic Presidential candidate in 2008.
3) The MEDIA has been treating Obama like a Messiah because of his high charisma and the novelty of him being an African American candidate. His overseas visits are being covered more than any other candidates in modern times. I couldn't care less if he stands in front of the Temple of Hercules for a great PR photo. There is nothing mystical or magical or...frankly important about him.
4) It would be POLITICAL SUICIDE for him to tamper with organized religion, denounce God, try to replace Jesus, or proclaim himself a Messiah or God.
5) EVERY candidate, president, or world leader has been equated with the so-called "The Antichrist" (a myth). Do a search.
6) Obama loves to be viewed like a savior. He loves the imagery. Some of his supporters are very fanatical, like a cult. People enjoy projecting their beliefs and feelings on him. Millions of people really believe his "CHANGE" gimmick. And that's fine. That's fine. But they will be apologizing about him soon enough, when those changes don't happen.
I don't mean to rip Obama or accuse him of being arrogant or anything, but I have an innocent question: how long has this tradition of presidential part candidates giving speeches in other countries been around?
Obama is going to be giving speeches and making appearances in Jordan, Israel, Germany, France and England. Last time I checked other countries can't vote in November's US Presidential Election.
Is he auditioning? Practicing? Looking for good PR shots? Making him look like a legitamate World Leader (tm)? Stroking the ego a bit?
You do realize protocol dictates that he cannot bash President Bush during these speeches? You realize that he You do realize that his change platform is a gimmick by now, right? Everything suggests that continuity set up by Bush and his cronies will guide our foreign policy even if Obama wins and the Democrats take charge.
Here are some things Obama has changed his views on. Seems like the more things "change", the more they stay the same.
Another controversial magazine cover will be released July 21st- this time The New Yorker will release a "Politics of Fear" story, with a Barack and Michelle Obama terrorist cover, which satirizes right-wing fears that have been pitched by some extreme conservatives.
People are already protesting the satire, because the cover is being taken out of context already on message boards.
Since I notice some of DailySkew readers don't get parody or satire, let me explain The New Yorker'scover:
Many right-wing Christian GOP Rush Limbaugh-listening extremists truly believe that the Obamas are black militants, Muslim, and un-American. Heck, even Hillary Clinton and her followers believed it, or at least forwarded e-mail spam saying as much. So the picture you see on the cover of TheNew Yorker does not mean that the editors believe that Obama is a terrorist spy; they are reflecting the character assassin jobs that some right wingers have been selling all year.
Tony Snow, 53, died after a long battle with colon cancer. He was best known as President Bush's controversial selection for White House Press Secretary, spinning the company line, but having previously made critical comments about Bush prior to being hired.
President Bush said: "America has lost a devoted public servant and a man of character. It was a joy to watch Tony at the podium each day. He brought wit, grace, and a great love of country to his work."
Tony Snow was a intelligent and creative conservative, and had stints with NPR, FOX News, The Rush Limbaugh Show, and The O'Reilly Factor.
As Bush's official spokesman, it was hard to separate fact from fiction with his press briefing propaganda spins, but he was an excellent and sharp worker in whatever he did.
Before Tony Snow is exalted into a saint, I do want the record to show how liberals hated him being Bush's Ministry of Propaganda.
I'm sure a fool like Keith Olbermann (he should have stuck with ESPN) will run a teary-eyed tribute to Tony Snow this weekend. MEANWHILE, take a look how Olbermann covered Snow:
Iran test-fired a missile, which caused U.S. officials to express their fear and anger over Iran's missile program, which could lead to war.
Nine missiles were fired off simultaneously from an undisclosed location in the Iranian desert. According to Iran state television, one missile has "a 2,000-kilometer (1,240-mile) range."
"The aim of these war games is to show we are ready to defend the integrity of the Iranian nation," Al-Alam quoted them as saying.
"Our missiles are ready for shooting at any place and any time, quickly and with accuracy. The enemy must not repeat its mistakes. The enemy targets are under surveillance."
White House spokesman: "Iran's development of ballistic missiles is a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions and completely inconsistent with Iran's obligations to the world."
He said that Iran's ballistic missiles could be used as "a delivery vehicle for a potential nuclear weapon".
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice:"It's evidence that the missile threat is not an imaginary one."
