i'm upsetting friends...

i have posted my cynicism about this election in a number of different ways. i live in the Chicago area and i believe that it is a foregone conclusion that Illinois will go to Obama, but i'm not sure of the rest of the country. i think that the numbers, the polls, the predictions, etc. are most confusing for a lot of people.

while the media is working on the presumption that Senator Obama will be the President-Elect on Wednesday, i have seen too many unusual things happen with the U.S. electorate. basically, they are fickle and influenced by fear and innuendo most of all.

though many pundits and newspeople are saying that John McCain has run not just a loose campaign but one with a scattergun effect, especially over the last week or so. i have found, working in both the public and private sectors and also in the service industry that peoples memories are short and tend to remember the last thing they hear.

as an example in this election, the word socialism has been bandied about by Palin and the Republicans. unfortunately, to most U.S. voters it is a dirty word, in spite of the fact that we have had socialized medicine for the elderly with Medicare and the Tsar and his minions just socialized the credit, banking and other industries with their baleouts.

when these people use the word socialism they are implying the word communism. at the same time, Palin used the word Marxism in reference to Senator Obama last week. in the belief that the U.S. electorate is actually a stupid body of people, the Mcpains are counting on the confusion of the three to instill or at least implant fear in the minds of people - especially the elderly who remember the witchhunt of Joe McCarthy, the Cold War with the USSR, the battle for Southeast Asia in Vietnam, and many other things that brought fear into the minds of U.S. citizens.

it's a vicious circle that has been perfected by the Republicans, especially, and been used as a master-plan to retain control and prevent the inclusion of new and, possibly, more modern and useful ideas and actions. it's been done for centuries, as i've written in previous posts.

now, back to how i'm upsetting my friends.

i have this very distinct sense that this historical error may actually occur. on Wednesday, November 3, 1948, the Chicago Tribune actually printed this banner headlined front page -

my personal fear and why i'm upsetting my friends? that not just the Tribune but other papers, websites and media will have this headline on Wednesday, November 5, 2008

McCain Defeats Obama

and i can't seem to shake it.

more than this, i can only imagine what the immediate repercussions could be around the country and, of course the long term effects of a Mcpain administration and the possibility of the second dumbest person to hold high office in the U.S. - Tsar George being the first. and, no, i am not talking about John McCain.

i wish for, what to me, would be reigniting of the hopes, dreams and goals of the movements in the 1960's. the Age of Aquarius is not just a short period of history; it is a period of about 2,150 years. by accounts it began around 1844. it's an age of promise for growth and progress, in spite of, or rather because of, the upheavals of the revolutions, world wars, depressions, nuclear discoveries, etc. that put a new sense of humanity into play.

i am not a true believer in astrology but i am a student of history and its cyclical nature. in most cases the cycles begin and end because humankind comes to the realization that the lot they are now part of is no longer working.

of course, on the opposite side are the groups of humankind who fear change and allow themselves to be played by the old guard. this play has been going on for 60 years now. i want it to stop, but i fear that i will not get to see it myself, but i know that...

when hope is gone, life is over...

taxes, taxes, taxes...

i'm really tired of hearing the Mcpains harping on the alleged tax increase interpretation they believe Senator Obama's economic plan will bring.

if you go to Obama's website (Obama-Biden Tax Calculator), there is a calculator that you can enter your income and find out what his plan means to you. my taxes would decrease by about $575. i haven't found the same at the Mcpain website, and, please, correct me if i'm wrong.

so, there is a question that comes to my mind about the Republican nominee's real plan. i don't completely understand it and i think that they are hiding that their plan will continue to support corporate welfare.

there is a very simple solution - a flat tax. [by the way, this link is to the Heritage Foundation. no fly-by-night organization.]

charge individuals the exact same rate - say 17% - with no deductions or loopholes. i might rethink capitol gains or losses, because they may have a long term effect on investment and people could get hit with a large amount all at once that would exceed a true 17% picture.

then, have a separate tax program for corporations that would be similar to a flat tax system but with benefits for growth.

there are a few plans out there and you can find them for yourself by going to a Google search. (just click on the word Google to a search i've begun already)

somehow, though, i don't think that either Mr. Obama or Mr. McCain would go along with this right now. the powers that be are in such dire straits that there would be too much pressure from them with very little logic and fear that they may lose somthing.

however, most of the countries that have gone with a flat tax have shown an economic growth overall.

we need to completely rethink government at this point. it has become so complicated that i don't think the Founding Fathers would recognize it. it's become like the English language: there are rules of grammar and usage to follow but there are so many exceptions it makes it more confusing and difficult.


think about it...

and now the New York Times...

