Wednesday, January 30, 2008
So the questions now are, where will Edwards supporters go and who (if either) will he endorse?
I have a feeling that Edwards would endorse Barack Obama and here's why. Like Obama, Edwards was an agent for change away from the entrenched politicians, special interests and the status quo in general in Washington D.C. Plus, I remember in one of the debates Mr. Edwards came to Obama's defense several times when being attacked by Hillary. Perhaps I'm reading too much into that but I just have the feeling that Edwards is more like Obama than HRC.
My guess is that Edwards supporters will split. That being said, I have a hunch that Obama will get about 2/3 of the Edwards people. Yet what do I know? I will say though that I was an Edwards supporter for a time and I broke for Obama when I saw the hand-writing on the wall that Edwards was fading. I would rather shave with a piece of broken glass than support HRC. I read on "The Fix" blog run by Chris Cillizza that one voter witnessed three out of four Edwards supporters breaking for Obama during the realignment.
I have great respect for John and would love to see him run as Obama's V.P. or as an Attorney General in an Obama administration. Hell, I'd like him to serve in any capacity in an Obama administration because I know that he was much to offer this country and I'd hate to see his voice silenced with this end of his campaign.
So here's the question to you Edwards supporters? Who do you prefer between the two and who will you vote/caucus for? Or will support a third party or simply not vote at all? Or are you now undecided? Inquiring minds want to know!!
BTW, Hulk Hogan endorsed Obama--I had to laugh at this because I was a big, BIG WWF wrestling fan when I was a kid and even when to a live event here in Denver once with my Dad. Hulk of course was my favorite wrestler. Obviously "The Hulkster's," "endorsement" is pretty much meaningless but I had to add that to the blog for some levity. Although it might help to get out of the steroid vote. Sorry Hulk, I love ya but I couldn't resist.
Oh yeah, one more thing. N.O.W (National Organization for Women) has stated that Senator Kennedy betrayed (the exact words were "ultimate betrayal") women by simply endorsing Obama!!!! They also used the word "abandoned!!!" I'm a huge supporter of a woman's right to choose but it is ABSURD to say that Ted Kennedy is betraying WOMEN!!! Are you kidding me?? Kennedy has worked for woman's rights for DECADES and now that he dared choose someone else to support in this campaign besides a woman, he's persona nongrata?? It is ridiculous to assume that non-support of a female candidate means non-support of women's issues.
---End of Transmission---
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Because the Democratic National Committee said that there wouldn't be any delegates available from Florida due to the Sunshine state deciding to move their primary up to an earlier slot.
Yet in the wake of the South Carolina Obama blowout, the Clinton's are claiming "victory" in this illegitimate primary. It looks like Hillary will manufacture a phony "win" in this masquerade down there in Florida and attempt to manipulate the news cycle in search for anything to slow the Obama momentum.
If the media does toss them a bone it will be a scrawny bone with little substance on it. It's a pitiful attempt at ginning up some excitement. It's nothing more than one of those unscientific polls that show up on the websites of CNN or MSNBC.
There is a deeper matter here, however. It plays into the larger narrative that the Clinton's play dirty pool, in other words that they're duplicitous and misrepresent themselves. It gives the impression that they're trying to change the rules mid-way through the game.
It's not momentum if there was no race to begin with!!
Are you watching this dog and pony show that they're trotting out? Hillary is up there on stage trying to mimic the Kennedy endorsement rally. It's completely ginned up and Hillary and her "posse" on stage have smiles as plastic and cheesy as the Joker from the original Batman.
The only thing missing from this hoopla are streamers and fire works.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Yet another seasoned, experienced politician putting their name and reputation on the line to back up Obama's campaign. Ted Kennedy is perhaps the most powerful Democrat in the Senate and has been championing the cause of people of all races, religions and income level for 45 years. Someone of that caliber brings years of experience and clout to the Obama campaign and help calm the fears that Barack doesn't have enough experience. If pillars of the Senate such as Kennedy and Kerry believe that Obama can lead on day one then I don't know how you can doubt them and their years of experience. These are people who know how politics and presidencies work and wouldn't lend their support to someone if they honestly thought that person isn't experienced enough or able to lead.
The other important aspect to this endorsement is that it gives true credence to all those voices who have said that it is a little too much to compare Obama to either JFK or RFK. Well, here you have the brother (Ted) of those two great American leaders saying that indeed, Obama reminds him of them.
I think that this is bigger than any of the other endorsements that Obama has received because Kennedy has great influence with the Latino communities across this great country. Not to mention Kennedy's extensive network of contacts and contributors. Perhaps the only great endorsement left to gain out there is that of Al Gore and that would be just as massive as Kennedy's endorsement.
Kennedy's endorsement has to be a major blow and embarrassment to the Clinton's as they looked up to JFK and RKF when running for politics. In addition, they doggedly lobbied Senator Kennedy to no avail. Kennedy was sickened like the rest of us of the dirty pool of the Clinton camp during this election and Ted chose to stand on the side of the future by passing the torch to Barack Obama.
You may not get through the entire clip/speech so I thought I'd post a few snippets that impressed me. Go here for the text of the entire speech:
So let us reject the counsels of doubt and calculation.
