
Too bad nobody else is very excited.
"He is reaching out to the Eskimo vote"
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams, speech at the Pennsylvania State House, August 1, 1776
McCain Makes the Biggest Political Mistake of Our Lifetimes
Mondale promised to raise taxes. Dukakis was in the tank. Kerry was for the war before he was against it. All mistakes, mistakes that should never have been made and errors that turn the course of an election. We hear about them all the time. But now, just as the memory of Bill Buckner's error took a backseat for Red Sox fans when their team finally won the World Series, John McCain has made the biggest mistake in politics, an error of such magnitude that he has probably cost himself a shot at the White House.Senator McCain, knowing that he held an edge on Barack Obama on the "Commander in Chief" question, badly overplayed his hand. He taunted Senator Obama on his lack of foreign policy experience and he challenged Obama to go to Iraq. He sneered at Obama for formulating an Iraq policy prior to traveling to the war zone. He even offered to go with him to Iraq, as if Obama needed his hand held by the man with military experience.
McCain wanted the public to believe that Obama was a novice, a whipper-snapper who would jeopardize our nation's security.Obama listened to McCain's attempted bullying and said, "You know what? I'll go to Iraq. And Afghanistan, Israel, Germany -- I'll make this a big foreign policy trip abroad. I'll show the voters back home that the world still really does love the United States, they just don't love President Bush or John McCain."
And Obama went abroad, with the world's press following him, clinging to his every word, oohing and aahing at his every jump shot, hoping to catch a glimpse of his every smile.
The trip: the biggest success of the campaign. The Commander in Chief question: negated. Heck of job, McCain.

It was Sen. John McCain's staff who asked security at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts to remove people holding protest signs at the venue -- not U.S. Secret Service agents, who were not involved in Carol Kreck's ouster from the galleria.A video of the incident circulating widely on the Internet shows a DCPA security guard saying that he was told by the Secret Service to remove Kreck, who was holding a paper sign that said "McCain = Bush."
But Thursday, after two days of being vilified by bloggers, letter writers and others, the Secret Service emphatically denied involvement.
"Contrary to some recent reporting, the Secret Service had no involvement in Ms. Kreck being removed from the area," said Malcolm D. Wiley Sr., spokesman for the Secret Service. "It was not done at our request or suggestion. Any assertion to the contrary is inaccurate and inconsistent with our established policies and procedures."
George Carlin in an interview earlier this year talking about the Obama phenomenon.
Do you think that over the past years of the Bush Administration - the FCC stuff and Nipplegate with Janet Jackson and the focusing on 'morality' and the rise of the Evangelicals, all of that - do you see that as being a direct correlation with the American situation as you've observed it?
Well, there are a number of things you've brought up here. First of all - let me go back to an idea that I usually express in a different way, okay? And then I'll get back to your question. I don't believe anymore in my fellow human, or my fellow American. I divorced myself from these two groups a long time ago, somewhere around 30 years ago. I found myself feeling completely outside of the human race and the American experience. Abraham Maslow, the psychologist said, the fully realized man does not identify with the local group. And when I read that it really hit me. I said, "That's me." I really don't identify with these people, I don't feel a part of this - I've never, never felt a part of this. And by "this" I mean - the human race yeah I know, I'm human, by definition I'm in it, I mean feeling like I'm in it. I mean feeling like I'm American. I just don't give a shit anymore. I stopped giving a fuck. And because I did that, it gave me a great deal of artistic freedom - it gave me emotional detachment from which I could operate with a more even-handed look at everything. I didn't have a rooted interest. I didn't have an outcome I was interested in. I didn't have a rooted interest. I wasn't a cheerleader. I was really just an observer. When you're born in the world you're given a ticket to the freakshow; when you're born in America you're given a front-row seat. And some of us in the front row have notebooks and pencils. That's you, Rachel, that's me. We sit there and we say, "Look at the fucking shit that going - look at this. Do these people know what they look like? Let me write this down." And so, that kind of divorces me from any of these attachments. Yeah, underneath it all I'm a disappointed idealist. Yes, I think the Obama story is an inspirational story, it's a wonderfully unique American story and it's exciting and fun to watch but even if he's elected and makes a lot of changes I still retain the right not to belong.