Barack Obama for President

Hyperbole is the currency of presidential campaigns, but this year the nation’s future truly hangs in the balance.

The United States is battered and drifting after eight years of President Bush’s failed leadership. He is saddling his successor with two wars, a scarred global image and a government systematically stripped of its ability to protect and help its citizens — whether they are fleeing a hurricane’s floodwaters, searching for affordable health care or struggling to hold on to their homes, jobs, savings and pensions in the midst of a financial crisis that was foretold and preventable.

As tough as the times are, the selection of a new president is easy. After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States.

The Times lays out a very logical and step-by-step explanation of the endorsement. It is worth reading the entire editorial. (just click on the link above)

The last three paragraphs sum it up succinctly:

Mr. Obama has withstood some of the toughest campaign attacks ever mounted against a candidate. He’s been called un-American and accused of hiding a secret Islamic faith. The Republicans have linked him to domestic terrorists and questioned his wife’s love of her country. Ms. Palin has also questioned millions of Americans’ patriotism, calling Republican-leaning states “pro-America.”

This politics of fear, division and character assassination helped Mr. Bush drive Mr. McCain from the 2000 Republican primaries and defeat Senator John Kerry in 2004. It has been the dominant theme of his failed presidency.

The nation’s problems are simply too grave to be reduced to slashing “robo-calls” and negative ads. This country needs sensible leadership, compassionate leadership, honest leadership and strong leadership. Barack Obama has shown that he has all of those qualities.

of course, now remember, this paper is in one of the two elitist cities that Mr. McCain talked about - McCain: Washington D.C. and NYC = Fake America - in an interview he and Palin just did with Brian Williams of NBC.

oh, yeah. The Washington Post endorsed Mr. Obama.

those damn elitists...

it IS about race - part 10...

In New McCain Robocall, Rudy Giuliani Suggests Obama Opposes Jailing Murderers And Rapist

Shades of Willie Horton again.

Giuliani has recorded a new McCain robocall in which he suggests, in effect, that Barack Obama doesn't think sex offenders, drug dealers and murders should have to go to jail, according to Jennifer Henderson, a stay-at-home mom in Maine who tells us she received the call.

Oct. 23, 2008, TPM Election Central

The problem with the call is one of omission. What Obama is opposed to is specific mandatory minimum sentences and that's left out of the robocall.

Here we are hitting the fear factor again - rape, murder, drugs - add to the welfare comparisons the last couple of days and it is the old tactics updated with new target words that leave out the explicitness and transparency by couching terms in PC phrasing.

will they link this to Obama?

Chicago has had an on-going police scandal since the 1980's. It deals with members of the Chicago Police force using torture techniques as an interrogation technique and a few other spurious behaviours.

The latest barrage in the case has U.S. District Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald [yes that Patrick Fitzgerald] filing charges of perjury against retired police Commander Jon Burge since the statute of limitations has run out on the alleged crime itself. Though it's BIG headlines for the Chicago papers, and even the New York Times has a story today, most people in greater Chicagoland just shrug our shoulders. We go through this a lot. We are pretty cynical about city politics, but we also live in the City that Works. I would have to say it does.

The case had a special result in that it force a former Republican governor, who by the way is in prison for corruption right now, to suspend all capital punishment making world-wide headlines and also had the effect in some convicted murderers actually being released not only from death row but from prison.

If you read the stories and look into the scenario, you will discover that it is a conservative's and right-winger's dream. Liberals at their worst; government run amok; a victory for the bleeding hearts; and democracy being attacked. Of course, there is also the unspoken angle that the vast majority of the prisoners released were African-American.

so, i'm just wondering how long it will take the Mcpains, the Limbaugh's, and other wingers to somehow connect this all to Senator Obama? you know, like they did Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright...

i'm just asking...

your culture will adapt to serve as us...

this photo comparison has been around for the last eight years or so.

but have you seen this one?

it sort of explains a lot, don't you think?