Let us remember that when Franklin Roosevelt envisioned Social Security, he didn’t decide—no, it was too ambitious, too big a dream, too hard.
When John Kennedy thought of going to the moon, he didn’t say no, it was too far, maybe we couldn’t get there and shouldn’t even try.
GOI: And this one which you can change the name Truman to Clinton:There was another time, when another young candidate was running for President and challenging America to cross a New Frontier. He faced public criticism from the preceding Democratic President, who was widely respected in the party. Harry Truman said we needed “someone with greater experience”—and added: “May I urge you to be patient.” And John Kennedy replied: “The world is changing. The old ways will not do…It is time for a new generation of leadership.”
So it is with Barack Obama. He has lit a spark of hope amid the fierce urgency of now.I absolutely loved that moment in the speech when Ted looked straight into the camera as if to confront the Clinton's and said, "And I know, that he's ready to be president on DAY ONE!!
Perhaps this was the most touching and poigniant moment of the speeches:
Obama personalized his connection to the Kennedy legacy through the stories he said his grandparents and his mother told of that hopeful era in American politics. And in a poignant moment, he referred to his father, whom he rarely mentions on the campaign trail. He told the story of how his father was only able to study in the United States because of the Kennedy family's foundation that provided scholarships for foreign students to come to the United States.
Forward we go!!!
---End of Transmission---
Saturday, January 26, 2008
PLUS, exit polls out of the S.C. show that a whopping 70% (three quarters) said the Clinton's have been attacking Obama unfairly. In addition, 55% of South Carolina voters said in the exit polls that Barack Obama is the best candidate to most likely unite the country. Hillary was down at 26%.
Barack's substantial victory in South Carolina is even more impressive when you consider that he was behind in the polls by 20 points only three months ago!! He won nearly 50% of the youth vote which shows that just like in Iowa, Barack Obama is drawing in new voters and getting those young folks to the polls.
This just underscores how Barack Obama can bring in voters from diverse demographics. He won in a white bread state like Iowa. He is winning the youth vote. He won in the large rural sections of Nevada and now won the African-American vote in South Carolina while splitting the white vote down there with Clinton and somewhat with Edwards. This shows that he can appeal to everyone, everywhere and shows that the efforts by Bill Clinton to marginalize Obama as simply, "the black candidate" where in vain and damaging to his wife's campaign.
And yet, despite all the criticism that the Clinton's have received about their dirty pool style of politics, Bill vows to keep hitting below the belt. He showed it just hours before the polls closed by comparing Obama to Jesse Jackson who won the state twice and the only similarity they have is that they are both black!!! I say KEEP IT UP BUDDY!!! You're bullying didn't help you one bit in South Carolina so continue playing the asshole card because it's just helping drive people into the Obama camp in droves.
I just watched "Hillary's speech" after losing South Carolina and she looked quite different, I say that because Bill Clinton was her surrogate. It looks like she's a poor loser by not giving her own damn concession speech!!! She did talk later in Tennessee about the Obama win using only about one sentence and saying it about as fast as she could to move on to the rest of the speech. It wasn't even really a formal, traditional concession. Her lawyer like "concession" just boosts her image as an aloof, arrogant, sore loser.
What does it tell you about Barack Obama that he pulls off this impressive win in South Carolina all the while fighting both Clinton's at the same time?
Yet as exciting this victory is tonight we mustn't get ahead of ourselves. This is still a tight race and with this win Obama and Clinton are now tied in states that they've won. There is still a long way to go but together we can literally move this country in a new direction. Keep up the blogging, the donating and any other areas of support that you can offer to help make history and get Obama elected President of the United States of America!!!
By the way, check out my Huckabee post just below this one, I think you'll enjoy it. Also, take a look at Obama's speech after his victory tonight. As usual it's a barn burner!!
UPDATE: Caroline Kennedy has endorsed Obama and said that he reminders her of her father (the late great John F. Kennedy). "I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans. He has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things."
"And she appealed to other parents to pick a candidate who she said could invigorate a younger generation that is too often "hopeless, defeated and disengaged."
There is also some hubbub that the senior Democrat and statesman of the Senate, Ted "the lion" Kennedy will endorse Obama.
Alright. That's it for me now, I'm signing off for tonight to have some beer and celebrate!!!
---End of Transmission---
He uses his religion when if benefits him but when the media focuses on it he whines that he's being marginalized into a one issue candidate, that issue being Christian issues. But what the Huckster ignores is that he was the one who made himself that one issue candidate!! That is how he won Iowa!! And was a big part of his angle in South Carolina and now he's claiming it's the media's fault that he can't gain traction with the non-Evangelical Christian crowd? See this is the crap that I really can't stand about these arrogant fundamentalist Christians, or fundamentalists of any religion, they want it both ways. It's always about them.
He also claimed that "people of faith" (code for only Christians) are being disenfranchised despite these same Christians disenfranchising people of other faiths then Christianity or people of NO faith!!! And how can you be disenfranchised when you love to claim that America is such a Christian country and that indeed the majority of Americans ARE Christian?!! How can you be the majority and also claim to be a marginalized minority???