I just like it out here. And I understand that the flame of the idealist flickers underneath, and that's fine - I can't deny that - but I kind of like it the other way because it kind of gives me the freedom to point at everything.Wow. Okay, so let me ask you this: You brought up the Obama thing, and you seemed to have done so sincerely and not with irony or being jaded. How do you view that as a phenomenon, even as one you don't want to belong to?
Well, it's an exciting story to watch. What's exciting is that it doesn't happen in this country very often. There were moments in the history of the American people - and by the way, one of the reasons I got off the train of the American experience is I think - I'll get back to Obama in a minute - I think that human beings were given great gifts and had great potential and they squandered it all on goods, possession, power, territory and on a superstitious God that watches everything and controls. These things, I think, crippled the human animal to the extend that we never lived up to their potential. The same thing happened in this country. We were given great potential. We were given this great system of self-government, the best one that had been devised so far.
And we've given it all up for gizmos, and goods, and toys and possessions, and - in this country - God, overlooking everything and spoiling everything. So... there have been moments in this country when people have, leaders have emerged who were inspirational, and who could carry the people with them because — in order to effect change in their lives and experience as a group, they need to be led, and they need to believe in something and they need to believe in themselves, and they need to believe that they can change things. And they way that happens is through an inspirational leader. FDR was that, Franklin Roosevelt - he gave people something to believe in, and mainly it was themselves, that they could weather the storm, and he got them through the Depression and a fuckin' World War. So, these things happen and they're interesting to notice - I don't know how much overall meaning it has, I do respect what's going on as a true American phenomenon, this rising up of someone who - maybe, I don't know - has the quality to inspire people.
Sorry it took so long to respond, but I wanted to watch the whole thing before I responded to it. I have been busy lately and it took me a while to get the time to sit down and watch it all.
In an interview last year Karl Rove said that the reasons his tactics work are not because Republican voters are stupid, but because they have "short memories" and they "don't pay attention to the news." That video plays off of both those qualities.
The short answer to your question is yes, that video is full of lies. You can tell the guy who made it is an experienced rightwing propagandist because of his opening shot "I invented the internet", which references a popular fallacy that Al Gore supposedly said he "invented the internet". The truth, as I am sure you already know, is that Al Gore said in an interview that he "was instrumental in creating the Internet" and the fact is, he sponsored the legislation that privatized ARPANET and created the Internet. Without his legislation, the internet you and I are using to communicate right now would still be just another "big government" project. (which, incidentally, was started under the last Republican who understood the role of government, Eisenhower)
A better description for that video is "propaganda", because it is more insidious than a mere lie. It will take one true fact and draw a bunch of false conclusions from it. It gathers and propagates all the worst lies about Barack Obama and tries to slip them in randomly to make them seem more legitimate. It also just cherry picks the most unflattering clips and pictures they can find and strings them together to paint the person in an unflattering light. You can find thousands of videos like this about both the Clintons and Bushs all over the internet. It is a very common propaganda tactic.
Basically it piles the bullshit so high, you have a hard time picking out individual pieces anymore. It just becomes one big stinky pile of bullshit.
It partakes in what is called "molehill politics". Taking something insignificant and trivial and theatrically trying to blow it up into a much larger issue than it really is.
"Flag-pins" for example. Seriously, who really cares about flag pins? How does wearing a cheap flag pin made in China mean you are a patriotic American? With everything else that is going on right now, inflation, gas prices, outsourcing, unemployment, forclosures, credit crisis, the falling value of the dollar... who is really concerned about flag pins? Seriously.
It seems to me that if you were a politician who really secretly wasn't patriotic, you would be wearing one 24x7 to cover for it.
Patriotism is caring about the welfare of your country and I think that means caring about the real issues instead of wasting time on meaningless theatrical bullshit like flag pins.
The "National Anthem Photo" is another example, you don't have to put your hand over your heart for the national anthem. All you have to do is stand. You are only supposed to put your hand over your heart for the pledge of alliegence. ...because its a pledge... The national anthem is just a song. Just look around the next time you are at a sporting event, everyone stands and takes their hats off and some people put their hands to their hearts and some do not. The announcer even says it at the beginning of almost every sporting event "Please stand for the national anthem".
Do you see? They take a true photo and draw all sorts of false conclusions from it. They mislead the viewer into drawing the specific conclusion that they want you to draw. That he is supposedly insufficiently patriotic.