We are the Borg.

You will be assimilated...

the Chicago Tribune does something it has never done before...

Tribune endorsement:
Barack Obama for president

This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

In Chicago, this is a very big deal. No one would have expected the Tribune to break with its history of endorsing Republican presidential candidates, even with a the new owner, Sam Zell.

The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause--the Republican Party. The Tribune's first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.

To highlight the paper's reasoning:

The Republican Party, the party of limited government, has lost its way....

We might have counted on John McCain to correct his party's course....

It is, though, hard to figure John McCain these days. He argued that President Bush's tax cuts were fiscally irresponsible, but he now supports them....

McCain failed in his most important executive decision.... Having called Obama not ready to lead, McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin....

We do, though, think Obama would govern as much more of a pragmatic centrist than many people expect.

And to end the endorsement:

It may have seemed audacious for Obama to start his campaign in Springfield, invoking Lincoln. We think, given the opportunity to hold this nation's most powerful office, he will prove it wasn't so audacious after all. We are proud to add Barack Obama's name to Lincoln's in the list of people the Tribune has endorsed for president of the United States.

i still have hope...


oh, and the Chicago Sun-Times endorsed Senator Obama also. We would not be surprised about this in the city:

Sun-Times endorses Barack Obama for president

read both editorials. just click on the headline links...

could this be the dreaded "October Surprise" the Republicans are known for?

McCain Transition Chief Aided Saddam In Lobbying Effort

William Timmons, the Washington lobbyist who John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, aided an influence effort on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to ease international sanctions against his regime.

The two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign later either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal criminal charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government.

Murray Waas, Huffington Post, 2:49 pm EDT, 10/14/08

if it is, i think they got it wrong this time...

read the entire story at Huffpost.

Obama and Clinton and Ayers...

Here is what Hillary actually said and Barack's response...



Senator Clinton:

"I think, again, that it is an issue that people will be asking about. And I have no doubt, I know Senator Obama is a good man and I respect him greatly, but I think this is an issue that certainly the Republicans will be raising. And it goes to this larger set of concerns of how we are going to run against John McCain. You know I wish that the Republicans would apologize for the disaster of the Bush/Cheney years and not run anybody. Just say that it's time for the Democrats to go back to the White House. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be wanting to do that. We know that they're going to be out there full force and, you know, I've been in this arena for a long time. Uh, I have a lot of baggage and everybody has rummaged through it for years and so, therefore, I have, you know, an opportunity to come to this campaign with a very strong feeling and conviction that I will able to withstand whatever the Republicans send our way."

Now that doesn't seem at all what John McCain is claiming Hillary said. As a matter of fact, if you look closely, she is attacking and predicting what the Mcpains would and are doing! She took the same stand that Obama did against the actions of Bill Ayers.

Obama also pointed out that President Clinton pardoned two members of the Weather Underground. Obama's words: "...which I think is a more significant act than me serving on a board, uh, with somebody with action that he did forty years ago." I would wonder how McCain would respond to his dealing with Charles Keating? He had actual meetings with the man about the savings and loan problem and was criticized by the Senate Ethics Committee for having "exercised 'poor judgment'".

At the end of the video, Senator Obama states,

"Look. There is no doubt that the Republicans will attack either of us. What I've been able to display during the course of this primary is that I can take a punch. I've taken some pretty [good ones already] and I don't begrudge her that. That's what the political contest is about. I am looking forward to having a debate with John McCain and I think that every poll indicates that I am doing just as well, if not better, in pulling together the coalition that will defeat John McCain. And, ah, when it comes to November, and people are going into the polling place, they're going to be asking, 'Are we going to be going thourgh four more years of George Bush economic policies? Are we going to go through four more years of George Bush foreign policy? And, if we as Democrats and if I as the nominee, have put forward a clear vision of how we are going to move the country forward, deal with issues like energy dependence, lower gas prices, provide health care, get our troops out of Iraq, that is a debate that I am happy to have and a debate that I am confident I can win."