And in a side splitting humorous bit of irony, guess where Huckleberry Hound is today? THE SAMFORD BAPTIST UNIVERSITY!!!!!!!!!! I also just heard on CNN that in the days leading up the South Carolina primary he campaigned at four Christian universities in ONE DAY.
Fuck the Huck and his man crush Chuck!!!
---End of Transmission---
Friday, January 25, 2008
Lauer then presented Clinton with a photo of Rezko posing between Sen. Clinton as first lady and her husband during his presidency. He asked if she remembered meeting Rezko.
Clinton said she did not, and parried, "I don't have a 17-year relationship with him."GOI: Pot meet kettle. There she goes again, shoveling more shit. Obama didn't have a 17 year relationship with Rezko but only did 5 HOURS of work for his organization. And not only that, now this picture appears of Rezko nestled in between the Clinton's. Things that make you say, hmmm. So don't act like your shit doesn't stink Hillary. You gotta stand in awe at the bullshit the Clinton's shovel. They are the masters of hypocrisy and spin.
It figures that they would throw the "slum landlord in an inner city" mud all the while having had their own connection to that very "slum landlord!!" It's just like Obama says, the Clinton's will do and say anything to regain power. Something else to consider is that those kind of photos are usually taken because the person (Rezko) has been a very considerable financial contributor. Know I don't have any hard evidence that this is the case but I would take the odds that it was such a situation. I'm sure some reporter is digging deep to find out how much, if any, money was donated to them from this so-called buddy of Obama.
Clinton quickly tried to shift the conversation in this video:
Clinton then argued that the debate between the two candidates should focus on their position on important issues, and implied that she was the most viable candidate to defeat Senator John McCain if he was the Republican candidate.
"Let's focus on what we want to do for the country and most importantly focus on the great difference between us and the Republicans," she argued. "Senator McCain has said it would be fine with him if we were [in Iraq] 100 years. It's not fine with me."GOI: Well if that's the case then why did you throw this Rezko crap out there in the first place Hillary?!! If the Clinton's want to get into the weeds then let's take them on and pull out all their dirty laundry from the past. I don't think they want to go down that road but you better believe that the Republicans would pull out all their skeletons from their closet should she be the Democratic nominee. We need to remind people and jog their memories as to how controversial her candidacy would be. If you want to bring the country back together then Hillary Clinton is not your candidate, she would keep this country divided and fractured. Obama has proven that he can bring people from both sides together as he gets a lot of support from independent moderates.
I don't want to have buyers remorse should we be so stupid to nominate her baggage ladened self. I don't want to hears Dem's say a month into her nomination, "Oh shit, we made a huge mistake."
Plus, look which young, idealistic politician said good things about Reagan in October of 1991:
Ronald Reagan, Clinton [Bill Clinton] said, deserved credit for winning the Cold War. He praised Reagan's "rhetoric in defense of freedom" and his role in "advancing the idea that communism could be rolled back."
"The idea that we were going to stand firm and reaffirm our containment strategy, and the fact that we forced them to spend even more when they were already producing a Cadillac defense system and a dinosaur economy, I think it hastened their undoing," Clinton declared.---End of Transmission---
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Sen. Clinton began distorting Obama's record in Monday night's debate and yesterday began airing a television attack that twists a recent Obama statement about former President Ronald Reagan to the point of clear inaccuracy. Bill Clinton, meanwhile, has wrongly accused Obama both of injecting race into the debate and of running a negative campaign against his wife.
They have gone well beyond engaging in tough political jousting while steering the campaign far from the substantive issues. Their tactics are reminiscent of the unproductive, distasteful mudslinging that started with Bill Clinton's election and continued through George W. Bush's reelection.
Sen. Clinton has an obligation to restore her competition with Obama to the level of fairness that has generally prevailed for the past year. And Bill Clinton should heed the counsel of Democratic elders, including Sen. Ted Kennedy, Rep. Rahm Emanuel and former Sen. Tom Daschle, who have called on him to cease fire.
This is not to say that Obama deserves a pass from scrutiny and criticism. Nor is it to endorse him as the better of the two candidates. It is only to express distress that the Clintons have crossed the line into attacks that raise questions about how she might campaign were she the Democratic nominee and how she might govern were she elected to the Oval Office.
She is indulging in the partisan-style politics that Americans are desperate to leave behind and certainly don't want in a President. And she is either giving free rein to, or failing to control, her husband. Neither possibility bodes well.
In one attack in the debate, Sen. Clinton accused Obama of helping a corrupt Chicago businessman with his "slum landlord business." The truth is that Obama had put in five hours of work as a junior law firm associate helping to represent a community organization that had partnered with the businessman. The truth is also that Obama fought slumlords as a community organizer.
In the debate, Sen. Clinton also charged that Obama had said that he "really liked the ideas of the Republicans," and she amplified the allegation in her TV ad, suggesting that Obama might support "special tax breaks for Wall Street" and refuse to raise the minimum wage.
And then yesterday Bill Clinton cynically claimed that he and Sen. Clinton are merely defending themselves against a rival who had gone negative and had played the race card. But the truth, as voters have plainly seen, is that Obama has run a unifying campaign free of invective. And the Clintons should know better.
