Oh, dear.

Oh, dear, oh, dear.

I love Patrick Kennedy. I really do. But this...? It's like someone gave him a list of talking points and he's just reciting them .. all out of order.

I mean, the question was 'What are you excited about...', so...

What's he like when he's bored??

I thought she was ...

Okay.

About what I expected. I thought she was solid and did well, but I didn't think it was "electrifying" as some are calling it. It was pretty standard stuff, delivered solidly but not spectacularly. That's just my opinion.

I don't know if my bar is set too high or others' are set too low.

I just know I didn't connect to her in this speech the way I did to Michelle Obama. Then again, I honestly think hers was the best speech of any of the conventions so far, followed closely by Bill's. I don't even think Obama reached that level, though he, too, was solid.

Anyway, she did fine. Not great, but fine.

After the past few days, I suppose that's a win.

Okay, the newest McCain ad is awesome. (If it's not on top in that link, go to "Convention Night".)

I don't think I've ever seen it's like in politics.

Job well done to you, Senator McCain. Well played.

I'm just...

Wow.


Just..


Wow.

I am truly, truly proud that she's representing us as women. What a woman!!

...I wouldn't vote for Joe Biden as President. ::shrug::

Granted, you don't vote for the VP and there have been some real winners in the Naval Observatory (including the clown living there now), but I still don't think I'd vote for him. This whole thing makes me feel a little unsettled.

It'll be interesting to see what McCain does. I know I've heard rumors that Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina could be his running mate, and that would suddenly put me in a really bad position, particularly if it's Meg (I worked for her). I don't believe it; I think he's going to go with the "safe" bet of Romney. But in many ways, it would make sense - Washington outsiders, female (for those Clinton diehards) and strong on the economy.

I wouldn't be so inclined if the nominee were Kay Bailey Hutchinson (who was my senator for some time) but we'll see. We'll see.

I agree with Pat Buchanan???

And yet, this is the most intelligent response I've read about the Russia/Georgia conflict. I am in 100%, violent agreement with him here.

It scares me a little.

"Highly placed sources" put Evan Bayh out of the running for VP.

Shoot. :(

How did we get back into the Cold War?

Is it just me, or has George Bush basically managed to f up every good thing that's happened in the world in the last 20 years? Seriously. Has this clown done ANYTHING right?

As if we don't have enough trouble in Afghanirakistan, now we hate the Russkies again.

Well done, W.

I wish Barack Obama would just announce the VP choice and be done with it.

I'm hoping it's Evan Bayh, just because he'd be nice to look at for four years. I've never been a huge Joe Biden fan, but he wouldn't be a bad choice. Indeed, no one I've heard bandied about would be a bad choice, except for HRC. (And while I would completely see the wisdom in choosing HRC and attempting to appease her rabid fans, I really don't see that they would accept it, and I fear what she would do in that position.)

I'm only mildly interested in who The McCain will pick, though it would be interesting if he picked someone like Lieberman. It will probably be Multiple Choice Mitt, though. Yawn.

Just hurry up already...Gawd...

Edit: Okay, the above isn't totally true...I am interested in The McCain's choice, if only to see once and for all which McCain has really come to this party. Is it The McCain we moderates fell in love with, the maverick McCain who would do what he thought was best even if it wasn't politically expedient? If so, he'll pick Lieberman, because that's who he really wants to pick.

If it's the McCain who will do whatever and pander to whoever it takes to win, he'll pick Romney.

If it's McCain the Fencesitter, he'll split the difference and pick Pawlenty.

So, which McCain are you, MacDaddy?

Is anyone else exhausted by the Democratic primary? I have never been so sick to death of seeing anyone on television as I am Hillary Clinton. The woman just won't go away.

In the meantime, Daddy Mac is looking and sounding more and more like President Mac. I think the general election will be over before it's begun...

I've given up trying to talk logic and sense and reason when it comes to HRC. Now, I'm just sad and tired and want the whole thing to go away.

You know, I am not usually a fan of Glenn Beck. He is not as bad as some of the conservative pundits, true, but I do find myself rolling my eyes at him at times.

But then there's this. You know, this sums up my feelings in a nutshell. I totally agree with him, and wish everyone in the country - Democrat or Republican - would take this to heart...

Check this guy out: http://www.youtube.com/user/JoeFelice.

