Sunday, November 30, 2008

For Those In Mumbai

Thankfully, the standoff in Mubai is now over. What a blessing that is. As more information comes out, it seems to be worse than originally feared, at least in terms of the perpetrators.

But for those who were lost or wounded, and for those personnel who were working to resolve this issue, my friend, Topher, has created a website at which people are invited to leave words of condolence and support. Here is the text, including Topher's opening comment:

Terror in Mumbai: Pray For Those Affected
Filed under: Mumbai Terror Attacks — Topher: in LA not L.A. @ 6:50 pm
Tags: Condolences, Mumbai, Prayers for Mumbai, Sympathy

Terror affects everyone; not just those who live in a terror attack zone. This site is dedicated to the people of India and the people around the world who were affected by the terror attacks in Mumbai.

This is a safe place to leave a thought, prayer, or condolences for those who lost their lives and the families of the victims of this terror attack.

Please be repectful of all who post here and remember that this is not a political forum.

It is a forum for persons of all faiths to express their feelings and emotions about this horrific event…consider it a condolence book and post only what you would write if you were attending a funeral or memorial service.

I’ll get this started:

My heart goes out to to the victims of this terror attack; to those families who are mourning the loss of a loved one today, and to the families of those who were wounded. May the Creator help all those hurting in India and around the world to find solace and comfort during this time.

If you feel inclined, please go over to Topher's site and leave a comment for thos who were lost. Thank you.

And I leave you with this video from Clannad as a meditation piece:

Saturday, November 29, 2008

Why The Surprise??

I am still on vacation, but trying to keep up witrh all that is going on. First, to Mumbai - what a HORRIBLE situation there. My heart goes out to all those who are being affected by this hostage situation. I hope by the time this is published, it has been resolved with no more loss of life...

The other thing I keep hearing about is that liberals are SO surprised that Obama keeps lurching to the right. I don't know how else to say this, but I told you so. I've BEEN trying to tell you so for MONTHS. His followers never bothered to listen to the words that were coming out of his mouth, and decided he was the "cool kid" no matter what. He has been saying all along how he really thinks, and no one wanted to believe it. Here is a piece I wrote back in early September. The facts were known, but ignored, like so much about this man. Still waiting on that birth certificate, Obama!! College records? Grad school records? IL Senate papers???? Obama couldn't pass his own requirements for employment in his administration, yet too many people just let all of this slide by the wayside. So the surprise experienced now is simply a lack of acceptance on the part of those who did not want to see Obama for who he really is. And so, here is "A Little Recap" for you:

OK, so three out of four of my siblings are Obama people. I don't know about the fourth - I don't think he has decided yet. My mother, a STAUNCH Hillary supporter, who is furious with the DNC (and has told them so because of the vote theft, etc.) says she doesn't know where she went wrong with them. Me either. But all of a sudden, they have started sending me articles and emails on why McCain/Palin are evil, and Obama is The One. I'm paraphrasing a little, but not a lot. My oldest brother sent me the piece Gloria Steinem wrote on Gov. Palin, an elitist, patronizing piece in which she diminishes people who hunt (not understanding, I guess, that many people hunt to put FOOD on the table, especially in these difficult economic times), among other smears. So, I felt compelled to write him back. A lot of this is information those who have been paying attention already know:

I am not an apologist for Sarah Palin, but I find the argument that SHE is inexperienced as Steinem said to be laughable. The DNC selected the least experienced candidate ever, one who refuses to make available ANY paper trail at all - no college or law school transcripts, no medical records, no passports, no birth certificates, and claims he had NOT ONE PAPER or DATE BOOK available from his time in the IL Senate (which is part-time service, btw). One who has no legislative accomplishments of note to his name. Never mind the LONG list of his sordid associates which throw his whole "good judgment" stance out the window. Add to that his vote for FISA, for the Bush/Cheney Energy Bill, for keeping Terry Schiavo on life support. Or his lack of chairing ONE meeting of the European Affairs Subcommittee, which oversees Afghanistan, and now claims that we need to do more abt Afghanistan,and who wants to return to the foreign policy of DONALD RUMSFELD...If this was BUSH, the Progressives would be going batshit crazy screaming our fool heads off. But for some reason, this is all fine and dandy. Never mind all of the university professors who are now shrugging off his constant plagiarizing (and his picking a running mate who is also a plagiarizer), an act that can get students thrown OUT of universities. Why? I really don't get this infatuation with this man! Without a teleprompter, he can barely even talk!! But he is "eloquent," and has "good judgm ent." Um, no. And he is sexist as all hell, to boot.

And for some reason, Obama is constantly comparing himself to the VP pick, not the presidential nominee. Much easier for him to pick on a woman than a man, as he demonstrated time and again during this campaign. Flipping Hillary off, brushing her off his shoulder and his shoe, having "99 Problems BUt a Bitch Ain't One" playing when he won Iowa. Class act this guy. Oh, and for what it's worth - he lives 1 1/2 blocks away from Bill Ayers, who lives right down the street from the Farrakhan Compound. What a coincidence.

Oh - is now when I tell you that my brother has a PhD., and developed some major software, whose clients include NASA? Yeah. He's supposed to be smart (my younger brother and his wife - both PhDs - also are big Obama supporters, at least my brother is. My sis-in-law is a "Vote Democrat" no matter what more than anything.). Here's what he wrote back:
These are interesting accusations. Do you know these things for a fact? What is your source of information? Is there some doubt about the fact that Obama was elected president of the Harvard Law Review? You don't get to that place by being a flaky biscuit. Is there any doubt about the fact that McCain was at the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy?

I don't follow you with the Donald Rumsfield foreign policy thing. What do you mean?

One thing I can say for sure. I have seen Obama in many interviews and town hall type conversations, besides the podium speeches. He has always impressed me with his speaking ability in off the cuff situations. This is a sharp dude.

I also like Joe Biden very much. He is a solid, decent, knowledgeable person.

At the end of the day, this is about policies, not personalities. Who do you think is going to best implement the objectives of Hillary Clinton? If you say McCain-Palin, then I don't see how you get there.

Oh, boy. And yes, he DID go there about the personalities. Here's my response:

Yes, I know these things for a fact. This is what I do every day, all day long.

True, Obama was head of the Law Review, and the ONLY Editor to never publish a single piece while editor. His tenure is the least quoted year of ANY for the Harvard Law Review. The changes he implemented were changed immediately after he left. He has only one piece that was finally uncovered just recently from his time at Harvard (it's on abortion, by the way), and is not well written at all. He never published anything as a law instructor, either. Nothing. And he wasn't a full professor, either.

Have you watched Obama in the debates? Interviews? His constant stammering has become fodder for late-night comedians, counting up how many times he says, "uh, uh, uh" in a few minutes time. Sure, give him a prepared speech, and he's great. Of course, he doesn't WRITE them - he leaves that up to three young white guys (not kidding - NY Times had an article on them).

Obama said if he was elected president, he would want to return to the Foreign Policy of George Bush the first. Those policies were courtesy of Donald Dumsfeld. He said this shortly after he lauded Reagan as a transformational president, and tore Bill Clinton down. Here's a LINK. It was at Huffington Post, too.

I agree that this is not abt personalities, yet that seems to be the ONLY reason people are voting for Obama. Many of the people I know who support him seem to know NOTHING abt him except he gives a good speech, and he claims he had good judgment for giving an anti-war (not all wars, mind you) speech in front of an anti-war crowd in Hyde Park. He wasn't even the main speaker - Jesse Jackson was! In fact, his speech wasn't even recorded. They went back and did it in a studio. He got everyone thrown off the ballot right before the election when he ran for IL senate, thus running unopposed. Oh, including his mentor, Alice Palmer. His manager, David Axelrod, exposed the Republican opponent for US Senate's sealed divorce records, revealing he had an affair, so he had to drop out at the last minute. So they brought in Alan Keyes, who is NUTS. That's how he got into the Senate. He has missed almost 50% of votes in the Senate. And like I said, he has not held ONE subcommittee meeting on European Affairs, the committee that oversees Afghanistan, NATO, and Europe. He said he was too busy campaigning, after only being in the US Senate ONE YEAR. If anyone else had tried this, with such a flimsy record of legislation both in the IL Senate and US Senate, they would have been laughed off the stage. He claims to be on committees he isn't, claims he assisted in legislation he didn't (even in the Saddleback Forum - he claimed he worked with McCain on campaign finance reform - McCain has a letter he sent to him apologizing for taking him at his word that he really DID want to work on it - it's powerful stuff, and reveals early on how duplicitous Obama is). How is it you don't know ANY of this? His relationship with Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist? The one with whom he worked at the Annenberg Challenge at which $110 million kinda disappeared? And from which he gave people like Jeremiah Wright big chunks of change (the fund was supposed to be for education)?