GOI: Wow. I hope the Clinton's aren't convinced that the New York primary is in the bag for them.---End of Transmission---
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
As usual, Hillary is playing both sides of the fence as she has had her own praise for Reagan:
In a hysterical bit of comedy, her own website listed, wait for it, Ronald Reagan as one of her favorite presidents!! Not only that though, it mentions that this list of favorite presidents (including Ronald Reagan) "demonstrates how she thinks."
Not only that, President and Hillary Clinton had all kinds of nice things to say about Reagan upon his death:
"Hillary and I will always remember President Ronald Reagan for the way he personified the indomitable optimism of the American people, and for keeping America at the forefront of the fight for freedom for people everywhere," their statement said.GOI: John Edwards has some 'splainin (slang for explaining) to do as well. Edwards slammed Obama as well for mentioning anything positive about Reagan by saying this (amongst other things):
When you think about what Ronald Reagan did to the American people, to the middle class to the working people,” said Edwards.GOI: Oh John but you already have sung his praises just FIVE MONTHS AGO in an editorial in Foreign Affairs magazine.
“He was openly – openly – intolerant of unions and the right to organize. He openly fought against the union and the organized labor movement in this country. He openly did extraordinary damage to the middle class and working people, created a tax structure that favored the very wealthiest Americans and caused the middle class and working people to struggle every single day. The destruction of the environment, you know, eliminating regulation of companies that were polluting and doing extraordinary damage to the environment.”
“I can promise you this: this president will never use Ronald Reagan as an example for change.”
For 50 years, presidents from Truman and Dwight Eisenhower to and Bill Clinton Ronald Reaganbuilt strong alliances and deepened the world’s respect for us. We gained that respect by viewing our military strength not as an end in itself but as a means to protect a system of laws and institutions that gave hope to billions across the globe. In avoiding the temptation to rule as an empire, we hastened the fall of a corrupt and evil one in the Soviet Union. The lesson is that we cannot only be warriors; we must be thinkers and leaders as well.GOI:But wait, there's more. Edwards admitted further in the article that Reagan had a positive role to play during the Cold War:
Presidents Kennedy and Reagan talked with Soviet leaders at the height of the Cold War, in both cases turning back major threats to our national security.
Millions of people imprisoned behind the Iron Curtain silently cheered the day President Reagan declared, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Even if these ordinary men and women did not always agree with our policies, they looked to our president and saw a person — and a nation — they could trust.GOI: My bullshit meter has just snapped and busted open in an explosion of parts and smoke so I better end this post.
UPDATE: Now Billy boy is all over news claiming the media and Obama are somehow teaming up on him and his wife for a political "hit job." Oh, so I see. Bill and Hillary can go out chop the legs out from Obama, kick in in the balls and they're fine with that kind of dirty politics. However, when they're called on it they spin it around and whine that they are being ganged up on and acting as if they are school children having their candy taken away from them and sand kicked in their face.
Yes everyone plays hardball in a political campaign but the Clintons bring that dirty pool to a new level, or should I say, low level. I'm talking down in the filthy sewers.
---End of Transmission---
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
However, what I don't like is arrogance and Hillary has that in spades and is a big reason that I do not support her. I'm worn out from the arrogance of Bush and tired of the mistakes that blinding egotism inflated self-confidence creates. These are both strong aspects to Hillary Clinton that I worry about in thinking of her as President of the United States of America.
I know that all politicians think a lot of themselves but with Hillary she oozes that self-importance and aloofness with frightening ease. I was reminded of this annoying characteristic of hers today when I saw a video of her slamming Obama's debate performance last night.
She claimed that Obama is supposedly acting "desperate" because he lost in New Hampshire and Nevada with this smug, arrogant, shit eating grin on her face. She's only one up on him and his loses have been slight (including gaining more delegates than her in Nevada it now appears). Plus, he's leading in South Carolina where the next primary is to be held. Now I'm not an abusive person AT ALL but I felt like smacking that smirk right off her face when I saw that video.
There is a Hillary bias in the Democratic party it seems because the Clinton name is seen as sacrosanct. Now everyone has biases but that being said, overall I get the sense that when Hillary and Bill attack they are respected like they are some genius chess players. However, whenever Obama goes on the attack he is seen as desperate and abandoning his positive message. So he's damned if he does attack and damned if he doesn't because then he is seen as weak or a heretic for daring to oppose the Clinton monarchy.
If anyone doesn't think that Bill and Hillary would run the presidency together then I would surmise that they haven't been listening to the rancor coming from the former president. Which is why you often hear them described as Billary Clinton. Obama is essentially running against them both and yet whenever anyone in the Obama or Edwards camp dares to attack Hillary they are accused of "piling on." In other words that they are ganging up on the Senator from New York unfairly and that she is being held to a higher standard because she's a woman. Yet when Bill and Hillary tag team on Obama then they are seen as masterful tacticians by the media.
I'm sick of the Clintons getting to have it both ways in the media but it's not going to change because the media is afraid of the Clinton mafia style intimidation and manipulation while being in love with them at the same time. It's some kind of weird Stockholm syndrome. You can't get access to the Clintons in the media unless you say good things about them. If you dare say something critical of them you are cut off, just like with "w." And the media can't stand being cut off from the entrenched power players in Washington such as Bill and Hillary so they bend over backwards to give them whatever they want.