My take (I'm kinda on the fence):
1) Nations should be allowed to test missiles and flex their muscles- why is the U.S. only allowed to do that? 2) I'm not ready to support another "initiative" and declare war. I'd rather WAIT for Iran to strike Israel, and then have the U.S. follow the treaty to protect our allies. 3) The White House is spinning fear, and it's working. Anyone who seriously follows current events is a bit smarter than the Joe Water Cooler, and many conservatives I know (mostly clients) are dead afraid of Iran, and are okay with a preemptive strike against Iran. 4) Let the U.N. worry about it if a violation occurred. 5) Iran insists its nuclear program for at generating energy for their growing population whose fossil fuel reserves will eventually run out. So until they decide to bomb Israel, the U.S. should butt out. 6) I DON'T share the talk radio call to action to stop Iran before they launch a nuclear war-head. 7) Do I believe Iran is plotting something? Sure. What? Who knows? It could all be posturing.
Obama and McCain differ:
Obama:
"I think what this underscores is the need for us to create a kind of policy that is putting the burden on Iran to change behavior, and frankly we just have not been able to do that over the last several years."
McCain: "Working with our European and regional allies is the best way to meet the threat posed by Iran, not unilateral concessions that undermine multilateral diplomacy."
My wife saw an American documentary filmed in China about the production of Mardi Gras beads.
Since China became a free market just about anyone can set up shop there as long as you follow some "rules".
Chinese teenagers who dropped out of school (they listed the need to make money for their family and the tough coursework as reasons) can work at a factory compound in the mountains.
The compound is surrounded by barbed wire, and they sleep there.
They work 6 days a week, 12-14 hours a day, with Sunday being the only day where men and women can intermingle in a social setting in the compound. However, any romance is punished.
If the production quotas are not met, the workers see a reduction of food rations (they already stand in long lines, and food is dropped into their tray, similar to the prison movies you've seen), a decrease in their hourly wage of $0.10 (ten cents), or their monthly salary is completed withheld.
There was no official threat of violence from the factory owner and management- the threat of losing the wage and barb wire is enough.
The teenagers are happy to have employment and didn't complain.
They are allowed 2 weeks off for the Chinese New Year where they spend some of their money to head back to the mainland and buy gifts for their family. One girl bought her young brother a watch, and was scolded by her mother for wasting her hard earned money.
The owner of the "factory" gets around $1.7 million dollars from the American company that ordered the production of the Mardi Gras beads. He lives like a king in China, providing toys and luxuries for his family. The guy was not a villain- he simply is a product of his culture. And which company enabled this? The company was Walmart, which sells the beads for $1 to $20 dollars.
When the film maker showed pictures and video of the New Orleans Mardi Gras celebration (the beads were tossed around, thrown in the street, wasted, and used by naked women) the Chinese teens were shocked. They were also informed that the beads sell for $1, and "special" ones sell for $20. How would you feel?
The film maker also showed the woman dancing in the Mardi Gras the film, and she felt guilty; she did not know the conditions that lead to the creation of these beads.
Are $0.10/hour workers in an overpopulated country a necessary part of this global economy? What happens if these people ever became free and demanded rights? Could Americans afford to pay $50 for beads? Would they want to produce them on their own?
The Chinese believe that Americans can't be productive and meet the quotas, and that this is the global economy.
Like Buddhism says, every condition arises from previous conditions, and every thing and every one is related to each other.
Can we judge other cultures? Is globalization a good thing? Is this slave labor? Does survival of the fittest dictate that we let things be? Is this the product of capitalism in a communist culture?
Jessica’s Law, if passed, would require a 20-year sentence for rape of a child under 12.
However, MA Democratic Representative (and defense attorney) James Fagan said that he would “rip apart” 6-year-old victims on the witness stand and “make sure the rest of their life is ruined, so when they’re 8 years old they throw up; when they’re 12 years old, they won’t sleep; when they’re 19 years old, they’ll have nightmares and they’ll never have a relationship with anybody. It's a knee-jerk legislation and every time the Legislature has named a law after somebody, it has been a failure.”
In my opinion, the criminal justice system (specifically the penal and correction facilities) should do more to reeducate and rehabilitate criminals than to simply punish them. I think if found guilty of a crime, the perpetrator should serve the full sentence based on criminal code (no bills) unless the criminal shows a complete change.