Today, Hillary's spokesperson, Kathleen Strand, responded to McCain's posture invoking Senator Clinton in his attacks using Bill Ayers against Obama.

As Hillary Clinton has criss-crossed the country for Barack Obama, she has said to anyone who will listen that we can't trust John McCain and the Republicans to fix this economy and turn our country around. Funny, John McCain isn't using those words.

from TPMelectioncentral

So, again, it appears to me, that all Hillary did was predict, presciently, what was going to happen.

who needs Tarot Cards? Mcpain is unbelievably predictable.

i just wish the outcome of the election would be as inevitable. the American electorate does have a history of, well, shortsightness...

the debate moderators...

There has been a lot of talk around the web about the roles of Jim Lehrer, Tom Brokaw and Gwen Ifill during the last three debates and that they did not really ask clarifying questions after the candidates' answers and remarks.

It was obvious, but I wonder if this is NOT part of the agreement that is supposed to be page after page in length.

I also wonder that most of the restrictions in the document came from the Mcpains. They have a history of telling people that it's my way or no way. Palin is not going to do any more interviews, according to the campaign, and will not do a press conference, because the media picks on her and skews her image.

Why do I wonder?

Wasn't it the Mcpains that forced MSNBC to withdraw Keith Olberman and Tim Matthews as its anchors for the debate coverage? Weren't the two men told to tone down their rhetoric? There was talk that it really came from the old-school reporters who said that the two were taking things too far, but it certainly wasn't any farther than what Fox News does.

i mean, i'm just asking...


oh, and as far as skewing Plain's image, i still like this image the best...





sorry [no i'm not[, i couldn't resist...

VoteVets.org new ad on McCain...

I have posted previously on things about and from VoteVets.org. Along with SLDN.org, I support VoteVets heartily and with donation.

Here is their newest ad debunking the support McCain pretends to have for vets. I'll let the video, and VoteVets, speak for itself...






Veterans' support? another mcpain lie?

just asking...

after the debate, my reaction...

The Lie Clock







A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.

He asked, 'What are all those clocks?'

St. Peter answered, 'Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock.

Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move.'

'Oh,' said the man, 'whose clock is that?'

'That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never told a lie.'

'Incredible,' said the man'. And whose clock is that one?'

St. Peter responded, 'That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life..'

'Where's Senator McCain's clock?' asked the man.

'McCain's clock is in Jesus' office. He's using it as a ceiling fan.


I didn't watch the entire debate, I had a HEDAC Board Meeting last night. I saw the talk on CNN for a little bit before we left the meeting and it didn't seem that the analysts, both those with political affiliation (partisan) and those who were media representatives (nonpartisan), didn't seem to be saying in their first response after the debate that John McCain did as well as he needed and wanted to do.

After I got home, I turned on CNN & MSNBC because they were replaying the debate. So, I switched back and forth watching parts of it.

My initial reaction was dislike for the smarmy "My Friend(s)" phrase McCain kept using. It was transparently pandering and unconvincing.

The rest of the parts I watched had McCain bringing up things that have consistently been proven false concerning Senator Obama by sites like FactCheck.org and the New York Times along with others. Yet, he continues to use them.

As an example, the reference to Senator Obama's connection to Freddie and Fannie. One of McCain's major aides was receiving $30,000 a month from one of the companies until it was discovered. There are others on his staff who also have/had connections to the companies - making lots of money. Obama didn't deny that he had some connection Fannie and Freddie. He reported that he brought up regulation a couple of years before McCain said it was his idea.

AmericaBlog had an article this morning citing the Obama Campaign displaying the 17 Lies they heard Senator McCain spout last night. The comments after the post have readers citing others. Check it out.

This morning, I heard the "That One" phrase. It just trickled off McCain's lips with no hesitation but with malice behind it. I can see the reason the pundits and media are grabbing on to it. It was rude to speak of someone not more than seven feet from you that you are in a debate with as if he weren't there. I also would propose that it had a slight racial undertone to it. An undertone that runs throughout the Mcpains. They are being as careful as they can be, but they are creating new racial epithets in their speechifying.

So much for being a "straight shooter" as he considers himself.

"elitist" is the new racial slur...