And one more thing while I'm ranting. I'm getting really sick of swallowing this shit from the Clintons that Obama shouldn't be president because he is "young" and "idealistic." Well, well, well look how far the Clintons have gotten away from their winning campaign from '92 of youth (Bill was only one year older than Obama is now) and Hope. Remember the, "Man from Hope" stuff from Bill--a play on the fact that he comes from Hope, Arkansas? This is the exact same platform of the Obama campaign but now it's all "pie in the sky" but when it was Bill and Hillary running for the first time it was the EXACT SAME THING!!! It was seen as this breath of fresh air (which it was) but now that Obama is that candidate he is painted by the Clinton machine as unrealistic.
---End of Transmission---
Monday, January 21, 2008
It is a huge achievement for a country that has been so bitterly divided by race and we should not fail to note how important this is regardless of who wins the nomination for the Democratic Party.
We know, however, that there is still much to do when an entire city of mostly African American citizens is flooded and left helpless by an out of touch government. We know that there is still much to do when we see a noose hanging from a tree in a school yard in that same state.
We know that there is still work to be done in knowing that our prison system is disproportionately filled with young African-American men. We know that we still have mountains to climb when the confederate flag still flies in South Carolina and Mississippi.
May we keep Dr. King's dream alive and keep striving forward for greater equality amongst all people.
Let us not become complaisant and lull ourselves into sleep thinking that racism and segregation do not exist in 2008. Let us join hands and unite to continue to bring this country and world together as one and never cease to break down walls of injustice and discrimination.
I will close this post with the words of the great man of peace himself, Dr. Martin Luther King Junior:
I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality.... I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.”
-Martin Luther King, Jr.
---End of Transmission---
Friday, January 18, 2008
"I'm running because I don't want to do business as usual," he said. "People say 'Well, he may have good ideas, he may be inspiring, but he hasn't been in Washington long enough.' They want to season and stew me until they boil all the hope out of me, like everybody else."
As if that's a bad thing, to be a Washington outsider!! He may not have the "experience" that the entrenched Washington D.C. politicians like but he isn't running for Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader or Majority Whip. He's running to not just lead all those cluby, jaded, out-of-touch politicians, he's running to lead America and last time I checked most of America live their lives outside the D.C. bubble.
America always bitches about politicians being too entrenched in the same old politics and yet when a true outsider comes along (like Obama) many say, "Meh, he can't lead because he doesn't know how Washington works." ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? How can we change "politics as usual" if we keep electing the same old players who want nothing more than to play the same old game and build up more power for themselves. Of course he can lead!! Look at his success as a community organizer!! You can't organize and motivate people to vote unless you're a good leader.
And do any of you Obama critics who beat that drum of "he can't lead," blah, blah, "He doesn't know how international politics work" realize that he attended Columbia university, one of the most respected and critically acclaimed universities in the world? Where he gained a political science degree with an emphasis in INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS!! And Columbia's international relations program is world renowned. So yeah, this "experience" bullshit is the biggest bait and switch game in this political season. But then again we know how good the Clintons are at playing politics. It's just more of the same old parlor tricks from a couple of entrenched Washington D.C. players who seem to mostly want the presidency for themselves, so that they can be back in power. And they're annoyed that many Americans don't want them around anymore. Like, how dare we not bow at the feet of the Clinton name!! "Don't they know that the Clinton name is sacred in the Democratic party? Don't they know that being a Democrat means liking and supporting anyone named Clinton?" I don't buy what they're selling one bit.
In other news, I need to address this Obama comment regarding Ronald Reagan because it is being blown out of context. First, here is what he said:
“I think it’s fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10-15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom,” Obama said in an interview with the Reno Gazette-Journal.
GOI: O.k., so the meat of the issue here is that Obama is saying that Reagan was such a great leader because he was able to challenge the status quo. And you can't deny that he was a great leader in his party and managed to bring many Americans together behind his cause, one I disagree with--and one I'm sure Obama does too--but still, Reagan was able to tap into a country read for change and ready for a new direction. He was able to tap into the hunger and thirst that many in the country wanted for change and channel it into a movement that blazed a new path. Again, it was a path that I feel did a lot of harm but the point is that he was a great leader, a great organizer because he knew how to change direction and challenge the old political structure of his party. And that is what Obama is trying to do as well but only from a Democrats perspective.
Now Hillary Clinton is twisting the quote. She is claiming that Obama said the Republicans had better ideas than the Democrats. However, that's not exactly what he said. Obama said that they were the party of ideas, not that those ideas were good. You can't deny that the GOP has been whooping up on the Democrats for awhile now and that isn't all just election rigging. The Republican ideas have been winning, Americans have been buying their brand so to speak. What have we liberals accomplished? Not much, why? Because we don't know how to win and that means being able to go outside the traditional structure of the party that CLEARLY hasn't worked as we haven't won many major elections since 1994 save the 2006 mid-terms. And we barely won. The reason that Democrats haven't been able to block Bush since winning the House and barely the Senate is because we didn't win BIG ENOUGH in '06.