THAT BEING SAID, as an elected official, James Fagan's comments are inexcusable, and he needs to be held accountable.
As I had originally mocked, Obama has finally come to his senses and removed the ridiculous presidential seal from his podium. He had no comment.
After the MEDIA had a field day with his arrogance, he had better not have a comment.
Here are some comments from mainstream MEDIA, which I actually agree with for once:
“What a bizarre and dumb idea,” railed NBC political director Chuck Todd. “It really feeds the arrogance narrative.”
“The Audacity of Hype,” cracked ABC's Jake Tapper. “No word on whether they played a remix of 'Hail to the Chief' as Obama walked in.”
Andrew Malcolm of the Los Angeles Times observed that Obama “has decided not to wait for any of the formalities like a presidential election, an inauguration or even a nomination, which he still hasn't actually officially won yet.”
Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics: “The press corps adopts a subtext for each candidate. Daddy Bush was 'a nice guy but out of touch.' Bill Clinton was 'smart but randy.' Bob Dole was 'heroic but too old.' Gore was 'brilliant but a fibber and a bore.' Dubya was 'pleasant but dumb.' Obama's subtext is rapidly becoming 'charismatic but arrogant.'”
John McCain's camp called the seal “laughable, ridiculous, preposterous and revealing - all at the same time.”
DAMN! I thought when McMahon made me wear a cheap gladiator outfit, that was lame. But Obama sitting in front of that fake seal was worse! Can I be on his campaign committee? DAMN!
John McCain said that the government should offer a $300 million prize to the person who can develop an automobile battery that leapfrogs existing technology. Although he didn't make a promise that he would make this offer if elected, the MEDIA will no doubt say that he did.
One thing McCain should consider: many people have already come up with alternatives, but Big Industry has stopped them. In fact, many people will say that an automobile battery that leapfrogs existing technology already exists, as do other methods to make gas mileage more efficient, or even doing away with oil completely.
The key is to 100% break away from Big Industry, and change society's reliance on oil based fuel completely, something that Obama and McCain will be unable to do.
Instead of the Latin E pluribus unum (Out of many, one), Obama's seal says Vero possumus, Latin for 'Yes, we can.' Instead of 'Seal of the President of the United States', 'www.barackobama.com'. Instead of a shield, Obama's eagle wears his 'O' campaign logo with a rising sun.
You know what? I'm not going to start a rant, because in the grand scheme of things it's not important. But I would like to say..that this gesture does come off as arrogant and presumptuous, and the Republicans are going to have a field day with this on talk radio.
I guess my first reaction was "Who the heck do you think you are?"
Obama apologists can defend the "Obama Seal" all they want, but the perception he gives off is... SNOBBY.
Here's a great clip about a case of mistaken identity, how the Internet makes everything a small world, and how people make snap judgements. Actually, it's pretty scary, and opens wide legal ramifications of posting incorrect information on the Internet. It also shows how people use search engines like they drink beer- it's a natural instinct now.
For those of you who are sending David Lawson hate mail...think twice about it before you hit send.
More than 400 city blocks and 3,900 homes were flooded in Cedar Rapids, where early estimates put property damage at $736 million.
Bush is in Paris.
Citizens have evacuated, and volunteers have been stacking up sandbags to preserve the University of Iowa.
The U.S. Coast Guard has deployed 30 people to Iowa City to conduct search and rescue missions.
Levees have broken.
The rest of the country is focused on movie box office results, Iran, sports, Father's Day gifts, California gay marriages, and the death of TIM RUSSERT!
Will Obama or McCain work on rebuilding levees and U.S. infrastructure to prevent this from happening AGAIN? Can we use our MODERN TECHNOLOGY to help? Can we get a break from insurance companies? OR WILL WE CONTINUE TO THROW BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THE WAR IN IRAQ, IRAN, AND NORTH KOREA INSTEAD OF HELPING OUR OWN CITIZENS?
SMOKER? Check. DIABETIC? Check OVERWEIGHT? Check WORKAHOLIC? Check TRAVELED A LOT? Check. OVER 50 YEARS OLD? Check. PRONE TO OUTBURSTS? Check. ADDICTED TO POLITICS? Check. FRUSTRATED OVER THE STATE OF THE WORLD? Check.