Look at his associates: IL State Senator James Meeks, close personal friend and spiritual mentor. Not only is he actively anti-gay, but he works with Focus on the Family and other groups to try to end separation of church and state (which is what made Steinem's smear on Palin abt James Dobson ironic). Tony Rezko - convicted. Kwame Kilpatrick - convicted. Gov of IL - under investigation. Oh, and his church is associated with Hamas and Louis Farrakhan. New politics? Nope - Chicago-style politics.

Personally, I don't like BIden at all. He's also a plagiarizer, and stood with Bush a great deal after 9/11, always appearing with him in the Rose Garden. Doesn't bother you he said Obama is too inexperienced to be president?

I would have thought after 8 yrs of Bush, someone else everyone claimed was too inexperienced (he was actually MORE experienced than Obama), people would not want to take such a risk again, and with someone who is more secretive than Bush EVER was. His birth certificate is important, since apparently, he was adopted by his mother's second husband - if he had dual citizenship EVER, it excludes him from being president (and all of this "I grew up with a poor single mother" is just CRAP. She was remarried to a wealthy Indonesian business man when he was quite small. He went to the most prestigious school in Hawaii - his grandmother, the "typical white person," was a bank vice president at the largest bank in Hawaii. They were not poor people. His father was a polygamist who was abusive to his wives, and who had a number of DUIs,and died in a drunk driving accident.).

So, I agree - it shouldn't BE about personalities, but that's exactly what it has been. And I am not voting for him just because of all of the above. I am not voting for him because I will not, cannot, condone the Democratic Party engaging in voter fraud, theft, and disenfranchisement. When the DNC starts taking votes cast for one person and giving them to another, they have lost their moral compass. It is immoral at best, and likely illegal. That was the ONLY way Obama got the nomination. That and the DNC treating FL and MI more harshly than any other state because they knew they were going for Clinton. So they took away 100% of their votes. Their RULE is 50%, same as the RNC. But they did not use that, and they SHOULD have for SC, IA, and NH, too. ALL of those states violated the rule. The purpose was to thwart Clinton's momentum, same reason Obama took his name off the ballot in MI. He encouraged others to do so, too, as a way to try and embarass Clinton when she won, and as an ass-kiss to IA. To then give him votes not cast for him, when "Uncommitted" is a recognized presidential candidate in MI party rules, as well as to take away delegates Clinton won from votes cast for her by American citizens is reprehensible. I will not support the DNC with my money or time or VOTE anymore until they clean house and regain some semblance of integrity.

So - it's not that it isn't Clinton. If Obama had won fair and square, I'd vote for him like I did for Kerry, whom I also did not like. But he didn't. His campaign engaged in a tremendous amount of dirty politics, especially in caucus states- TX alone had over 2,000 documented cases of fraud to which the DNC turned a blind eye. Clinton supporters were being locked out of the caucuses, numbers were changed when they were called in, peopel were bused in from out of state, they stole packages in TX and had people sign in when they voted rather than having them come back at night...It made NO sense that Clinton would WIN TX by as much as she did, then lose the caucus by as much as she did. There are already a number of reports and documentaries out about this, but the MSM is not covering them.

And that's another thing - Clinton was outspent up to 4 -1, was trashed regularly NOT for her policies (which were similar to Obama's because he would take them WHOLE CLOTH from her, like the 5 million green jobs initiative), while praising Obama up one side and down the other WITHOUT EVER VETTING HIM.

I do not think for a second Obama will work for the same policies Clinton did. I think he will go whichever way the wind blows. He has already demonstrated that time and time again. Why he isn't being held to any of his votes is beyond me - and which just reinforces my point that people are not paying attention to WHAT he says, just how he says it (by the way - he didn't have that folksy Southern-churchy accent when he was running for IL Senate). Look at his flip on FISA. Offshore drilling. Public campaign funding. Just to name a few.

I don't know if I will even vote this year, so don't assume I am voting for McCain/Palin. I can say that McCain is an honorable man, and has given his entire life i n service to this country. That means something. He is also moderate, and a reformer, something Obama will NEVER be (oh - today's BIG report is about Obama raging on Palin, particularly about the Bridge to Nowhere, which she did get rid of afterall - and which HE VOTED FOR TWICE!!! He claimed, "Palin Can't Just Make Stuff Up!" No, that purview belongs to Obama alone.). But Obama will never get my vote. He should never have assumed he would.

So that's how my morning started - not at ALL about what I was going to write today. But you never know what is going to come up, I reckon. And I know there is evern more about Obama, but I figured I was pushing my luck with him actually reading it this far.

Ah, families...

Friday, November 28, 2008

Is the Gates Appointment...

Making your head explode with the continuing hypocrisy that is Obama? You know, Gates, the continuation of Bush's policy in Iraq? Oh, yes - this is where those of us who were shaking our heads incredulously at all the pablum people were willing to swallow just shake our heads some more...

Or how about Obama's appointing Clinon as Secretary of State after deriding her for having LESS foreign policy experience than he did? Yes, indeedy, living in Indonesia from the ages of 6-10, and backpacking through Pakistan for 3 weeks while in college SURELY exceeds visitng 82 - that's EIGHTY-TWO countries, meeting with heads of state, and working on a number of issues. Nice of Obama to finally admit it. But everyone who was taken in by that hooey really shouldn't have. The facts were in evidence - you CHOSE to ignore all of them. After all, Hillary Clinton gave one of the TOP 100 speeches of the 20th century while in CHINA (you know the one, "Women's Rights Are Human Rights"), so if people REALLY believed Obama's BS about her lack of experience, they have only themselves to blame.

Oh, the list goes on and on. So, for those of you frustrated that people didn't see through all of the various and sundry lies, and for those of you who didn't see through the various and sundry lies, I give you the following videos (h/t to Cuz'n Ellen for the first, and Rosie for the second) to take your minds off all of the cognitive dissonance):

Hope it gave you a laugh! And I hope you had a good Thanksgiving!

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Happy Thanksgiving

No politics today. As you spend time with your family, chosen family, and friends, I wish for you a lovely Thanksgiving, with hope for a better tomorrow.

And for those who cannot be with their loved ones, may you know comfort and solace. May your heart be warmed by the memories you share, or the memories you were able to make together.

I leave you with two music videos, very different from each other, but both in celebration of this day. May we remember always to be thankful for the lives we have been given, the joys and sorrows that make us who we are, for the loves we have and have lost, for our families and friends. Blessings on you all this day, and every day.

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Are THESE The Jobs?

About which Obama was speaking when he said he would build 2.5 million jobs by his third year in office??

Obama Promises To Stop America's Shitty Jobs From Going Overseas

Well, I guess it's a start. More power to him! Ahem...

And now to Sports News. As some of you know, I am a HUGE Yankees fan. Imagine my delight to learn of the newest Yankee stadium:

Yankees Building New Vacation Stadium In The Hamptons

Oh, I can't wait to see the sun glint off those solid gold bases!! Start spreading the news! And hey - that kind of construction has GOT to be good for the economy, right?

Spring Training cannot come soon enough for me...

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

If I Had Known This...

Perhaps I wouldn't have been quite so concerned about an Obama Presidency:

Obama Undertakes Presidential Internship To Ease Concerns About His Lack Of Experience

Nah, still concerned. Even with soon to be Secretary of State Clinton in his Cabinet, I have seen who this man is, and I don't like him one bit. I'm kinda funny that way about arrogant misogynistic lying race-baiters with nefarious associates who tarnished a former president as racist, along with Senator Clinton, whom he also claimed had less foreign experience than he did from his 4 yrs in his childhood and a 3 week backpacking trip to a country in which US citizens were not allowed at the time, claiming that Senator Clinton had done little more than have tea parties with foreign dignitaries, then picks her for her foreign policy experience to be his Secretary of State. But that's just me...