So now we need new leaders with new ideas and not just ideas but have an idea of how we are going to get there. We can't bring these ideas to fruition like the Republicans did with many of theirs under Reagan unless we are willing to scrap the old rickety song and dance which we keep losing on and embrace change to help bring in independents and yes even some Republicans. We need to believe again that something new can happen in America, that a new chapter is beginning and Hillary Clinton doesn't represent that new chapter. She would take us back to the old way of doing things for the party and that hasn't gotten us very far since Bill won. And yes, it was great that Bill won and he was an excellent president but times change and they have, there is a new dynamic in this country that requires a different way of approaching politics. The Clinton game plan worked because it was fresh, new and exciting much like bringing in a new coach does for a professional football team. But after awhile, the other teams figure out that coach's plays and schemes and start to beat that team. So, a new coach is needed with new plays, new plans and new ways of looking at the puzzle. Obama is that new coach, that team is America and we are the players.
“I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure," he continued. "I think part of what's different are the times...I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. ... he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.”
In other words, America is in that same position like before Reagan where many are ready for a change and so what we need is a figure like an Obama who can lead that change and funnel it into action. He is saying that the moment is ripe in America for a new direction and if the Democrats don't seize on that moment then the Republicans will.
Liberals are freaking out that because Obama said something good about Ronald Reagan that somehow that means he is going to what? Win the nomination as a liberal and then switch to being a hard right conservative like Reagan? It's ridiculous hysteria and of course the Clintons are right in the middle of this stirring the pot, fueling the fire of rampant, paranoid thinking. Playing on people's emotions and fears of anything conservative. Somehow you can't still be a good Democrat if you so much as say one good thing about a Republican? Come on!! That's how the GOP plays, that if you don't agree with everything a Republican says and if you dare agree with anything a Democrat did, does or recognize they're good leadership skills that somehow you aren't a true Republican. It's the Republicans who demand a lock-step mentality. We are supposed to be the party of open minds that ask the difficult questions to help create a new, bold reality.
Of course both sides are looking for weaknesses in the others campaign but the Clinton's seem like real vultures in this election. Bill Clinton looks like a bitter, angry man being the bulldog of the campaign. It's sad because Bill use to be the new player with the new ideas and now he's desperately clinging to power. It just looks sad. I hate to see such a great president like Bill Clinton get down in the weeds to dig up and sling mud. It's o.k. to be passionate and defend your candidate but he just looks like a rabid dog flashing it's teeth and salivating to attack and bite. Maybe I'm naive but I expected more from him. I wish he would just stick to talking positive about his wife and let someone else do the attacking. It just looks like they're a team scheming and doing whatever it takes to win, including tearing down the hope of all these new voters and young people getting passionate about politics because they dare question the entrenched leaders of the Democratic party.
---End of Transmission---
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Sound familiar? Yep, the Clinton's are using a page right out of Karl Rove's play book with his "liberals are weak on terror" bull crap. Now Hillary is pulling that below the belt attack on one of her own Democratic colleagues, Senator Barack Obama. Even if he isn't the best terrorist expert around, (and Hillary is no expert in this field either) this baseless attack on Obama insults his intelligence, that of his supporters and of the American people. This is because it insinuates that he wouldn't surround himself with experts in that field of preventing terrorist attacks.
Terrorists are looking to attack America night and day RIGHT NOW. They're not sitting up in the caves of Waziristan watching the race and crossing their fingers for Obama. As if he'd be such an inexperienced and dumb president that he'd somehow leave all our defenses down. HOW ABSURD.
Obama handled this issue like a true statesmen last night with class and dignity. He answered the question without engaging in her trap, taking the high road. Check out the video:
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Clearly the Bushies didn't learn the dangerous of the arms race with Russia during the Cold War. All this arms deal will do is encourage Iran to further arm themselves thus fueling an already tense situation in a unstable region. Boy they really know how to bring peace to a region, what better way than to arm everyone!! When will America learn that arming the enemy of our enemy isn't always smart--especially in the middle east? One only need to look at the Reagan administration arming Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden's fighters/Taliban in Afghanistan.
What happens if and when the Saudi Royal Family is overthrown and radical clerics/terrorist groups get their hands on these sophisticated weapons? Say then they attack Israel and we'd have to back the Jewish state. We'd be in a war with all of Islam at that point. We'd have to bomb the holiest country in all of Islam!! President C- and his cronies have no understanding of history, regional politics and culture nor any ability to think ahead and see potential problems with such deals. They have blinders on and hand out weapons to questionable governments like they were handing out candy. This is beyond reckless but I don't expect anything different from this administration that seems to have been in power for longer than 8 years.
Perhaps the most troubling problem with this arms sale is that it is "no strings attached" in that it demands nothing of the Saudi kingdom. There is no demands for democratic reforms, human rights reforms, oil price reductions, etc.In other news, Barack Obama and Hillary/Bill Clinton have finally made nice on this non-issue of supposed "racial differences." Obama stated, "I think that I may disagree with Sen. Clinton or Sen. Edwards on how to get things done, but we share the same goals. We're all Democrats, we all believe in civil rights, we all believe in equal rights, said the senator from Illinois. I think they're good people, they are patriots and they are running because they think they can lead this country to a better place, and I don't want the campaign in this stage to degenerate into so much tit for tat back and forth that we lose sight of why all of us are doing this."