Another example is the "danger" that his middle name supposedly represents. They spend quite a bit of time trying to evoke some fear from the viewer because his middle name sounds like the name of a dead bad guy. Even Karl Rove asked Republicans to stop saying his middle name all the time because he said it sounds racist.
It also uses blatent race baiting, even going so far as using a clip of a radical extremist, Ann Coulter, talking about his "three muslim names". Barack and Obama are actually African names, not Islamic. Hussian is actually a very common Arabic name which means "Blessed one". Islam is a religion not a nationality or ethnicity. She is using that term to lump Arabs, Persians and Africans into one group... basically, "brown people". We should all fear the brown people. Thats the real message.
The Rev Wright thing was all just the attempt to redefine Obama as an "angry black man". Before that whole boondoggle, the question that was asked was "is he black enough". They are trying to do the same thing to his wife Michelle. Tell you what, watch her appearance on the View from this week and tell me if you think she is the radical they try to paint her as.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59twO1fJwtQ
It does state some blatently untrue things, obviously.
The claim that there is no information available about Obama's background is a lie. How lazy can they get? He wrote two autobiographies for pete's sake. All anyone has to do is read them. A good portion of his life is already public record. He has been a public figure in Chicago for decades so the facts of his background have been gone over with a fine tooth comb.
Also the claim that he was raised in Jakarta, Indonesia. Thats a lie.
He spent most of his childhood in Hawaii and Kansas. He only visited Indonesia when he was a kid. He also traveled all over Africa, Europe and Asia. By the time he was a teenager, he was more well traveled than a lot of Congressmen.
The claim that sitting down and talking to the leaders of countries we don't like is "radical". That's a blatent lie.
Every President before George W. Bush practiced more open diplomacy and they very often met with the leaders of countries we didn't like. George Washington parlayed with leaders of the British Army. George Washington also met with and enlisted Pirates to help the revolutionary army. John Madison talked to the British and Indians during the war of 1812. Jefferson signed a treaty with the Barbary Pirates. They founding fathers all would have talked to King George if they had the chance, but the King had a policy that he did not talk to his enemies.
How did that work out for him?
FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford and Reagan all talked to the Soviets.
Nixon met with the Red Chinese.
Anyway, I think you get my point. The claim that talking to our enemies is a "radical" idea is a big steaming load of crap.
That video is a lot of things, but true is not one of them. I would think that most people would find their intelligence insulted by a video that tries to make all three assertions, that Obama is 1. a radical muslim, 2. a Marxist (athiest), and 3. a radical Christian, all the in same video just a few minutes apart. How stupid does this guy think his audience is?
Anyway if you are curious about doing any fact checking, you should check out these sites:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/fightthesmearshome/
http://factcheck.barackobama.com/
By the way, if you are curious about my take on Obama, you can read about it on my blog.
http://thesarcasticcynic.blogspot.com/2008/06/defining -candidates-professor-obama .html
Your friend,
Kyle
The Mother's Day ProclamationArise, then, women of this day!Arise, all women who have hearts,Whether our baptism be of water or of tears!Say firmly:"We will not have great questions decided by irrelevant agencies,Our husbands will not come to us, reeking with carnage, for caresses and applause.Our sons shall not be taken from us to unlearnAll that we have been able to teach them of charity, mercy and patience.We, the women of one country, will be too tender of those of another countryTo allow our sons to be trained to injure theirs."
From the bosom of the devastated Earth a voice goes up with our own.It says: "Disarm! Disarm! The sword of murder is not the balance of justice."Blood does not wipe out dishonor, nor violence indicate possession.As men have often forsaken the plough and the anvil at the summons of war,Let women now leave all that may be left of home for a great and earnest day of counsel.
Let them meet first, as women, to bewail and commemorate the dead.Let them solemnly take counsel with each other as to the meansWhereby the great human family can live in peace,Each bearing after his own time the sacred impress, not of Caesar,But of God.
In the name of womanhood and humanity, I earnestly askThat a general congress of women without limit of nationalityMay be appointed and held at someplace deemed most convenientAnd at the earliest period consistent with its objects,To promote the alliance of the different nationalities,The amicable settlement of international questions,The great and general interests of peace.
1. a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.
