“Look at what happened in the last two years since Senator Obama visited and declared the war lost,” the GOP nominee-in-waiting told The Associated Press in an interview, noting that the Illinois senator’s last trip to Iraq came before the military buildup that is credited with curbing violence.
“He really has no experience or knowledge or judgment about the issue of Iraq and he has wanted to surrender for a long time,” the Arizona senator added. “If there was any other issue before the American people, and you hadn’t had anything to do with it in a couple of years, I think the American people would judge that very harshly.” “
Look, what’s the point in Obama going over there? Who cares?
Clinton also suggested some were trying to “cover up” Sen. Clinton’s chances of winning in key states that Democrats will have to win in the general election. “
“She is winning the general election today and he is not, according to all the evidence,” [Bill] Clinton said. “And I have never seen anything like it. I have never seen a candidate treated so disrespectfully just for running.” “
My favorite part:
Clinton did not expound on who he was accusing.
Hillary will be bitter after this election. She thought she was going to stomp B.O. in this thing, and now the truth is dawning on her, although in a hazy kind of way–like how a drunk remembers there are still microwave burritos in the freezer. Bill will harp on this election for years.
The Clintons are soooooo confused, soooooo tired that they can’t even tell you who they’re fighting against. Bill is just lashing out at THEM. THEY are holding little Hillary back.
People don’t follow politics because of assholes like the Clintons. They grate on your nerves, and you’d rather just play xbox or watch “Flavor of Love III” until your goddamned brain has turned to tapioca.
Ok, granted, this is a little bit outdated. The Writers’ Strike is over, and everyone’s happy now that “So You Think You Can Dance” is on. However, there is some gold in this mock-debate-style panel discussion in Congress (at which actual congress-persons were present). “Representing” the WGA, we have writers from The Daily Show, and on the side of the AMPTP we have writers from The Colbert Report. In addition to a smug philosophy-major-turned-writer and a parody of Code Pink protesters, there is some interesting commentary on the internet, a charge that the writers “think they’re better than Jesus,” and a discussion of “nothing-adjacence.” Enjoy:
Here is an interesting article about illegal immigration and assimilation in the Wall Street Journal. After briefly making the case that most Americans don’t want to see illegal immigrants deported and for the idea that statistics on illegal immigrants often distort reality, the author writes:
If American culture is under assault today, it’s not from immigrants who aren’t assimilating but from liberal elites who reject the concept of assimilation. For multiculturalists, and particularly those in the academy, assimilation is a dirty word. A values-neutral belief system is embraced by some to avoid having to judge one culture as superior or inferior to another. Others reject the assimilationist paradigm outright on the grounds that the U.S. hasn’t always lived up to its ideals. America slaughtered Indians and enslaved blacks, goes the argument, and this wicked history means we have no right to impose a value system on others.
But social conservatives who want to seal the border in response to these left-wing elites are directing their wrath at the wrong people. The problem isn’t the immigrants. The problem is the militant multiculturalists who want to turn America into some loose federation of ethnic and racial groups. The political right should continue to push back against bilingual education advocates, anti-American Chicano Studies professors, Spanish-language ballots, ethnically gerrymandered voting districts, La Raza’s big-government agenda and all the rest. But these problems weren’t created by the women burping our babies and changing linen at our hotels, or by the men picking lettuce in Yuma and building homes in Iowa City.
Maybe everyone else already knew about this, but I found this great website this morning called Project Vote Smart. They have a lot of helpful information on political candidates. Here are the main pages for the presidential races:
This kind of information is really helpful because of how difficult it can be to get an “accurate” picture of a candidate from reading print media and watching TV. And for the most part the “debates” are a joke and basically useless for forming an educated opinion of who is the best candidate.
Reiterating a point she has made frequently while campaigning in West Virginia, Clinton pointed out Tuesday that no Democrat has won the White House since 1916 without winning West Virginia.
Bill Clinton won there in 1992 and 1996. George W. Bush took the state in 2000 and 2004.
In addition to West Virginia, Clinton’s campaign points to other swing states she has won — like Ohio and Pennsylvania — as they try to woo superdelegates to their side.
Yes, yes. But she has missed the point. I understand that a Democrat must win swing states. No brainer. But it doesn’t matter that she won against a fellow Democrat. You have to win against the Republican, dumbass. Apples and oranges. General Tso’s and pizza.
And I don’t buy these polls that say that these swing-stater-Hillary-supporters will vote for McCain over Obama. It’s bullshit spoiled-grapes nonsense. They will think about the war and the goddamned economy, and they will be voting BLUE. Bottom line.
(Although, if she wins, maybe I’ll bail out on her. “MC Spanky McGee, you’re an asshole.” Yes, I am.)
It’s the same kind of political sophistry she’s been pulling all along, like claiming that she has “won” Florida and Michigan.
Yeah, and I used to be a badass in YMCA soccer. Whoopdiefuckingdoo.
I cannot believe what I just read. This shit is almost too crazy to summarize, so you’ve really got to read it for yourself. Some of it is so absurd it made me laugh out loud in a room full of people who have no idea what I was reading. But some of it really made me worry about these vote-wielding crazies – especially those who promote casting out the “demons” of such things as the intellect, philosophy, and…handwriting analysis.
[B]y my third day I began to notice how effortlessly my soft-spoken [Christian alter-ego]Â Matt-mannequin was going through his robotic motions of praise, and I was shocked. For a brief, fleeting moment I could see how under different circumstances it would be easy enough to bury your “sinful” self far under the skin of your outer Christian and to just travel through life this way. So long as you go through all the motions, no one will care who you really are underneath. And besides, so long as you are going through all the motions, never breaking the facade, who are you really? It was an incomplete thought, but it was a scary one; it was the very first time I worried that the experience of entering this world might prove to be anything more than an unusually tiring assignment. I feared for my normal. ….
By the end of the weekend I realized how quaint was the mere suggestion that Christians of this type should learn to “be rational” or “set aside your religion” about such things as the Iraq War or other policy matters. Once you’ve made a journey like this â€” once you’ve gone this far â€” you are beyond suggestible. … [O]nce you’ve gotten to this place, you’ve left behind the mental process that a person would need to form an independent opinion about such things.Â … Once you reach that place with them, you’re thinking with muscles, not neurons.
This isn’t Christianity. This is a form of pop-pyschological brainwashing combined with a vague grasp of mythology. And it’s fucking scary.