Stop and think about it. The Mcpains are taking great pains to label Obama as elitist. This in spite of the fact that McCain is a celebrity whore, owns a lot of property, is married to a very rich woman who sells alcohol, and has a new supporter in Lady Rothschild [see the LA Times article Lady Rotschild Thinks Obama Is Elitist]. I have brought this up in a couple of other posts [it IS about race...; as of late...; it IS about race - part 2...].

After watching Bill Maher last night, I realized and am convinced that ELITIST is being used as the replacement term for UPPITY and one that white folk can identify better than uppity. It's so transparent.

One of the basest fears among older white people is that African-Americans believe that they will become or already think they are better than white folk. This is nothing new nor is it anything others haven't talked about. It can also be said about impressions of Jews that the white folk have. They hold to the Old Country beliefs that have been around for centuries.

The Republicans have always bartered on fear and racism. Willie Horton is a prime example. It may just have cost the Dems the election in 1988; at the least it added to it. The Repubs made a scary picture [to most white folk] of a man and turned it into caricature. The incident concerned Horton, who was on a Massachusett's furlough from prison program who twice raped a local woman after pistol-whipping, knifing, binding, and gagging her fiancé. He then stole the car belonging to the man he had assaulted, but was later captured by police after a chase. The subtle message? Do you want your wife or daughter to meet someone like this on a darkened street? Of course, Willie Horton was black.

They are doing it again. Only this time they are being much subtler. They think that by pretending that the American electorate is now smart enough to see what is happening fear will work again.

It will.

Maher said on his show last night that he didn't believe that the American electorate is smart enough to see through the b.s. and has repeatedly shown that for the last 30 years of elections. Andrew Sullivan, appearing on the show, said that they are smart enough to know. and see through it all. Maher's response, "You're not American."

The expression on Sullivan's face was priceless and he was speechless. He was coming from the point of view of a person who chose to become an American citizen and who cannot see the subtleties of our history from anything but books and not living it. To what he should be likening it is the centuries old conflict in Northern Ireland. With that he has experience. The situations are quite similar. Rather than color being at the base of the problem, it is religion.

Earlier in the show Sullivan said the key to Obama winning was telling five of your friends who are not bigots to get out there and vote. Maher said to him, "How do you know they are not bigots?" It caught Sullivan off guard briefly, until he stammered something like, "You know your friends." No, we don't!

I mentioned in my post, it IS about race..., of friends I have known for 40 years who said they would not vote for Obama because he is black. I was shocked. I never expected. this They are extremely intelligent and cultured people. They have been married for over 50 years. Maher's point hit home when he gave his response to Sullivan. We don't know.

but..., i am going to agree with Sullivan on one thing. we need to do everything we can to make certain that people do get out and vote.

even if we have to use the tactic that their vote is one against Tsar George, because Mcpain is actually worse! [that's for another discussion, i.e. rant, later]

Fwd: OK... NOW i GET IT... IT ALL MAKES SENSE...

this is an email I received from a friend. I don't know where it originated, but it is worth people reading it. I forwarded it to all my friends and thought posting it would help getting it out to more people. if you want, copy and forward it to your friends.

This took some figuring out:

If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."

Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.

If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

Name your kids Willow, Trig, and Track, you're a maverick.

Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with more than 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with fewer than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.

If your husband is nicknamed "First Dude," with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now.

like i said, pass this on if you think your friends or family need clarification about the candidates. it's clear to me who has the pulse on the issues...

more lipstick schtick...

actually, no more lipstick schtick...

here is what really needs to be the focus of the entire political process in this election to dispell the lies and disinformation that mcpain is fomenting.

These people know they are lying; they know that Tsar George lied for the last 8 years; and they know that no one pays any attention to it. They've been getting away with it and they believe that they will continue to get away with it. They decry dirty politics when they think the Dems and the Obama campaign are doing it to them. Remember, it's okay for them to do it though. [yes, i'm going to go back on my first sentence in this post.] Hence, all of the fuss over lipstick, all of the sanctions on Palin's background and family, and all of the talk about change when there is no real change in their talk.