2. a person who, in the opinion of others, has heroic qualities or has performed a heroic act and is regarded as a model or ideal:
“John McCain’s capture and imprisonment began on October 26, 1967. He was flying his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam, when his A-4E Skyhawk was shot down by a missile over Hanoi. McCain fractured both arms and a leg, and then nearly drowned when he parachuted into Truc Bach Lake in Hanoi. After he regained consciousness, a mob attacked him, crushed his shoulder with a rifle butt, and bayoneted him; he was then transported to Hanoi's main Hoa Loa Prison, nicknamed the "Hanoi Hilton".”
“In August of 1968, a program of severe torture began on McCain, at the same time as he was suffering from dysentery, and McCain made an anti-American propaganda "confession". He has always felt that his statement was dishonorable, but as he would later write, "I had learned what we all learned over there: Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine."”
“Eight days later, on February 28, 1969, came the events for which Kerry was awarded his Silver Star. On this occasion, Kerry was in tactical command of his Swift boat and two others. Their mission included bringing a demolition team and dozens of South Vietnamese soldiers to destroy enemy sampans, structures and bunkers. Running into an ambush, Kerry "directed the boats to turn to the beach and charge the Viet Cong positions" and he "expertly directed" his boat's fire and coordinated the deployment of the South Vietnamese troops, according to the original medal citation (signed by Admiral Zumwalt). Going a short distance farther, Kerry's boat was the target of an RPG round; as the boat beached at the site, a VC with a rocket launcher jumped and ran from a spider hole. While the boat's gunner opened fire, wounding the VC on the leg, and while the other boats approached and offered cover fire, Kerry jumped from the boat and chased the VC and killed him, capturing a loaded rocket launcher.”
“During the course of their several month-long investigations, they heard unbelievable testimony from hundreds of people. No less than four former Secretaries of Defense testified that men were left behind. National Security analysts testified that they tracked the movements of our men long after the war ended. Radio transcripts of American POWs being moved in Laos were recorded in the early 1980s:
There were satellite photos of pilot distress signals taken as recently as 1992, complete with pilot name and authenticator code numbers. Former Soviet Commanders testified that they debriefed our men in the Soviet Union, and even Boris Yeltsin admitted American POWs had been transferred there.
No less than four committee investigators provided the Senators of their estimates ranging from a low of 150 to as many as 600 men who they believed were still alive and in captivity. This doesn't even include the testimony they heard behind closed doors that supposedly endangered our national security.
The conclusions of this committee was that "no credible evidence was provided to support the possibility that Americans were still alive and in captivity," This, despite documents from Soviet Archives that showed that the Vietnamese were holding more than 1,200 American POWs, and released less than 600, John McCain signed his name on this incredibly flawed report.”
Bush hails early delivery of stimulus checks
President expresses hope tax rebates will boost weaker economy
WASHINGTON - President Bush says the economic-stimulus tax rebates will begin going out Monday and will help people cope with lofty energy and food prices, as well as giving the economy a jolt.
...
“This money is going to help Americans offset the high prices we’re seeing at the gas pump, at the grocery store, and will also give our economy a boost to help us pull out of this economic slowdown,” Bush said Friday in brief remarks at the White House.
...
“It’s obvious our economy is in a slowdown,” Bush said.Earlier this week, the president denied the nation was in a recession, instead saying, “We are in a slowdown.” But many economists believe the economy may already be in a recession.
A trio of crises — housing, credit and financial — has threatened to plunge the economy deep into recession.
The economy grew at an anemic 0.6 percent in the final three months of last year and is believed to have gotten even weaker in the first three months of this year. The government will report on the first quarter’s performance next week. A growing number of analysts believe the economy is shrinking now.
Economy Sheds 80,000 jobs in March
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The employers cut payrolls for a third month in a row in March, slashing 80,000 jobs for the biggest monthly job decline in five years as the economy headed into a downturn, government data on Friday showed.The Labor Department revised the first two months of the year's job losses to a total of 152,000 from a previous estimate of 85,000. The March unemployment rate jumped to 5.1 percent from 4.8 percent, the highest since a matching rate in September 2005.
The March job report was more bleak than expected. Economists polled ahead of the report forecast a decline of 60,000 in non-farm payrolls and a rise in the unemployment rate to 5 percent.
During the first quarter of this year job losses averaged 77,000 a month, compared to average monthly gains of 76,000 in the last half of 2007, according to Keith Hall, Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner.
Job losses were widespread during the month, with the biggest losses in the construction and manufacturing sectors.