---End of Transmission---
Monday, January 14, 2008
I dislike Hillary Clinton very much and readers to this blog know this but I would never accuse her and Bill of being racist. And to say that Obama isn't "black enough" and not able to deliver on minority issues is equally as absurd. Can we please just stick to the issues? This is getting childish.
Here's a thought, let's turn our guns on the Republicans.
Enough is enough.
Speaking of Republicans, have you heard what Romney is talking about in Michigan to try and win that primary? That he was born there. Seriously. That and Romney bragging that his dad was governor. So what? What does that have to do with you're qualifications to be president?
---End of Transmission---
Friday, January 11, 2008
PHOENIX (AP) — Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano is endorsing Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination for president, The Associated Press has learned.
The endorsement is a major gain for Obama in his race against chief rival Hillary Rodham Clinton. One of several female governors, Napolitano is in her second term. Napolitano is the most prominent Democrat in Arizona and her endorsement could be significant in a state now regarded as winnable by a Democratic presidential candidate after decades as a near-lock for Republicans.
GOI: Living in the west I have heard a lot of good things about Napolitano and she is a very powerful woman in politics. She could be very important to help Obama convince more older women to support his candidacy. She could also help deliver an Obama win in Arizona and maybe help in other western states like my increasingly swing state of Colorado.
Napolitano has held top leadership posts in the National Governors Association and the Western Governors' Association.
GOI: She is one of the most popular governors in Arizona history and would be a great choice for vice president. Think of that ticket!! The first African American to be president and the first woman to be V.P.!!! Obama has much female support and he understands that women are key in winning elections and this endorsement helps show that he will do as much for female concerns in office as Hillary.(Above: Senator Barack Obama and his lovely wife Michelle).
He obviously understands that women are powerful and important players in not only politics but in life as well. His wife, Michelle is a very impressive person. She is very successful in her own right, not only in her career (worked as assistant for mayor of Chicago, associate dean of Student Services as Univ. of Chicago and listed as one of the world's 25 most inspiring women) but also as a wonderful mother. She is vital to what Barack has accomplished and would be one of the best first ladies that we could ever want. She is stunning in her beauty and together with her husband and children they are a striking family.
Again, we have to remind ourselves that endorsements don't always mean more votes but they help show that older party establishment types are impressed with Obama and know that he is the most electable. Piling up endorsements helps also in the sense that it helps give him even more credibility and trust in his candidacy. It helps to also show that his momentum not only survived his very close second finish in New Hampshire but also that it is picking up more steam throughout the country in states with different populations. Which thusly means that he is believed to be the best candidate that can handle the many different issues that vary from state to state.
With more and more party establishment types backing Obama, it gives him credibility that his message of change is not only welcome with the core of the party but more importantly that he can deliver that change once in office. These experienced endorsers believe that he can lead with conviction and courage, as well as strength. These establishment types wouldn't put their stellar careers of decades of experience on the line if they didn't believe that Obama could do the job well.
I'm not worried that an Obama presidency would be "lost in the forest" when it comes to experience with foreign policy matters. He is extremely intelligent and will quickly pick up how things work, especially with the help of veterans of such matters that would surely be apart of an Obama administration. And he would do it with much more tact, respect and understanding of other cultures than Bush ever did. I believe that his charisma will further help him work with foreign leaders to better get things done while maintaining a good relationship with the players than the condescending, pushy Bush. That goes for Hillary Clinton as well who seems less charismatic and palatable to a diverse world.
---End of Transmission---
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Jan. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry plans to endorse Barack Obama's White House bid today at a rally in Charleston, South Carolina.
(GOI: We know now that he has indeed made that endorsement official).
This is an important endorsement for a couple reasons. First, he was the previous nominee for the Democratic party in the 2004 election. This is extremely helpful because Kerry has many contacts (somewhere around 3 million) from his run for president (and decades as a senator), he is still very popular among the party faithful and can help Obama tap into more donors.
Kerry still has the remnants of a national operation in nearly every state. That means donors, activists and operatives who know these states and will be able to add to the already large team of Obama backers around the country. Local knowledge and on-the-ground operatives are crucial to winning any of these early contests and could even prove decisive if Obama winds up as the nominee and is looking for people with in-depth knowledge of the general election battleground states. Kerry, a decorated military man and experienced hand in foreign affairs, can help to validate that Obama is indeed up to the challenge. "If he says Obama is 'ready' it will reassure many who were unsure."
GOI: The other reason that this is note able is that Kerry represents the old Democratic cadre (as Hillary does) and his endorsement shows that Obama is the future of the party and the best chance to reach the White House and change this country around.
"Barack Obama isn't just going to break the mold," said Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate four years ago. "Together, we are going to shatter it into a million pieces."
Obama also picked up an endorsement today from Representative George Miller, a California Democrat who is close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota will announce later today that he is endorsing Obama, said his spokeswoman, Julianne Fisher.
GOI: Of course endorsements don't mean they will translate to votes. That being said, It does help show that major players in the party and moving to Obama and thus maybe help sway some people to shift as well.
---End of Transmission---
PHOTO CREDIT: (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds).
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Now onto my original post form this morning about last night's results:
Well, I clearly got ahead of myself. It's just that the polls showed Obama so far ahead!! Not many expected a Clinton victory, even the Clintonites themselves. They were saying throughout the day that they were just hoping to lose by only 5 points for so.