McCain used the pig line on Hillary Clinton. No one said anything or made a big deal about it. The mcpain's utilize all of the rumors about Obama's background still hinting that he's Muslim. Finally, they deploy the defensive tactics of using Obama's focus on change and saying, "It was our idea first."

one more, and maybe the last thing about lipstick. i wonder if any Republican has ever tried putting lipstick on a pig? Something tells me that since they're not elitist they've never tried...

sorry, i love this picture,
though four-strands is not
really fashionable.
it's a bit gaudy...

election update...

but not what you might be expecting...

while i was writing the last post on the Grand Sport Bugatti Veyron, my eyes were caught by three little widgets on the side of the website:

2008 Election Countdown: 79 days

The Official George W. Bush "Days Left in Office" Countdown: 155 days 11 hours 5 minutes 59.6 seconds

Cost of the War in Iraq: $546,169,702,441. [it's gone up since i typed that by several tens of thousands of dollars.]

does anyone really want to add 4 more years and $500 Billions of dollars to these counts?

the thought of McCain as president really does scare me...

another assault on the American family...

Edwards Admits to Extramarital Affair,

NYT, August 8, 2008

Now remember that what's her name, you know that skinny anorexic looking pundit, oh yeah, Ann Coulter, said that Edwards was gay. By logic that must mean that by having an affair he must have assaulted the American family even more.

As a matter of fact, if you go to her blog, she comments on it:

ONLY HIS HAIR DRESSER KNOWS FOR SURE!

Her point is that the main stream media white-washed [Coulter's word, not mine] the story and scrubbed it from the National Enquirer's revelations not wanting to give it credence and because of the media's liberal bias. [some how Enquirer and Ann Coulter in the same story counters as very bizarre! Almost oxymoronic...] In other words, it's because he's a Democrat and a Liberal. Heavens!

Her proof:

Isn't there some level of coverage between "wall-to-wall" and "double-secret probation, delta-force level total news blackout" when it comes to a sex scandal involving a current Democratic vice presidential and Cabinet prospect?

Hey, what sort of "elected official" was Ted Haggard again? He was the Christian minister no one outside of his own parish had ever heard of until he was caught in a gay sex scandal last year. Then he suddenly became the Pope of the Protestants. And yet, despite the fact that Haggard was not an "elected official," the Post gave that story wall-to-wall coverage. And what sort of "elected officials" were Mel Gibson, Rush Limbaugh and Bill Bennett?

See, the connection and the hint is already there It's all because of the assault on marriage by the gay agenda to destroy marriage. The relationship is unmistakable. Queers are either seducing holy, upstanding men or forcing them to have affairs. As long as they're not liberal Democrats. or have pretty hair. or have wives that support LGBT marriage. or...

Wait a minute!

What about John McCain's affair(s)? It [they] are very well documented. As I remember, didn't he leave his first wife for Cindy after his wife was in a severe auto accident? [Sound familiar? Newt Gingrich left his wife suffering in the hospital with cancer for a younger woman also. Seems to be a pattern here.]

And now, others are saying that Edwards is unfit to be vice-president or hold a cabinet position because of this. Given that McCain had affairs, doesn't it mean that he's unfit to not only be preznit but unfit to run for preznit?

Cenk Uygur has a great take on it over on HuffPost - How is John McCain's Affair Different than John Edwards'? check it out.

i'm so confused......


[i know. i know. what else is new?]

hey, stop picking on McCain...

he's doing a marvelous job at not getting elected!

Britney, his own mother, Joe Klein, Kathy Hilton...

and let's not forget that We'll always have Paris.

the Obama, Paris Hilton, Britney flap...

here's the one thing that struck me about McCain's ad: how out of touch is he really? to pick Paris and Britney as the current celebrities du jour when they haven't really been in the news for, well, months if not weeks...

i mean, come on, does this speak to age or his desperation?

just asking...

i'm watching Olbermann again...

and just had a really, really scary thought while listening to his Special Comment on John McCain's statement that pulling the troops out of Iraq is not the most important thing.

the really, really scary thought?

Rasputin Cheney as McCain's vice-presidential choice!

remember - "In a world where carpenters get resurrected, anything is possible."

what was the name of that other movie? you know, the one that has the line, "Be afraid. Be very, very afraid."


oh, my...