Why is everyone shocked that a 58-year old man died with these symptoms? A lot of people I've spoken with ask me, "How can a man just drop dead?" Read the above, and my previous Tim Russert post to find out.
I just want to clarify that I liked Russert, and found him very enlightening, but he was clearly addicted to politics. Politics = sports...really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
There's no denying that Tim Russert's Meet the Press and Hardball TV programs showed us how he really put politicians on the hot seat, and (generally) asked the tough questions. And there is no denying his level respect in the field of broadcast journalism, nor can one deny his influence on mainstream media news coverage. He was pretty aggressive and open about what he felt was right. Probably the best political interviewer on television.
I know I should wait a week, but I'll say it now- because I have the guts (or stupidity) to say it- since the MEDIA seems to be romanticizing Tim Russert, and expressing their SHOCK of why Tim Russert is dead.
Hos did Tim Russet die? Look, Russert was overweight, and every time I saw him on TV, he was yelling and taking everything too seriously. I'll say it; no one else will. YES, politics and world affairs are important, but guys like him are so passionate about it, that it has to hurt your health.
Yeah, Russert is a million times smarter and more professional than other broadcast journalists and talking heads, but let's face it...he is still one of them. Was he an "objective voice"? It seems as if he and Chris Mathews kinda knew the answers to the questions they asked already. Also, his critics say he stretched the truth about Saddam's WMD. He was involved with the CIA leak case.
In an emotional interview to the (London) Times, President Bush expressed regrets for using strong language that made him look like a war monger:
"I think that in retrospect I could have used a different tone, a different rhetoric... 'bring them on' and 'dead or alive' indicated to people that I was, you know, not a man of peace. I found it very painful to put youngsters in harm’s way. I try to meet with as many of the families as I can. And I have an obligation to comfort and console as best as I possibly can. I also have an obligation to make sure that those lives were not lost in vain.”
Bush also commented on John McCain:
"He's an independent person who will make his decisions on what he thinks is best."
and Barack Obama:
"I think the fact that the Democratic Party nominated Barack Obama is a statement about how far America has come. Having said that all that, it's going to be important for the American people to figure out who can handle the task of the 21st Century. It's a challenging job."
My opinion: Bush knows that McCain has to distance himself from Bush as much as possible. I do agree that McCain's mind is more independent than Bush's, but McCain will still be controlled by conservative advisers and major corporations who have their own agendas.
Regarding Bush's "regret" for using strong language (that his speech writers made up)...I don't see how that's an apology for anything that he has signed off on for the last 8 years. This "exclusive" interview didn't reveal anything.
Here are photos of inside the gallery, which has been shutdown and banned from the public:
Does anyone have a problem with the art exhibit being shut down and Yazmany getting carted away? Once again, we have an issue with freedom of expression versus public decency and the risk of offending people. Law enforcement agencies claim they wanted to protect two senators from harm.
I'd like to know what makes Obama and Hillary so special that we can't rent office space and display "The Assassination of Hillary Clinton" on our windows. Last I checked, some people choose to fly Nazi flags on their porches, without the police taking them away.
Frankly, I'm tired of law enforcement being able to make court decisions on the spot.
I can understand Joe Water Cooler (tm) not having an ounce of sympathy for Yazmany, and the MEDIA may accuse the artist of being a publicity hound, but he should have the right to lease space and put that sign up. He says:
“It’s art. It’s not supposed to be harmful. It’s about character assassination — about how Obama and Hillary have been portrayed by the media. It’s about the media. The Secret Service had to do a whole questionnaire with me. It was about an hour of questioning. They asked if I owned guns, if I was a violent person, if I had ever been institutionalized. I’m renting that space; the space was allocated for an exhibition and it’s my right to put those words up. They said it could incite someone to do something crazy, like break the window. The Secret Service asked me if I would voluntarily take down the exhibition title from the window. It’s terrible, because they’re violating my rights. If someone breaks a window, they’re committing a crime."
The police said:
“Why would we question him? Well, we want to determine what his motives are. Obviously they could be interpreted as advocating harm to protectees; both of the senators, of course, are now being provided Secret Service protection, that’s why the Secret Service was interested; both of them are federal employees, so, ah, of course it is a concern to federal authorities as it is to ourselves. Our lawyers are researching it and will determine if there are any violations of law; right now he is being questioned.”