That is to say, Obama, and his thuggish minions, spent a whole helluva lot of time demeaning, belittling, castigating, and smearing both the Senator and President Clinton, then turns around and pulls all kind of people from Clinton's Administration, as well as the Senator, to do his heavy lifting. The same people he claimed would be a step backward into the 1990's. Yeah, okay. I have to wonder how all those fawning masses will justify this change of, well EVERYTHING, on which he campaigned, especially that whole "Change We Can Believe In" thing. Little did they know that the only "change" was going to be what Obama promised them.

Then again, they have consistently found a way to justify his flip flop FISA vote, new interest in off-shore drilling, tabling until convenient "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," plagiarism of policies and speeches, misogyny, caucus fraud, voter fraud, and a host of other major issues: He is Eloquent (with a teleprompter), and is all about change!! It would be freakin' hilarious if all of this hooeyfication wasn't for the POTUS position, during this very difficult time.

But hey - that internship should sure come in handy with all that is facing our country, right? Yeah, sure - as long as Hillary is the one putting out the fires...

Monday, November 24, 2008

"The Money Hole"

I think this pretty much says it all, don't you?

In The Know: Should The Government Stop Dumping Money Into A Giant Hole?

It's our patriotic duty to throw money in the money hole, dammit! Glory, glory hallelujah! (Major kudos to the fine folks at The Onion. Those are some funny damn people over there!)

Reminder: I am out of town, but hope to check in occasionally.

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Now This Is A President...

I could support with ease. Especially if CJ Cregg was his VP. Or Vice versa.

That's the whole thing about picking and choosing what parts of the Bible (or Koran, or whatever religious text is important to us). We have seen a whole lot of that picking and choosing on the issue of homosexuality, certainly recently with Prop 8 and Amendment 2. But it is not unique to this year, I'm afraid. The 2004 Election focused on criminalizing homosexuality (for all intents and purposes).

No doubt this kind of fight will be with us as long as we do not have leaders who will stand up against injustice and oppression like Bartlett did. Heaven knows, it will be another four years of wandering in the wilderness with the group assembling in DC (seriously, Tom Daschle? Bush's lapdog on the Iraqi resolution, the passage of which seems to have fallen on just ONE person - Hillary Clinton - that Daschle?? That WEASEL??? So glad Obama is making CHANGE in DC! Hahahahaha!).

We have to continue to fight, though, for the kind of government we want, that represents us, truly represents us, not the lobbyists (oh, yeah - Daschle's wife is a lobbyist, just FYI), not Wall Street, not the US Automakers, not the filthy rich executives, but everyday Americans. Clearly, we are not there yet.

SUNDAY: I'm on my way to Florida for the week, but hope to check in, and have some new posts.

Saturday, November 22, 2008

What A PLAN!

Proponents of the new economic stimulus package show off the comfort and versatility of alpaca fleece.

Now, this is a plan by Congress that might actually be worthwhile from those brilliant "reporters" at The Onion:Congress To Raise Alpacas To Aid Struggling Economy. Yep - this sounds like a real winner. If only they had implemented this back in January when they first crafted it:
Members of Congress assured Americans that they have a definitive plan for reviving the slumping economy when they unveiled on Monday a bold new fiscal stimulus package that calls for the purchase of a pair of alpacas.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said the proposal, which is expected to solve the sub-prime mortgage crisis, boost consumer confidence, and pump much-needed liquid capital into the market, will be put into motion as soon as the first issue of Alpaca World magazine arrives and Congress has a chance to go through the catalog and select the perfect mating pair.

"We're confident that breeding alpacas will jump-start the economy and lift this nation out of debt once we get the start-up money," said McConnell, who insists the exotic livestock require very little maintenance and are of a gentler temperament than their cousin the llama. "All you need is a fertile male and a female in heat, and nature takes it course. Before you know it, the money is rolling in and there's alpacas everywhere."

See? Isn't that brilliant?? Not only would it help the economy, but LOOK how cute they are!!! One of the best parts about this venture? Bringing people together:
After weeks of debate, a bipartisan commission finally chose the alpaca initiative over a number of other proposals, including handcrafting turquoise jewelry, an extensive job-training program in the nation's most impoverished regions, and opening a U.S. Congress seller's account on Ebay. McConnell said the group was swayed toward the idea of mating alpacas and also shearing them for their valuable fleece because it required the fewest resources and was a "super-easy" way to rake in cash.

"It is time to stop bickering and take real steps to revive the U.S. dollar—which is why we're sending a fact-finding delegation out to the alpaca farm in Hagerstown [MD] next weekend," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said. "Senator Chuck Hagel's brother-in-law said we could borrow his truck to pick up the alpacas from the National Zoological Society on Saturday."

"I can't believe we ever wasted our time with tariffs, raising interest rates, and tax hikes," Pelosi added. "This is such a no-brainer."

True that - no brainer indeed! I mean, it's as obvious as the nose on your face! It's practically the WPA of the 21st century:
Under the new proposal, a Senate subcommittee will be formed to attend to the day-to-day care of the alpacas, providing food and water, cleaning up their communal dung pile, and securing the animals in their pen inside the Senate chamber at night. In addition, Congressman Robert Andrews (D-NJ) made his office available for storing buckets and shovels, saying the space is usually empty anyway since he prefers to work from home.

"A special committee was sent to a nearby alpaca farm to scout mating pairs and pet some alpacas."

Another bonus is the opportunity to use, um, historic names:
A Senate majority has already voted to name the alpacas Jefferson and Bongo.

Advocates also claimed that using the alpacas' fleece for knitted and woven items would energize the textile industry and eliminate the nation's dependence on foreign- produced ponchos.

"If we are truly committed and learn to spin our own fibers, we can cut out the middleman and sell socks, hats, and gloves directly to the American public," Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said. "People don't realize how much softer alpaca wool is because they've never had a chance to try it. Once they do, though—let's just say this war could be paid for in no time."

But you know how Congress is. There are always a few grousers in the bunch:
While initial reaction has been positive, critics of the plan have pointed out that Congress has still not paid back the money it borrowed from the American public to start that silk-screen T-shirt business it was so excited about in 2004, and many were concerned that this will just be a repeat of the Bedazzling the Economy Act of 2000.

The bill's sponsors, however, claimed that they had thought it all through, and that this economic stimulus package "can't miss."

"If for some reason it doesn't work out—which it will—we can always allocate some additional spending for a goat and convert the venture into an executive petting zoo," Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) said. "Those other projects required too much overhead. With alpacas, it's just grass, and we already have the whole National Mall right across the street."

Exactly. What a bonus! They have all of that real estate at their disposal!

Still, not everyone is on board with the concept of alpacas:
Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL), a well-known fiscal conservative, remained one of the sole voices against the proposal.

"This harebrained scheme is shortsighted, ill conceived, and an absolute waste of time and effort," Martinez said. "Which is why from the beginning I said, let's raise emus. Not only do you have meat and eggs, but you can probably get some money for those feathers too."

Yeah, yeah - raise your own emus, Martinez (side note - there are emus across the street - read gravel road - from where my horse is stabled!). Leave those alpacas alone!!! Besides, I think this guy might know just a little bit more about the economy than YOU do:
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Monday called the new plan "intriguing," but stressed that the nation's economic policy should continue to center around Sen. Robert Byrd's (D-WV) practice of selling soda and candy bars out of his office, which accounted for almost 30 percent of last year's gross domestic product.

Huh - I don't know why the other senators weren't as enterprising as Senator Byrd, but maybe this idea will get them off their duffs...

And that is just ONE of the benefits of raising alpacas! It will get people outside! It will get them exercising! It will reduce stress by rubbing their furry little heads! AND, you get those nice ponchos. I'm all for it, myself. I'm thinking maybe I'll name mine George and Martha. Or maybe Thelma and Louise. I dunno - I'm working on it, but I can't wait to get working on the bailout plan for the US economy!