He does a fairly frequent video blog where he talks about politics, the election, educational issues, etc. He's definitely liberal-leaning, but he's very fair, balanced and logical. He also writes and speaks very well, and has a nice, casual delivery. I've really enjoyed his stuff - to the point where I've subscribed. (Even cooler, when you subscribe, he puts a "Thanks for subscribing" note at the end of his next blog and lists your name. I'm in this week's. :>)

Check him out! And if you like him and you think your readers might be interested, maybe post him on your blog? I think he would like to get the numbers, and I'm big on sponsoring people who are good writers and good thinkers.

Just...wow.

This is from a story from McClatchy that is about Pennsylvanians in Obama Girl's hometown of Hazelton. Normally, I don't take things out of context, but these really were stand alone quotes. There was nothing about them that woud change with the context. Still, I'll see if I can't dig up the link to the actual article, so you can see for yourself...

Of Obama, Duser said: "I'm not crazy about voting for a colored guy, but that's not why I don't support Obama. I'm not prejudiced. I just like Hillary."

A couple tables over, Jean Fetterman, a foster grandparent, said of Clinton: "Oh, I love her. She's a very intelligent person, and she has her husband who went through this."

She scoffs at the idea of voting for Obama: "I don't want to be a Muslim!" She looks dubious when told Obama is Christian. "Then why did he go see what's-his-name over in Iraq, that Lama?"

She isn't clear about whom she means. She may have seen a photo of Obama wearing traditional clothing during a visit to Africa. "I don't care what color he is, I don't care if he's pink," she said. "I don't think he's got the same education Hillary has, and he's so young. He's arrogant, too."

Wow.

Check this out.

I think anytime a Republican-controlled Treasury secretary says he's going to take something over, and the people he'll rule say "Well, yeah, okay, that makes sense" and the Democrats say "Well, I wish he'd do more, but yeah...that's pretty good!", you've probably got a winner on your hands. You've probably also got something that's pretty necessary.

Personally, I like the Fed. Always have. I know I'm in the minority, at least in my group of friends. I know they're not perfect, and I don't think they can be; it's inherent that what will work in one situation will be a disaster for another that we can't see yet. Economics, because it's essentially human-based, is as much art as it is science. The Fed did the right things after the Depression; they're just bad for us now.

So, anyway, it's looking like a good plan and despite his association with GWB, Paulson is turning out to be a very deep-thinking Treasury secretary. Good on ya, Hank.

I love YouTube, don't get me wrong. The dancing guys video, the talking cat ("Oh, Long Johnson!"), Darth Vader opening and closing his pod...these things are the work of genius.

But from a societal standpoint? You Tube = Not So Good. We seem to have completely lost the ability to understand things in context. People seem to have forgotten (or not understood) that ANYONE can take ANYTHING you say, edit it, move it around, put it next to other things, mash it up - and the result can have nothing to do with what you actually said or meant.

Add that fundamental misunderstanding to the fact that people can't logic their way out of a paper bag anymore, and no wonder we're sliding downhill as a country.

I haven't even bothered to look at the Jeremiah Wright videos, because I'm smart enough to know I can't get the context to make a smart decision about them. Finally a few reporters ARE beginning to report the whole sermons, and as I suspected, they look very different from what you see on YouTube or hear in sound bites.

<a href="http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-behind-rev-jeremiah-wrights-911-sermon/>Here</a> is the one about "the chickens come home to roost". If the witch beats him because of this, I truly will look for a way to move to Switzerland. Guess I should start practicing my German...

Rather than respond to this outrage, I'll defer to the wisdom of Huffington Post commenter "bobdevo" (whom I do not know, but wish I did):

Dear Geraldine:

As per your request, please see my apology below:

I'm SO SORRY you're such a clueless tool. Hope you get better.

regards,

Bob

Okay, I can't take it. I really can't.

I kept my mouth shut yesterday about Geraldine Ferraro's hatefulness and racism because I just couldn't face it, and I thought maybe, just maybe Hillary wouldn't be an arrogant, hypocritical bitch about it and would do the right thing. (Silly me.) After all, she freaked out and demanded Sam Powers' head for being called a "monster" (of course she did; Hillary hates the truth), so having Ferraro not only insult Barack but an entire race (that she NEEDS to win the general election - they make up 48% of Democratic voters, for God's sake!!!) would be just as bad, right?

And get a load of this. These comments are almost exactly like ones she made about Jesse Jackson. So, she's a lifelong bigot. (Umm...exactly when will it be okay for a black man to run, Ms. Ferraro? What are the criteria that make it not about his race?)

And does Hillary 'reject and denounce' this shit? Of course not. They justify anything, especially when it involves a lobbyist who raises a lot of money for them.