(Reporting by Joanne Morrison; Editing by Neil Stempleman)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. personal income rose more than expected in February as the economy teetered on the brink of a recession, while both personal spending and a key price measure increased only slightly, a government report showed on Friday.
The GOP has been trying to rewrite history, claiming "Saddam would not let the inspectors back in" to justify invading Iraq.
Unfortunately for them, we have a little something called "video tape". Clips of UN/UNMOVIC inspectors in Iraq destroying Saddam's stockpile of al-Samoud missiles in the MONTHS just prior to the invasion of Iraq before President Bush orders everyone out of Iraq the week before the invasion on March 19, 2003.
The Bush Administration wants to cut Homeland Security money to cities across the country.
According to papers obtained by the Associated Press, the administration wants to reduce anti-terrorism funding by more than 50% next year.
States that expected to get more than $3 billion to protect against terrorist attacks would get $1.4 million instead.
It could mean agencies that have bought high-tech rapid response trucks, as Tucson has done, may not have the money to maintain the equipment years down the road.
Under the Republican Administration, as our country has prospered, so have its people. This is as it should be, for as President Eisenhower said: "Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America." Today that kind of talk sends Republicans into convulsions, sputtering on about tax cuts and wealth trickling down. Wealth is created from the ground up. There is no capital without labor. Republicans used to get it.
The Eisenhower Administration has brought to our people the highest employment, the highest wages and the highest standard of living ever enjoyed by any nation. Today there are nearly 67 million men and women at work in the United States, 4 million more than in 1952. Wages have increased substantially over the past 3 1/2 years; but, more important, the American wage earner today can buy more than ever before for himself and his family because his pay check has not been eaten away by rising taxes and soaring prices. (Eisenhower was able to do this with a 91% top tax rate for any wages over $3.2 million a year in todays dollars. This is precisely what Reagan declared war on by lowering the top tax rate for Millionaires and Billionaires and raising the social security tax, which has a cap on it, so it is only paid by the middle and lower classes.)
The record of performance of the Republican Administration on behalf of our working men and women goes still further. The Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen's compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal employees. All policies that worked. Policies that created the strongest middle class in the history of the world. All policies that the Republicans now oppose. Hows that working out for them?
In addition, the Eisenhower Administration has enforced more vigorously and effectively than ever before, the laws which protect the working standards of our people. I can't even remember a time when Republicans gave a shit about the working standards of our people.
Workers have benefited by the progress which has been made in carrying out the programs and principles set forth in the 1952 Republican platform. All workers have gained and unions have grown in strength and responsibility, and have increased their membership by 2 millions. They are trumpeting the fact that union membership grew under Eisenhower's administration. Ironically, it is these very same strong unions the Republicans created that they now wage war on.
In the course of playing political "king of the hill" to see which state in the union can have their primary or caucus first this year, we ended up with the Presidential primaries (which normally happen in the spring) happening immediately after New Years and throughout January until culminating in "Tsunami Tuesday" on February 5th when over 20 states will have their primaries on the same day. Then we get to look forward to nine months of hard core negative Presidential campaigning instead of the normal three months.
In the middle of all that fun, the Michigan Democratic Party went and broke National Party rules about not infringing on the "importance" of Iowa and New Hampshire and decided to have our primary before February 5th. In response, the National Democratic Party has announced that they will not seat any delegates from Michigan at the National Convention.
If that happens, it means that Michigan will have no say in deciding who the Democratic candidate will be.
Also, because we moved our primary before Feb 5th, Barak Obama and John Edwards both inexplicably decided to pull their names from the ballot in Michigan completely, essentially handing Michigan over to Hillary on a silver platter.
So here we are... Michigan's primary is going to be January 15th, this coming Tuesday, and Michigan progressives are still unsure who to vote for.
Even if my vote does count the only major candidate I have to choose from is Hillary Clinton and she is not my first, second or even third choice. Any vote I cast for Kucinich or Dodd would essentially be nothing more than a protest vote.
So essentially there is a game of chicken going on between the Michigan Democratic Party and the National Democratic Party. So far the National Party has given no indication that they intend to back down from their stated intention of refusing to seat our delegates and all we have is the assurance of the Michigan Party leadership that they "wouldn't dare" refuse to seat our delegates at the convention.
If I do go vote in the Democratic Primary...