Friday, November 21, 2008

Time To Bail Out

On the bail out, if you ask me. Especially for the Detroit automakers. Here's a little clue if you are going somewhere to try and bum some money: Do NOT take a private jet to the meeting. Or three. Especially when just ONE of the jets costs a cool $36 MILLION dollars. Or when one of the bums looking for some cash makes $27 MILLION A YEAR. And has completely mismanaged the business, ya know, since he's out begging for the feds - scratch that - US - to bail him out. Wanna guess how much a First class ticket costs from Detroit to Washington, DC? $837. Know how much it cost them to fly their jets? $20,000. Yet they spent tens of thousands of dollars taking their private jets. They couldn't even carpool. Yeah, they are making a really good case for themselves. Hahahaha! I think that was Rep. Gary Ackerman's point here:

Just to be clear - because there seems to be some major confusion about this - the $25 gazillion the US Automaker "Like my cool jet?" guys want is IN ADDITION TO $25 BILLION already available to them for R&D/retooling. Get that? It has NOTHING to do with them making a green car, or making cars people want to buy. Huh uh. This is just for them to pay their employee benefits, like their pensions. So, while the rest of us are losing our retirement portfolios down the toilet while the DOW crashes and burns, we - WE - are supposed to pay the pensions for people making $83 an hour for a boss who makes $27 million a YEAR????? (Gee - I wonder what would have happened had their been any oversight of Fannie or Freddie?? If maybe ACORN hadn't pushed for all of those sub-prime mortgages?? Just a thought...)

And here's another thing. GM added $1,600 PER VEHICLE to compensate for employee benefits. So what happened to that money?? Now, I know people can argue, and I would myself, that the unions have lost perspective in their demands. I mean, really - should someone who builds cars really make over $80 an hour??? I mean, nice for them and all, but from what I understand, their jobs are highly repetitive and their equipment is all ergonomic, thus not requiring a lot of thought (this information comes to me from a source who has been inside a Chrysler plant). If the union prices their employees out of their jobs, and the executives mismanage the money so grossly, WHY should we be stuck paying their compensation?? Did the Enron employees get their pensions reinstated? No.

Now, don't get me wrong - I think unions can do a LOT of good, especially when workers are being mistreated. But when people are getting paid more money than many university professors, or nurses, or social workers, or just about anyone who has paid for a higher education, and then expect THOSE people to make up their benefits while losing their own, the unions have lost their way.

And the executives are to blame for mismanaging their businesses. I understand that US automakers employ a lot of people. So do the Japanese and German automakers in the US. The latter are BUILDING plants, not looking at bailouts or bankruptcy. That should be a big ol' clue that something is amiss.

Those execs have not cut back on their salaries, they have not utilized recent green technology, they have not designed cars that appeal to Americans. The unions have not made concessions to cost. But we should keep propping them up anyway? Who does that help? Well, the people making $27 mil, or $160,000 a year making cars, but how does that help the average taxpayer who is losing their job, or their house, or their car, or their pension, or health insurance?

And to give credit where credit is due, the Democrats were not all that impressed with the presentation of these three automakers, as Rep. Ackerman's comments above would demonstrate. They were sent back to come up with some plans that would merit them getting the money. That begs the question why they did not HAVE plans prior to their trip to Congress. If that is an indication of how they conduct business, well, it's pretty damning. (I might add, just now, I looked up as this whole issue was being discussed on the news, and these big machines were installing major parts into the cars. My immediate response was, "Wait - those MACHINES are doing a lot of the work - what's the deal here??? Just saying.)

So, the Detroit Three executives are on their way back to Detroit - on their three private jets - to figure out how the hell they will justify an ADDITIONAL $25billion. From the way they have conducted themselves this past week (and many weeks prior), it better be a damn good plan...

Thursday, November 20, 2008

New Clinton DVD And Debt Repayment

I received this email from the Hillary Clinton campaign on Wednesday:

Dear Amy,

We are living in a very special time in American history, with an election that has redefined the boundaries of possibility and set our nation on a positive path with new leadership.

Things are changing in Washington and we have reason to hope that the next four years will look much different and better than the last eight.

As we look forward to a new era in Washington, there is still one piece of unfinished business where Hillary needs your help.

We need to do all we can to help Hillary by acting now to reduce her remaining debt.

So in case you missed it last time: here is a great way for you to help Hillary once more -- and be a part of one of the most historic campaigns in our history. We've put together a video with some of the best moments from the campaign, including Hillary's speech at the Democratic Convention in Denver.

Watch a quick preview of what you and Hillary did this past year. HERE.




I watched the short preview, and immediately hit the "Donate" button. Not only will it help to defray Senator Clinton's cost (Hello? Senator Obama? What happened to you helping her out after she campaigned so tirelssly for YOU???), but having this dvd, hearing her speeches, and seeing the enthusiastic rallies, is more than worth $50 to me. (* Need to see my receipt? Happy to reproduce it below.)

I hope it is for you, too. Please take a look at the preview and consider getting your own dvd...And if you cannot afford $50, I am sure any amount will be a help.

Despite it all - the actions of the ONC, Obama, and the MSM, this was a historic campaign, and Senator Clinton, with our help, broke records:

If you are able, please consider a donation.


DATE: November 19, 2008 10:30 PM EST
AMOUNT: $50.00


Please allow up to 4 weeks for delivery.

Live from Denver DVD
($50 each)
Quantity: 1

You Got That Right, Dee Dee...

Yes, this is dated insofar as the election had not yet happened when this speech was given, but much of what Dee Dee Myers has to say is quite relevant today. As Senator Clinton is "vetted" (just spare me already about the whole vetting thing. I have one word to say about this: Daschle), she continues to be held to a different standard than men are. If we learned anything this year (and we should have, because it was blatantly obvious), misogyny was simmering just below the surface. It is not simmering any longer. It has boiled over. And continues to do so.

Here's what Dee Dee Myers had to say about the primary season and expectations for men v. women:

As Bud White had in his excellent piece, "The Sexism Continues," when a sitting US Senator is dismissed by major cable networks by headlines like, "(President) Clinton To Help Wife Get Job" as MSNBC had, there is no longer even an attempt to disguise it. This woman has more accomplishments in a year than many people do their entire lives, and certainly has more than the President (S)Elect, but her husband is going to help her get a job? She already HAS one, you misogynistic MSNBC *&@#$#! You can just bite me. This woman was a star even before she met Bill Clinton, thank you so much, or did you forget she was the first student EVER to give the address at Wellesley for her graduating class?? (Oh - and here's a little heads up - you actually KNOW something about what SHE did in college. How about your man crush, Obama? What the hell do you know about his time at Occidental or Columbia, huh??? Tools.) Her husband is going to help her get a job? Please.

Just as a little reminder of the esteem with which GROWN UPS are capable of holding Senator Clinton, here she is as the Guest of Honor at the Marine Corps Sunset Parade:

Do you think she was the guest of honor because of her husband, or because as a US Senator, she has worked tirelessly for our men and women in uniform, especially veterans? Yeah. Her work, not who her husband is. Jagoffs.

Well, I was wrong. I guess Obama did unite some people after all. Men against women. Again. Out in the open, with no remorse. From our "news" channels. Great. What a uniter.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

O, Come Let Us Adore Him

Oh, boy - this is quite some article by Howard Kurtz in the Washington Post (H/T to athy at No Quarter for this article). He really tells it like it is. I wonder if he still has a job there? Just the title alone gives it away: A Giddy Sense of Boosterism.

Holy Toledo - is he allowed to SAY something like that?!?! I hope he has someone watching his back. At all times. Oh, but you're not gonna believe some of the things our "media" have cooked up. Check this out:
Perhaps it was the announcement that NBC News is coming out with a DVD titled "Yes We Can: The Barack Obama Story." Or that ABC and USA Today are rushing out a book on the election. Or that HBO has snapped up a documentary on Obama's campaign.

Perhaps it was the Newsweek commemorative issue -- "Obama's American Dream" -- filled with so many iconic images and such stirring prose that it could have been campaign literature. Or the Time cover depicting Obama as FDR, complete with jaunty cigarette holder.

Are the media capable of merchandizing the moment, packaging a president-elect for profit? Yes, they are.