The SS said:
“We did not shut down that exhibit or request that anybody else shut it down. This was brought to our attention, we went out there and had a conversation with the individual, but we did not shut it down.”
Michelle Obama Bombshell (Racist, Whitey Video Tape)
"Obama, I've been thinking...let's be friends now!"
"Rock, you know, I've been thinkin' brotha...let's team up!"
Although the main news is that Hillary Clinton wants to be Barrack Obama's running mate again, the Internet, FOXNews, CNN, the newspapers, and conservative talk radio will be hit with a Michelle Obama bombshell in the form of a tape recording and/or video of her making racists statements.
This will only benefit the inevitable, as reported here on the DailySkew- that John McCain will become President of the United States.
The average white senior citizen voter has always been against Obama from the get-go because of his race; their fears were realized after the Reverend Wright Saga, and now they will be fully grown after they get a hold of what Michelle Obama had to say about "whitey".
The conservatives have already planted this story, even if it's false. Inner-circle conservatives know how to prey upon people's bigotries. They want you to think this:
RFK Assassination Was Sirhan Alone? Sandy Serrano Conspiracy
DailySkew contributor R.A.W. managed to get his hands on an old newspaper from 1968 that was in his late uncle's attic this weekend. Attached is a copy of a particular article that we both found very interesting.
It seems like the history books and MEDIA have sold to us that Sirhan Sirhan was not part of a greater conspiracy, and acted alone, without any accomplices. They would like us to think he was a madman who was a lone wolf.
However, Sandy Serrano not only reported her eyewitness account that night to the LAPD, but her story was carried by nationwide newspapers, and the BBC and NBC.
Sandy was a 20-year old youth volunteer for Robert Kennedy, who reported that she saw a woman and man running downstairs. Earlier in the night she had seen a young woman in a white dress with dark polka dots walking up the back stairway of the Ambassador hotel, with two men-one was wearing a white shirt and a gold sweater, the other looking dirty and out of place, short, and with bushy dark hair (Sirhan Sirhan). Shortly after hearing what she thought were backfires from a car (it was RFK getting shot), the woman and one of the men came back down the stairs, in an excited fashion, speaking loudly. Sandy said:
She practically stepped on me, and she said, "We've shot him. We've shot him." Then I said, "Who did you shoot?" And she said, "We shot Senator Kennedy." And I says, "Oh, sure." She came running down the stairs, very fast, and then the boy in the gold sweater came running down after her, and I walked down the stairs.
The police told Sandy to CHANGE HER STORY. Smells like a total COVER-UP to me and R.A.W.:
Robert Kennedy is an icon in the northeast, especially in New York, where the Kennedy legacy is romanticized.
Any smart politician (an oxymoron?) would know making statements that
1) Imply that your rival could be assassinated, and you would win by default 2) Uses RFK's assassination to try and advance your standing
is political suicide.
Hillary has thankfully lost the NY MEDIA's support now, not to mention any senior citizen down here in Florida who takes offense to those statements. RFK's senseless deaths ranks right up there with MLK and JFK's assassinations. Anyone who saw it on TV back then remembers it to this day. Anyone from that era believes he would have won nomination eventually and would have been a better president than John Kennedy. Like I said, invoking RFK's assassination as a reason for sticking around like a vulture to wait for someone to kill Obama is crazy.
Here is an example of what one newspaper is saying:
"SICK. Disgusting. And yet revealing. Hillary Clinton is staying in the race in the event some nut kills Barack Obama."
Hillary Clinton responded to her critics' call to drop out of the Democratic nomination race, a race she can no longer win:
"We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it."
Wow. Talk about a controversial quote. She's implying that there's a chance Obama can be assassinated, so she won't drop out. Instead of focusing on unifying the Democratic Party, Hillary continues to divide it.
She is one sick person.
Other candidates from both parties could have used that excuse too, but they dropped out for unity.
The, the, problem with hap, err, health, uhhh, care in America today is not the quality of health care, it's the availability and, and, and cost to the average American working two jobs- one at McDonalds' and one in the White House. And that has to do with the dramatic increase with the cost of health care. Indeed, it's the, ah, cost, the cost of health care that is the number one problem today.