...and if I vote "uncommitted" because my preferred candidate, John Edwards, is not on the ballot...
...and if our delegates get seated at the national convention... then there is still no telling how the delegates I send there are going to vote. It could end up going to Mike Gravel for all I know.
What is important to me is to use my vote to its greatest effect. Normally that is simply voting for my candidate of choice but this situation has created quite a conundrum for me.
I could go vote for Hillary but I have been saying all along that she is my least favorite candidate and as long as there are other candidates out there whom I would rather vote for, I do not think I should go contribute to handing my state over to their competitor.
I could go vote for Dennis Kucinich, who I agree with on most issues and who I think would be a great President. Normally I would think that supporting Dennis would be the best use of my vote, but given the situation with the Democratic delegates from Michigan, it would be a gamble.
So...why not go vote in the Republican primary? At least they are guaranteed half of their delegates at their national convention. I may not be a Republican but I can take advantage of Michigan’s open primary system to possibly have some positive effect on them.
If I go vote in the Republican primary for Ron Paul, and he has a strong enough showing in Michigan to at least get a few delegates, then it may send a strong message to the Republican Party that Ron Paul's anti-war message resonates with their base and it might move them ever-so-slightly to the left, away from the edge of fascism and totalitarianism they are currently teetering over.
The fact is that on some issues Ron Paul is even farther to the left than any of the Democratic candidates. Ron Paul is the only candidate on the Republican side even talking about the Constitution and the Legislative branch’s responsibility to check the power of the Executive branch. He is bringing some small measure of sanity back to the Republican Party and he deserves to be supported by progressives for that reason alone. If I want to move the discussion in the direction that I want it to go, then I have to support the people talking about the subjects I want to talk about, no matter what party I find them in.
Now don’t get me wrong, I am not a Ron Paul supporter. I actually wrote an article not that long ago entitled "Why Ron Paul is Unfit to be President". I agree with him on some issues, like Congress’ responsibilities in declaring war and how we should not be putting military bases on foreign soil all over the world and how wars of aggression are wrong. However, Ron Paul also thinks that corporations should be allowed to police themselves and he believes that the best educational system is home schooling. Those are pretty clear reasons to oppose him, which is why I did until recently.
Rob Kall wrote an interesting endorsement of Ron Paul over at OpEdNews recently where he made some good points. Even if Ron Paul got elected President, the only things he would actually have the authority to change would be those matters of war and peace where I do agree with him. He would not have the authority to do any of the other stupid things he wants to do. As Commander in Chief he could pull our troops out of all the bases around the world and save us billion of dollars. However, getting rid of the IRS or FDA would require an act of Congress and he wouldn’t be likely to get that much cooperation from either the Republicans or Democrats on that.
If I went and voted in the Republican primary for Mitt Romney, and he won, he would continue both the occupation of Iraq and conservative policies of disaster capitalism. At least with Ron Paul, he would end one of the two worst mistakes in modern American history.
So as I see the situation;
Since I can’t vote for the candidate I want...
And since there is a good chance any protest vote I make within the Democratic Party will be a complete waste of time...
...the best use of my vote this week may actually be to go vote in the Republican Primary for Ron Paul. At least I could do my part to push the Republican Party, and therefore the entire political discourse in America, to the left.
With all the disgruntled Democratic voters who may flood the Republican Primary this year, the outcome could be very interesting.
Perhaps it is Providence.
Perhaps the Great Michigan Primary Debacle of 2008 is really an opportunity in disguise.
Perhaps this whole mess is an opportunity for Michigan Progressives to use their votes for something even more important, saving America by saving the Republicans from themselves.
"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself."
- Thomas Paine
I think that cutting taxes without cutting spending is reckless and foolish.
I believe that conservative "borrow and spend" economic policies are suicidal.
I believe that true freedom of religion means allowing people to worship any god they choose and no god if they so choose. I believe that if the government were to give any one religion favor over others it sets a precedent that is dangerous to all religious liberty.
I believe in the power of diplomacy.
I believe that war is a last resort.
I believe that the key to winning the fight against radical Islam is to liberalize their society. We need to give them jobs not guns. We need to put them to work rebuilding their countries. We need to win their hearts and minds and we will never do that with bombs and bullets.
I believe we are a nation of laws, not men.
In an age where masculinity is often debated—sometimes celebrated, sometimes scrutinized—there exists a fictional character who has embodied...