Okay. NBC. ABC. Two of the major networks using OUR AIRWAVES have lost all semblance of journalistic integrity. What the HELL is the matter with these people?!?!? Good grief, how in the world will they ever cover anything remotely challenging for The One??? Oh, right - what they care? They are clearly making a lot out of this:
What's troubling here goes beyond the clanging of cash registers. Media outlets have always tried to make a few bucks off the next big thing. The endless campaign is over, and there's nothing wrong with the country pulling together, however briefly, behind its new leader. But we seem to have crossed a cultural line into mythmaking.

"The Obamas' New Life!" blares People's cover, with a shot of the family. "New home, new friends, new puppy!" Us Weekly goes with a Barack quote: "I Think I'm a Pretty Cool Dad." The Chicago Tribune trumpets that Michelle "is poised to be the new Oprah and the next Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis -- combined!" for the fashion world.

Whew! Are journalists fostering the notion that Obama is invincible, the leader of what the New York Times dubbed "Generation O"?

I'm sorry - were you saying something? I couldn't hear you through the grinding of my teeth. When did the MSM and the National Enquirer change places? If you will recall, this year, it was the latter that that actually broke some real news. The MSM? Not so much:
Each writer, each publication, seems to reach for more eye-popping superlatives. "OBAMAISM -- It's a Kind of Religion," says New York magazine. "Those of us too young to have known JFK's Camelot are going to have our own giddy Camelot II to enrapture and entertain us," Kurt Andersen writes. The New York Post has already christened it "BAM-A-LOT."

"Here we are," writes Salon's Rebecca Traister, "oohing and aahing over what they'll be wearing, and what they'll be eating, what kind of dog they'll be getting, what bedrooms they'll be living in, and what schools they'll be attending. It feels better than good to sniff and snurfle through the Obamas' tastes and habits. . . . Who knew we had in us the capacity to fall for this kind of idealized Americana again?"

I am seriously on the verge of being ill here. "It's a Kind of Religion"??? Worshiping this lying, cheating, bamboozling, hoodwinking, race-baiting sham of a politician who hasn't had an original idea I can discern, who got everywhere he is by stepping on the throats of others? THIS is a "kind of religion"? Okay, it is clear to me. We have gone to hell in a hand basket.

No doubt, Thomas Jefferson, who knew the importance of the Fourth Estate for maintaining a democracy, would be, check that, probably IS, rolling over in his grave right now. Kurtz asks the right question about this, well, INSANITY:
But aren't media people supposed to resist this kind of hyperventilating?

"Obama is a figure, especially in pop culture, in a way that most new presidents are not," historian Michael Beschloss says. "Young people who may not be interested in the details of NAFTA or foreign policy just think Obama is cool, and they're interested in him. Being cool can really help a new president."

So can a sense of optimism, reflected on USA Today's front page. "Poll: Hopes soaring for Obama, administration," the headline said, with 65 percent saying "the USA will be better off 4 years from now."

Yeah, I saw that headline, too. I wondered who the hell they were talking to first, then realized it was probably an AP article. Sure enough, it was. Like they haven't been in the tank all year long. Hahahaha.

And why, pray tell, would these young people think Obama is "cool," yet know NOTHING for which he stands?? I mean, really - on what, exactly, are they making that determination? His listening to Ludacris? The misogyny? Reverend Wright's racist ravings? What?? What a bunch of ridiculously uninformed children. And THEY are the future? Yikes. Sure will be interesting to see what happend if they ever get more than one brain cell to rub against another. Or as Kurtz puts it:
But what happens when adulation gives way to the messy, incremental process of governing? When Obama has to confront a deep-rooted financial crisis, two wars and a political system whose default setting is gridlock? When he makes decisions that inevitably disappoint some of his boosters?

"We're celebrating a moment as much as a man, I think," says Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham, whose new issue, out today, compares Obama to Lincoln. "Given our racial history, an hour or two of commemoration seems appropriate. But there is no doubt that the glow of the moment will fade, and I am sure the coverage will reflect that in due course."

FDR?? LINCOLN?? Are they INSANE????? LINCOLN??? The ONLY thing Obama has in common with Lincoln is living in IL. FDR? What are you people SMOKING???

And, sure. You just know you can count on the media to reflect reality at SOME point, right? Because they have demonstrated time and again how willing they are to reveal the realities of who Obama really is, and what he has really done. Oh, yeah.

And not for nothing, but I sure as hell don't remember the media being so glowing and positive about Hillary Clinton, who, since they were clearly unaware of this, was a "historical" figure by being a woman who received more votes than any other Democrat ever, as well as winning a primary, and a lot more than one. But hey, let's bury THAT "moment" as quickly as possible so no one intrudes on The One's ascension.

Thankfully (or despairingly), there is an itsy bitsy teensy weensy ray of light:
One of the few magazines to strike a skeptical tone is the London-based Economist, which endorsed Obama. "With such a victory come unreasonably great expectations," its lead editorial says.

Naturally, it is European based, not US based. Big surprise. One could say that:
Web worship of Obama is nearly limitless. On YouTube alone, the Obama Girl song, "I've Got a Crush on Obama," has been viewed 11.7 million times. Even an unadorned video of the candidate's election night speech in Chicago has drawn 3.5 million views.

Can someone please tell me how it is that this virtual unknown with the thinnest resume I have ever seen, who couldn't even get a full time job in any university or business on his lack of documentation, has manipulated the masses so masterfully with "words, just words" and no real deeds of which to speak? I mean, besides the characteristics he has demonstrated thus far besides those listed above?

Yes, this is a change:
I am not trying to diminish the sheer improbability of what this African American politician, a virtual unknown four years ago, has accomplished. Every one of us views his victory through a personal lens. I thought of growing up in a "Leave It to Beaver" era, when there were no blacks in leading television roles until Bill Cosby was tapped as the co-star of "I Spy" in 1965. When the Watts riots broke out that year, the Los Angeles Times sent an advertising salesman to cover it because the paper had no black reporters. The country has traveled light-years since then.

Is it nitpicky to point out that Obama is bi-racial, reared by his white and Indonesian family, not his African one at any time? But hey - why rain on (more of) their delusion? Those pesky facts, why am I bringing THOSE up? This is SPECIAL, you know:
It is hard to find a precedent in American history. Ronald Reagan was a marquee star because of his Hollywood career, but mainly among older voters, since he made his last movie 16 years before winning the White House in 1980. Jack Kennedy was a more formal figure after winning the 1960 election -- "trying to look older than he was, because he thought youth was a handicap in running for president," Beschloss says -- but quickly took on larger-than-life dimensions.

"The Kennedy buildup goes on," James MacGregor Burns wrote in the New Republic in the spring of 1961. "The adjectives tumble over one another. He is not only the handsomest, the best-dressed, the most articulate, and graceful as a gazelle. He is omniscient; he swallows and digests whole books in minutes; he confounds experts with his superior knowledge of their field. He is omnipotent."

Soon afterward, Kennedy blundered into the Bay of Pigs debacle.

The media would be remiss if they didn't reflect the sense of unadulterated joy that greeted Obama's election, both here and around the world, and the pride even among those who opposed him. Newspapers were stunned and delighted at the voracious demand for post-election editions, prompting The Washington Post and other papers to print hundreds of thousands of extra copies and pocket the change. (When else have we felt so loved lately?) Demand for inaugural tickets has been unprecedented. Barack is suddenly a hot baby name. Record companies are releasing hip-hop songs, by the likes of Jay-Z and Will.I.Am, with such titles as "Pop Champagne for Barack." Consumers, the Los Angeles Times reports, are buying up "Obama-themed T-shirts, buttons, bobblehead dolls, coffee mugs, wine bottles, magnets, greeting cards, neon signs, mobile phones and framed art prints."

"Unadulterated joy"? That the MEDIA ITSELF created, and for which it fanned the flames?? Yeah, absolutely - don't start having any kind of ethics now on our behalf! We might all fall over dead from the shock of it. So, please, just spare us and keep us in our little Happy Obama Place. Oh, yuck - making myself sick now...

Oh, and just in time for the holidays:
A barrage of Obama-related books are in the works. Newsweek's quadrennial election volume is titled "A Long Time Coming: The Historic, Combative, Expensive and Inspiring 2008 Election and the Victory of Barack Obama." Publishers obviously see a bull market.