I want to give every American family a $5,000 refundable tax credit so that you, you, can go out across state lines and get the insurance policy that suits you and your family best.
I believe in choice and competition, affordability and availability.
We need more community health centers, more walk-in clinics. I understand that emergency room care is the most expensive room in America, besides the Champagne Room at my favorite strip club.
There's many, many, many, many solutions to this problem. I think I can address them. The problem is not the quality of health care; it's the costof health care. Therefore health care must be made affordable and available.
If you already receive health care for your employer, you will have to pay more taxes.
President McCain: Iraq War Victory by 2013 or 2099
Taking a page from the DailySkew, President McCain decribed a vision of the future:
"By January 2013 (or January 2099), America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq War has been won."
It's not a timetable; it's victory. It's victory, which I have always predicted. I didn't know when we were going to win World War II; I just knew we were going to win.
I know from experience, you set a day for surrender - which is basically what you do when you say you are withdrawing - and you will pay a much a heavier price later on."
It's pretty ironic that he picked 2013, which coincides with his term length. The general public doesn't want to hear that our boys overseas are going to be bogged down in the middle east forever. However, since McCain simply reads pre-written speeches by his true masters, one can safely assume that the puppet masters of the Republican party truly believe in an indefinite time line until the "job is done".
Anyone who still listens to Rush Limbaugh knows that this is true.
It just sounds like holier-than-though Republican propaganda. The thing that can be appealing about the Republicans is that they try to appeal to your patroitism, American spirit, moral responsibility, and idealism, while Democrats in recent years come off as being crybabies wanting social justice and free handouts.
The sad part is that all of this is a worked gimmick, a scam.
Ron Paul could have saved us. Ron Paul was not one of the Reptilian Overlords, like the Bushes, Clintons, McCains, and Obamas (especially Michelle). Ron Paul would have told us the truth about 9/11 and about the UFO nWo conspiracy that went back to Nixon.
Instead, we have President McCain...Mr. Over-the-hill and defensive about it. Mr. Preemptive Strike. Mr. "Tell Me What to Say, Puppet Masters". Mr. "I Was Forced to Cooperate with the Viet Kong, and So You You".
The cause of the President Bush speech at the Israeli Knesset controversy begins at 0:44 in the clip below.
Obama released a statement that said:
"It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack. Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power -- including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy - to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel."
Dana Perino, White House press secretary, denied Bush's comments where in reference to Obama:
"It is not. I would think that all of you who cover these issues and have for a long time have known that there are many who have suggested these types of negotiations with people that the president, President Bush, thinks that we should not talk to. I understand when you're running for office you sometimes think the world revolves around you. That is not always true. And it is not true in this case."
My take is this:
Bush didn't mention Obama by name (see the clip), so Obama should have shut up because he comes off as petty in my eyes, and as very thin-skinned and egotistical.
On a side note, Bush probably shouldn't have even mentioned Nazi Germany or Hitler, only because it's a no-win situation to compare anything to that era.
However, Bush is right in that terrorists will never be appeased. I'm not saying Bush is correct in his one-sided "negotiations" or how he ruined the U.S.'s worldwide image, BUT how much better will Obama (or anyone else, actually) do when the going gets tough? I'd love to see how Obama would handle terrorist states. Would he compromise and be "nicer"? Does it matter if the end result would be the same?
How about Obama mentioning Richard Nixon is a good light. Wow, have the times changed.
Obama's spin actually caused the media and Democrats another reasons to bash Bush's foreign policy again. This looks like a well-orchestrated attack by the Democrats to spin the 60th anniversary of Israel to bash Bush and Republicans.
Heaven help me if I can't see what's so "controversial" about that speech. I'm the last person to defend Bush, by the way.
Is this T-shirt offensive? Is it copyright infringement?
The conservatives I've spoken with in real life tell me that it's a joke, Obama has big ears, and that people look like cartoon animals, and that we should all laugh. I've already gotten phone calls and e-mails from liberals telling me how racist this shirt is. Of course, the liberals had to tell me that monkeys are offensive to black people.
Why are we so fixated on such labels and the imagery that is conjured up with "left", "right", "conservative", "liberal", "moderate", "Democrat", and "Republican"?
What is the Truth? And does it even matter in the grand scheme?