But the best thing is now they're blaming Obama for dividing the party. They do hateful, spiteful, horrible things - like Ferraro's racism and their leaking of photos to make Barack seem like a muslim - and then they have the gall to say that Obama's "response is dividing the party".

No, Hillary. You are. Actually, you HAVE.

And I, for one, am done.

I just donated to John McCain, and will put everything I have in seeing him defeat the Democrats in 2008. Even if it doesn't work, I will have done SOMETHING to fight back. (I am withholding judgment on my other Democratic donations - I still believe Mental Health Parity was a good thing, and will probably shoot a bit to PK. The others, I'll have to see.)

It's clear this party has been torn apart, is rotting from the inside and it's not something I want to be associated with.

Update: Well, well...looks like the Racist has stepped down from Hillary's finance committee. Bet she still takes her money, though. Disgusting. Hmm...maybe I missed the "reject and denounce" speech from Hillary about GF.

Didn't know that, did you? Apparently, neither did Lord Trimbley, the nobel peace prize winner. Nor, it seems did Bill and Hillary themselves a few years ago when they wrote their own memoirs...

An interesting breakdown of Hillary's lie claim that she had a major role in the Irish peace process

So, the Clintons - clever buggers - are pushing a Clinton/Obama ticket. Pushing it to the point that it's absurd and embarrassing, but I don't underestimate their ability to manipulate things their way, or their shamelessness.

What would I do?

I have been pretty clear: I think we have two good men in the race. I lean toward Obama over McCain because I like some of Obama's policies and like his leadership ability, and his stated desire for conciliatory politics. I like McCain beause he's proven time and time again that he'll work with both sides, even if it costs him, and because I feel like I can trust what he says. (I don't even bother to listen to BushCo anymore, assuming everything they say is a lie; whenever something they say does slip by and enter my psyche, I automatically assume the opposite must be true.)

I don't feel like Hillary Clinton is honest, based on things she's done in this campaign, and I don't think she would bring the nation together or reach across the aisle in partnership. There are two issues with that. One, I am sick to death of this country being two countries: The United States of Canada and Jesusland. Just because "my" side would be on top doesn't mean that the country wouldn't be as fucked up as it is now. Second, the chances are high that at some point in your presidency, you'll have a majority of the other party in Congress. Sure, you have veto power, like GeniusBoy, but guess what happens when you can't work with Congress and can only veto stuff? NOTHING GETS DONE

I'd like shit to get done, please. k thx bai.

So, back to what I would do with a Clinton/Obama ticket. I've said unequivocally that I would defect to Daddy Mac if Hillary were the candidate. But what if Obama was the VP?

At this point, I would probably still vote against her. I think she'd shut him out; I think she's only floating the idea because she's desperate to win, and winning is all she cares about. And I don't think she could learn from him enough to be able to work with people who disagree with her.

It would help, though, I won't deny that. At the very least, I would stop and think.

Clever Clintons...

I've been thinking a lot lately, while watching this Presidential campaign, about General John Buford.

Buford was a union officer - a cavalryman. He commanded the Reserve Brigade of the 1st Cavalry Division, Army of the Potomac. Buford's brigade was the first to arrive at Gettysburg, late in the afternoon of June 30th. The Confederate army was already in the town of Gettysburg, and moving toward the field. The closest division, General Reynolds', would not arrive until the afternoon of July 1st. Buford took one look at the ground and realized that the Union Army was in big trouble. The rebels would occupy the hills, and dislodging them would be nigh impossible. He who controls the heights controls the field.

The general wrote to his superiors asking for their advice, but he knew he would not receive an answer back before the morning. He had to make a choice. He dismounted his 2500 calvarymen, and strung them across the road, in front of the advancing Confederate army. Buford's men held, no matter what the rebels threw at them. They held and by late afternoon, General Reynolds arrived with reinforcements.

He who controls the heights controls the field, and the Union Army proceeded to do just that. The rest, as they say, is history.

Buford died several months later of typhoid fever. He never saw the end of the war, nor learned how much his decision mattered in turning the tide and saving the union. I don't know if he knew what he had done, but I think he would be proud.

What does this have to do with the campaign?

I absolutely believe that the man himself (or woman herself) matters when we choose a President. Not just the party or the platform, but the essence of the man (or woman). Who he is. What he believes. In whom he trusts. I believe that because I believe that one brave man who believes in himself, loves his country and trusts his men, can truly change the world.

I don't believe that because I'm naive or because I'm a Democrat, Republican or whatever it is I am (Democrican? Republicrat?). I believe it because General Buford shows me that it's so.

John Buford, Jr. (March 4, 1826 – December 16, 1863)