Oh, JOY!!!! Another way for Americans to spend all of our hard earned, ever dwindling dollars! Yay!

And speaking of cheers:
MSNBC, which was accused of cheerleading for the Democratic nominee during the campaign, is running promos that say: "Barack Obama, America's 44th president. Watch as a leader renews America's promise." What are viewers to make of that?

There is always a level of excitement when a new president is coming to town -- new aides to profile, new policies to dissect, new family members to follow. But can anyone imagine this kind of media frenzy if John McCain had managed to win?

Obama's days of walking on water won't last indefinitely. His chroniclers will need a new story line. And sometime after Jan. 20, they will wade back into reality.

Do you PROMISE, Mr. Kurtz? Because I am WAY over all of this Messiah worship we have had to endure, even as the most qualified candidate in decades was kicking his butt in the primaries on a whole helluva lot less money (that untraceable mountain of Obama's money. See Ani's post, "Obama's Questionable Internet Donations Raise Suspicion at WaPo."). But hey - that never stopped the "media" from promoting their rapturous tale of who Obama was, how he was the One for whom we had been waiting, regardless of what the people said with their votes...I mean, really - how much reporting did they even do on the Michigan fiasco? How many people in this country really knew what happened there? How many people outside the states where there were caucuses actually knew about the vast amount of caucus fraud? Close friends in Baton Rouge had no idea about a lot of this because their state wasn't contested, so how would THEY know what had really been going on? As one of them said, they sure didn't see this on ABC News! No, indeed. And that is exactly the problem. So many of the issues that should have been covered about Obama simply were not, or left to the "News Briefs" section. Not so for anything the least bit suspect or negative about any of the other candidates (or if it was one of Obama's BFFs, like John Edwards. In that case, the MSM buried critical information the voters deserved to know.). And on it goes...

You may have seen this new video already, but personally, I find this to be a glaring indictment of the Fourth Estate,as if the above was not enough (H/T to American Girl in Italy for the heads up on this):

Holy Toledo. Add these results of the Zogby Poll commissioned by John Ziegler of "How Obama Got Elected", and bear in mind these were MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS:

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet.....

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

Just to be clear - Palin did not ask for the clothes the MSM made such a brouhaha about, and she did not keep them. They were given to, or will be auctioned off for, charity.

For an added bonus, you can watch this John Stoessel interview of voters:

YIKES. Are people not required to take Civics classes any longer?? Really??

What a sad, sad state of affairs, for our educational system, for the Fourth Estate, for democracy, and for this country. We reap what we sow...

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Has Hillary (OR BILL) Been Vetted Enough?

Well, you all know where I stand on the Hillary as Secretary of State thing. I think she would be brilliant, probably the best SoS in the history of Secretaries of States. Presumably, though, those Secretaries of State could trust (more or less) the president whom they served. Clinton? Not so much. Obama will turn on her like a rabid dog should she outshine him for even a moment, much less do a good job as SoS. And then she would be out of a job as the Good Senator from New York. Oh, you know it could happen.

But there are others who disagree with me, which is peachy keen-o by me. That's the beauty of a democracy (such as it is at this stage). I was asked highlight the excellent comments for WHY Clinton should accept the position if offered to her, which I have done here. The comments came from one of my great readers, who also has an awesome blog of her own, BlueLyon. My comments are interspersed as well. BlueLyon had this to say (and I reprint this with her permission):
I think she'd make a super SoS and Barry would be a fool not to offer it to her. Of course, if he does offer it and she declines, we'll never know.

I think her time in the Senate, if she stays there will be ruled by the archaic seniority rules and she'll never get a major chairmanship. After all, she didn't start in the Senate when she was in her 30's (ala Biden).

Any hoo, I'd like to see her get it for one reason: I'd like to see Kerry and Richardson's heads explode and their man-parts fall off when they get bested by "the girl."

Okay, I gotta admit, seeing Kerry and Richardson's "heads explode and their man-parts" falling off may well be worth it just for that. There was some back and forth with some other smart folks (including InsightAnalytical), and I finished up with, "
And BlueLyon makes some good points abt her time in the Senate...I dunno - obviously, she'll do what she thinks is best...

To which BlueLyon said:
That's just it. She'll do what she thinks best. What is best for the country that is. Her political ambitions have always been about moving her agenda forward, not moving herself forward. When I think of what force she could be on the international scene, rather than having to bide her time in the Senate and waiting around for crumbs from the Big Boys' table, I get chills.

Well, BlueLyon has a point there. I know exactly what that feels like - waiting for the crumbs that drop from the table. As a woman, as a lesbian, as a woman in ministry. One of the main reasons I left the Episcopal Church while in seminary (besides my changing theology) was the church's reaffirmation that GLB people were allowed to come to the church, but not be ordained in it. I would have had to lie to get ordained, and that was just wrong on so many levels, it was not a real choice. Anyway, that felt a whole lot like being grateful for the crumbs that were dropped from the table. So, I totally get that.

I asked my buddy if she had seen American Girl in Italy's excellent post, "So, Does She Have Foreign Policy Experience, or Not?". She had, and if you haven't, I recommend it. Naturally, she had. And she said:
...Aside from Kerry and Richardson's reaction, would be also to see the Obots' heads explode from the cognitive dissonance.

I have one friend in particular whose face I'd like to rub in it, if HRC is named SoS.

Yes, I'm leery of the way Obama operates. And really, this whole conversation we are all having is just tea leaf reading...

She does have a point. I like the idea of the exploding heads as a result of the cognitive dissonance after the way Obama treated Clinton, and gave tacit approval to his minions to act likewise. Then here he is, after labeling her a racist, inexperienced (compared to HIS foreign policy experience of living in Indonesia from ages 6 - 10, and traveling in Pakistan for 3 whole weeks!), or belittling her accomplishments (Annie Oakley anyone?), etc., etc., to considering her for a major position in his Administration. Wowie zowie - can't wait to see the machinations they go through to justify THAT one!! So, there is some poetic justice there, I have to admit.

I have to say, this whole "vetting" thing is really getting to me. Now the media is saying if she doesn't get it, it is all Bill's fault for his international work post-presidency:

As always, Greta was the most balanced in her coverage of this issue. Generally, from what I have seen, it just looks like another opportunity for people to pile onto the Clintons, to ream them anew. Like the video in LisaB's excellent article, "The Media Tells Stories THEY Want To Tell People They Don't Respect," which has these two HORRIBLE women on "Hardball," Jennifer Donohue and Michelle Bernard who are just insane in their descriptions of Clinton, and their adoration fr Obama. When CHRIS MATTHEWS comes off as looking neutral, you KNOW you are in trouble.

If only they had ever, ever cared about vetting Obama as much as they do the husband of a potential cabinet member.

All of that is to say, yes, at this point, it is tea leaf reading, though the time is ever-drawing near. I still cannot bear the concept of Hillary Clinton carrying this guy's water, but she will do what she thinks is right. Right for her, and right for the country, because unlike Obama, for Senator Clinton, those two are one in the same...

Monday, November 17, 2008

You Have GOT To Be Kidding Me

That was my response when I saw this headline from the BBC news after Obama's first post (s)election interview: Obama 'To Rebuild Moral Stature In The World'. I'm sorry, WHAT did you say?? That OBAMA is going to rebuild our moral stature? Well, how the hell is he going to do THAT, I ask you?? This sounds JUST like Bush did in 2000 - remember that?? When he said he wanted to restore "honor, integrity, and dignity" to the Oval Office? This just doesn't sound too different to me, but that's just me. And we all know how THAT worked out (can anyone say Gitmo? FISA? Iraq?).

Oh, yes:
In his first television interview since the election, Mr Obama told CBS he would pull troops out of Iraq, shore up Afghanistan, and close Guantanamo Bay.

"I'm going to make sure that we don't torture," he said of the prison camp.

Well, good. No one should torture. That concept has been fully established, so that isn't exactly groundbreaking. McCain would have done the same thing with Gitmo, by the way. But to spy on your own citizenry through FISA is A-Okay, even though it violates the US Constitution. Clearly, he has no problems with THAT since he VOTED for it.

Anywho, I'm no authority on morality - oh, wait a minute - yes I am! Yep, majoring in Ethics (Philosophy) as well as five years of graduate work in Ethics and theology, an internship, a residency to become a minister, and actual work as a minister as well as an honest-to-goodness moral upbringing really comes in handy sometimes! This would be just such a time, I think.

So, for Obama to make this claim to restore our "moral stature" is just laughable. I mean, really - to claim one wants to "rebuild the country's moral stature" implies one has a MORAL base from which to do that work. I have seen blessed little evidence of that from Obama in the past two years. Heck, even longer than that, if you include how he got into the IL Senate - by screwing over the very woman (Alice Palmer) who got him into politics in the FIRST place. Well, that just goes to prove the point - he has had a "morality" problem for a while, it would seem.

There is no way I can touch on everything he has done during this entire election season, but one has to begin somewhere:

Tainting President Bill and Senator Hillary Clinton as racists. I am pretty sure that's a violation of one of the BIG TEN: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." And that is just the beginning of the the lies Obama spread against Hillary Clinton over the past two years, though that is not just career damaging, but psychologically damaging. No matter HOW much one might know a smear is false, something of that magnitude has an effect, especially when one has spent one's entire adult life fighting against that very cause? Yes, it is laughable, but it also tarnished them both tremendously. Yeah, what a stand-up guy. That is just ONE of the areas in which he went far beyond standard election campaigning. This false, yet lingering, attack on both of their CHARACTERS, using such a profound issue in this country, was so, so far beyond the pale of decency. Yet, not only did he use it, but he used it time and time again, then extending it to ALL Americans who did not support him. That is not the least bit "moral."

Nor is it MORAL to demean and belittle women. To treat them as less than, as less worthy, as not on the same level, is not exactly reflective of good character. And to diminish a woman's accomplishments all the while stealing her work and claiming it for one's own is not ethical in any way, shape, or form.

Then there is the vast amount of caucus fraud perpetrated by Obama's minions from Washington State to Texas. Texas alone with its 2,000+ documented complaints of caucus fraud - from intimidation, bullying, and threats, to physically being blocked out of the process. There is absolutely no way that the level of caucus fraud seen this year was a fluke, that it was not organized by the Obama campaign itself (does the term, "Obama Youth Camp" mean anything to you?). The caucus fraud that occurred was the ONLY reason Obama was even close to Hillary Clinton, who won all of the big states besides Obama's own.

Which leads me to this the whole delegate issue. Even with Obama's cheating at the caucuses, he and Clinton would have been only four votes apart except for one thing: taking lawfully cast, certified votes from Clinton and giving them to Obama, which he seemed to think was "fair."

Now, I realize knowing the law does not a lawful, ethical, or moral person make. But honestly, wouldn't one HOPE that the president-elect had any ONE of those characteristics? Is that really too much to ask? Evidently...

Ahem. And then there is ACORN. Oh, holy cow - where to even START on ACORN? Their voter registration fraud was OFF THE CHARTS this year. It couldn't POSSIBLY have had anything to do with Obama paying them over $800,000, could it? Or that Obama actually WORKED for ACORN? Suffice it to say, ACORN was a boon to Obama, especially if voter fraud didn't cross his moral barometer. Clearly, since he did not speak out against them, it did not seem to prick his conscience at all. Not even ACORN being investigated in sixteen states stirred him to say something against his unofficial election arm.

And how about Obama's lack of oversight on Afghanistan? Ho can anyone claim a moral high ground when he has held NOT ONE MEETING of the Committee that oversees Afghanistan, Europe, and NATO? Do you know that Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the entire world? That families in Afghanistan are selling their CHILDREN, both boys and girls (though the girls are often "sold" as BRIDES to pay off a debt) to be able to survive?? Where has Obama been? How he can he make ANY claims to "moral stature" when he has lifted NOT ONE FINGER for Afghanistan? Not one. In fact, he USED Afghanistan as a campaign issue, which makes his inaction even worse in terms of his own character. He used them, and did absolutely nothing FOR them. Not one damn thing.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Threatening, bullying, cheating, and lying have been the hallmarks of Obama's campaign this year, and HE is going to be the one to restore our moral stature in the world? Uh, yeah, no. He does not have the moral fortitude himself to pull that off. Not even close. Looks like four more years of Bush after all (like I've been sayin'...).

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Combo Platter

As promised, today is the day I highlight my pupsters since the kitties had their day in the limelight recently. And, I will have some other great ways to give following the dogs. Hopefully, this will provide a needed distraction from $500 bottles of wine served by the White House; the "Will he or Won't He," and "Will She or Won't She" for the Secretary of State position; and a bit of a release from seeing those incessant two-minute commercials for Obama coins. Oh, BLECH.

First, though, I was remiss in describing my cat, Bug, fully - he absolutely LOVES when I whistle. He comes running from wherever he is in the house to rub up against me, roll around on the floor purring, or headbutting me. AND, he loves when I give him some of the milk foam from the cappuccino or latte I am making (former for me, latter for my partner). He loves it.

And when I said Punkin' thinks I am her mother, she exhibits this behavior by sucking on my fingers. She is over 5 yrs old now, but that doesn't stop her. She will GRAB my hand to get what she wants.

Okay, now for the dogs. We have two now, having lost our two greyhounds within two months of each other 1 1/2 years ago. We have Sasha, a border collie mix, whom we adopted from the SPCA when she was about 1 year old 12 years ago. We call her Skippity Do Dog because she prances around everywhere. Sasha absolutely loves everyone - dogs, cats, kids, anyone...Now, it is hard to get a good picture of her because she seems to think the camera will steal her soul (I am not kidding), but here is our cute girl (with my old cat, Mariah, who died of cancer this year):

Then there is Sweetie, a chow/lab mix, whom we rescued from some abusive neighbors 9 years ago. At the time, she was clinically emaciated, and had had two litters of puppies - by the age of 1. She got her name because she would come by our house almost every day for a treat, and was definitely a sweetie, just as cute as she could be. Now, she has an autoimmune disease, from which we almost lost her a couple of years ago, but from which she is now in remission, thank heavens. She's a great watchdog (she actually barks at people - Sasha is more in the licking people genre), but is great with kids and kittens. Here's Sweetie (and it is hard to take pictures of her because when you pet her prior to the photo taking, she tilts her head up and closes her eyes):

For the Big Guy, LJ, and since I had those videos of the cat, I give you Peggy, the Rottweiler (she's just a beautiful Rottweiler specimen, don't you think?):

And now, for a fun, easy, FREE way to give to people, animals, and the environment. You may already know about these sites. There are three I recommend to you. The first is The Hunger Site. At this site you can click for the Rainforest, breast cancer, animal rescue, children, literacy, and hunger, as the name suggests. All it takes is a click of the mouse, and you have helped someone or something.

Affiliated with The Hunger site is, which, as the name implies, gives free rice to people in need. This site is a little different, though - to acquire the grains of rice, you have to correctly define a word (there are four possible definitions). Don't worry if you don't get it the first time, it will come back around, and frankly, they can use some mighty archaic definitions sometimes...Anyway, it's good for your brain, and helps people. Bonus!

The last one is, which covers global warming, baby seals, the oceans, big cats, primates, pets, children, breast cancer, and violence against women. Again, just click along and you are helping all of these causes.

In these difficult economic times, it is an easy way to give needed services to people and animals, as well as helping the environment and related causes. What could be better? And you can do it daily, which is what I do. It is just part of my daily constitutional now. It's fun, it's free, and it helps. A triple bonus!

Let's hear about your animals, or sites of which you are aware that help people, animals, or the environment. Or anything, for that matter. Consider this an open thread.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Run Away, Run Away!!

That's my advice to Senator Clinton, the THIRD candidate for Secretary of State in the Obama regime, or at least she was until yesterday. Now, it is down to her or Gov. Bill Richardson. Can I just say, from the outset, that to have it come down to her, the best presidential candidate we have had in DECADES, and that assholic Judas Iscariot, is insulting in and of itself. I mean, REALLY. He is a SEXIST pig, so he would definitely fit right into an Obama presidency, but he is also a BACKSTABBING sexist pig, having stabbed his "good friend" Hillary numerous times. What the hell is the matter with Obama? Can he just not STOP himself from being mean-spirited, petty, sexist, and cruel, while trying to make it look like he's a good guy? I know, no. He can't. He has demonstrated that time and time again.

By the way, while the Obama supporters are no doubt saying, "See? He's great offering this to HER," they miss the point. His word cannot be taken at face value. That is, he's a LIAR. His attacks on Hillary fueled a misogynistic rage in the US the likes of which I have never seen in my fifty years on this planet. Meanwhile, his smearing of her was joined in GLEEFULLY by his supporters, who bought every lie and smear against her he threw out there - are they not seeing the conundrum this presents for THEM?? How can they hate her so much and keep demeaning and belittling her if The One makes her the Secretary of State? Uh, yeah.

If he does offer it to her, I hope she says no. Hell no. Hell TO the no. Not that I don't think she would be BRILLIANT at it, of course she would. She has the experience, the ability, and the personality to be an outstanding Secretary of State, and if this was John McCain asking her, I'd say she should go for it. The difference? McCain RESPECTS her, and has always TREATED her with respect. He would value her input, and would trust her to do the heavy lifting without micromanaging.

Obama, on the other hand, has not shown her the respect she deserves, and since all cabinet members serve at the pleasure of the president, there is absolutely NOTHING to guarantee that he wouldn't fire her at the least provocation. So, there's that little piece. How do I say this? He doesn't deserve to have her in his cabinet after the way he and the ONC stole the nomination from her and US in the first place. Makes me nuts.

And then there is this. I had just been wondering the other day what in the world Obama was going to do now that he can't borrow off the smart kid's work any longer like he did all during the Primary and the Election seasons. I mean, really, what was he going to do for policies once he slithers his way into the White House? Lo and behold, SOMEHOW the news leaks out he is considering Hillary Clinton for the Secretary of State. Call me cynical, but I don't think it's because of his great care and concern for the country. I think it is to use her to create his work for him (again), have someone to blame if things don't go well, and take the credit for things that go well. But that's just my opinion...

Senator Clinton can do great work in the Senate, assuming she can get past The Old Boys Club, who seemed determined to mess with her. She is a leader, though, and her constituents are counting on her. WE'RE counting on her. Senator Clinton will do what she thinks is best for her, and the country. At least THIS time, we won't have to go through 18 months of her being dragged through the mud to to find out how this will be resolved. Either way, though it might be a hard pill to swallow...

As Thanksgiving Approaches...

It is important to count our blessings, yes, but also to keep in mind those who are less fortunate. My good friend at No Quarter, Bronwyn, responded to an email I sent her about one of my favorite causes with a suggestion: that we pick a cause that is especially in need at this time, and tell you about it.

Well, you know I cannot narrow it down to just one, though two are similar in nature. I'll limit it to four, though the other two are also (somewhat) similar to each other. Choice is good.

The email I forwarded to my friend was one that takes in abused and abandoned horses, "People Helping Horses." This small organization, located in Washington State, recently accepted a horse rescued by the county named, "Lucky." According to the PHH newsletter:
Found at a trail head in Skagit County by people out for a trail ride, Lucky and a gelding were taken in by the county who then asked PHH to step in. Lucky, a chestnut Thoroughbred, had been shot in the head above her right eye. The county had the bullet removed and surprisingly she still has vision in the eye though severed tendons in her eyelid have left her with a drooping lid.

Unfortunately, with an economy in a downward spiral, animals often pay the price by being neglected, or worse, killed. Care for horses can be expensive (and though fuel has recently dropped, rate hikes resulted in increased grain/hay hikes, too), and sometimes even good people cannot properly care for a horse any longer. Of course, there are also the cases of abuse, unfortunately. They need and advocate, People Helping Horses steps in to take on horses that fit that bill. They rescue them, rehab them, and put them up for adoption (when appropriate). Horses can be sponsored for as low as $25, though any amount is appreciated. To make a tax-deductible donation (through PayPal, click here and use the Donation button to the right.

Another great horse rescue organization is Castleton Ranch Horse Rescue, located in CA and, like PHH, is a recognized member of the Humane Society and the ASPCA. It, too, is volunteer-run, rescues, rehabs, and puts up horses for adoption. If adoption is not an option (a number of reasons can prohibit adoption, e.g., age, disease, injury), the horses live out the rest of their days at the Castleton Ranch Sanctuary. To make a tax deductible donation (and they do it in cool way, like you can buy a bag of treats, or bale of hay, etc.), click here.

Both of these organizations are nationally recognized for their great work, and in addition to rescue, rehab, adoption, and retirement, they do educational work as well for the horse-owner, and the community.

See, this kind of work is especially meaningful to me since my partner and I have a horse rescued from someone threatening to shoot him in the head. Why? Because she claimed he was having some lameness issues due to advancing age and the type of work he did (hunter/jumper). He is great now - living a life of retirement with supplements that keep his joints relatively pain-free. He even kicks up his heels, uh, hooves, with some of the other horses at the stable now. Here is my big boy, Jordan (that's his witness protection name), with two of his best friends (also rescued, by the woman who owns the stable):

Of course, there are a number of good, worthy organizations out there, and we give regularly to the big name people and animal organizations regularly. No doubt, they would be happy to receive something, anything, from you as well. But if you have a soft spot for horses, these are two good places to support. No amount is too small in this economic climate.

And since we are getting close to Thanksgiving, I have two other organizations to recommend to you, two of whom you may have heard: Feeding America (formerly Second Harvest) and Oxfam America. Right now, Feeding America is having up to $50,000 matched by Tyson Foods, and each dollar feeds 32 meals. To donate, click here.

Oxfam America deals with "Injustice and Poverty" all around the world, and has a program, Hunger Banquet, to teach about issues of hunger, which includes Fast for a World Harvest, and some other events, all designed to highlight world hunger and to raise money.

All four are worthy organizations, to be sure. If you can help and of these organizations, or another one close to your heart, that would be great. No amount is too small in this economic climate.

And if you cannot give money, please consider using as your search engine. You can put in the charity of your choice (after you verify it, or add it if it isn't already there), and every time you do a search, they give money to your cause. It's FREE, and you don't have to use (Obama-supporting) Google. It's a win-win!

Friday, November 14, 2008

Introductions - Updated

I have to run out this morning for an appointment, so I would like to introduce you to one of my animals, my 3 yr old cat, Bug. Bug lives up to his name in three ways: he is as cute as a bug, he scoots like a bug, and he can BE a bug. I love him dearly, of course. This is what he looks like:

And this is what he acts like:

Yep, that's my boy!! He is SUPPOSED to be an indoor cat, though we screened in the porch for all of the cats to be able to go out. But one of our dogs often blocks for Bug when we are coming in the front door. Did I mention that he scoots like a bug? Uh, yeah. (H/t to my sister for sending the video and the one below.)

This is my cat, Punkin'. She was a feral kitten we rescued, along with two of her siblings. They went to a young family who wanted them badly, and we kept her. She thinks I'm her mother. I'm not kidding. She's small - less than 9 lbs.

The following video is a combination of their two behaviors. Punkin' loves to cuddle, and climbs all over me when I am in the midst of writing, or just getting up. If I am standing when she wants to be held, she reaches up to me. It's very sweet, actually.

Bug, when he wants to be fed, wends around my legs, up against any thing he can find, then jumps up on the washer, headbutting me until I give him treats or more food.

What the heck - might as well finish this out. These are my two kittens. The boy likes to play fetch. He even has a special meow for when he wants to play. He loves the flat caps off of gal. water jugs, and will bring them back to me, dropping them at my feet. I kid you not. He can do this for some time - like a Golden Retriever or something. The girl is very sweet, and both love to cuddle:

Isn't this a nice way to take your mind off of the possibility that Senator Clinton might end up being Obama's Secretary of State? Oh, she'll do a BANG-UP job, no doubt about that. Even her detractors (talking to you, Rachel) admit that. She's brilliant, and very experienced. It just seems like another way for Obama to keep cheating off the smart kid, getting her to continue creating the policies he swipes. But that's just my take - I figured he was going to have to do SOMETHING now that he can't just take her work willy-nilly like he did in the Primary/Election. And just another painful reminder of what SHOULD have been had the DNC not become the ONC...

I'll save my dogs for another day!