I learned not to underestimate the Clintons nor trust polls that much last night. I tip my hat off to Hillary. She pulled it out. It was close though. I was guilty of getting caught up in the emotion of the Obama win coming out of Iowa. I guess we have a race on our hands. This should be fun to watch.
I will say that I liked Obama's speech more though. I think Obama has a leg up on Hillary when it comes to speaking. I just believe him more. Speaking of his speech, I posted the video at the bottom of this post, its in two parts. However, I must tip my hat to the Clinton campaign. They pulled out the victory and I congratulate her on a well run campaign in the granite state.
This will be a race for the ages I think from here on out.
In other Obama news, the influential SEIU union (Service Employees International Union) in Nevada endorsed Obama for president. I hope this will help propel him to victory in the silver state.
New Hampshire New Hampshire Second Place Victory Speech. YES WE CAN!! Part I:
Speech Part II:
---End of Transmission---
Monday, January 07, 2008
As Obama says, "We have started something and now we have to finish it."
Well Obama's victory in New Hampshire has started early thanks to the tiny towns of Dixville Notch and Hart's Location (don't those sound like nice places to live?). The good citizens of these sleepy, no doubt cozy communities who are allowed to vote at midnight, voted for Obama.
And to the naysayers who claim that he doesn't have the ability to work with foreign leaders and handle foreign policy issues? Well yesterday he called the opposition leader in Kenya, his father's homeland where Obama is working with the U.S. State Department trying to stem the violence.
So there he is working on global issues, trying to help stop the violence in far away Kenya right before giving a speech to an at capacity crowd. After the speech he went outside to the overflow crowd and talked to them too. He doesn't just jump back on the warm bus like many candidates and turn the masses away but rather goes to them and engages them on a cold New Hampshire day.
"Ready to lead on day one" says Hillary but Obama is already leading, while campaigning. He's leading before day one. That's hard to beat.
One more thing about being ready to lead, Barack Obama is getting support and foreign policy advice from General Colin Powell. We can take comfort in knowing that Obama will and does take advice from a great source like Colin Powell. It is a sign to me that he will surround himself with sharp minds and people with decades of experience. I hope that Obama brings Powell into his administration and Powell indicated that he keeps the door open in respect to a possible position in a Obama administration.
I'd also like to see him bring in Joe Biden because of all his foreign policy experience. As well as John Edwars as V.P.
---End of Transmission---
This is my second post today, to see the first scroll down one post.
UPDATE: Hillary chokes up, has an Ed Muskie moment and says that this campaign is very personal for her. Well no shit, I would submit that it is for all the candidates. Why else would they run if it wasn't personal for them? They all feel that they personally are the only ones that can bring about a better country. I'm not slamming her because she showed emotion. I've wanted to see her show some emotion since the beginning of the primary campaign but not this kind of emotion, not a breakdown!! The emotion I'm talking about that I want to see from her is passion, not forced passion.
I want to feel that she cares about someone other than herself and she hasn't really shown that to me. For her it's about how SHE will lead and with Obama it's about how WE can lead. Yes, she's paid that kind of stuff lip service but I don't feel it's very sincere. And now when she does show emotion it's still all about her. That she's being unfairly treated. Well you weren't acting like that when you were way ahead in the polls for months Hillary!! Who knows WHAT to believe about her anymore!!! I don't want my candidate to break down in tears and cry for sympathy, I want to be the one breaking down in tears out of connection with the candidate like Obama does. I get chills when he speaks and the only chills I get from Hillary is chills of terror about her character. I want to see Hillary cry when bodies come home from Iraq, not because she's losing. After all her experience, now conveniently the day before the New Hampshire primary she breaks down? Kind of suspicious don't you think? She's trying to have it both ways.
It seemed that she used this emotion to evoke pity. In the video you can tell she gets sympathy for her emotion, which in and of itself is fine but then she goes on to milk that sympathy and keeps getting emotional. If she is now relying on pity for votes then she's in big trouble. Are we supposed to feel sorry for her? After all the mud her campaign slung around? Come on, I don't want to hear it. She said all summer that we were supposed to vote for her because Obama couldn't stand the Republican dirty tricks and pressure and now she's asking for sympathy because she can't handle the primary process?? It sounds to me like she's the one who would crack under the GOP onslaught in the general. I wonder, could this be the equivalent of the "Dean scream" in this election?
Yes the campaign can be stressful but If she can't stand the pressure and bumps of the campaign trail then how is she going to handle the even greater stress of a presidency?? She then brought up the "ready to lead on day one" bullshit again. How? By having a breakdown when the going gets tough?? That's not the strength of character that I look for in a president. I have emotional breakdowns all the time but I'm not vying to be the president of the United States of America!!
So it's o.k. for her to break down and cry because she's supposedly being beat up and singled out because she's a women but Obama is facing a huge obstacle too being a black candidate in a very white country and you don't see him break down now do you?
She's finally realizing that she might not win and now she's throwing a pity party. She's acting like the spoiled child that I've always seen her to be who whines and cries whenever they're not getting their way. Save it for someone who cares Hillary. Yes I'm being hard on her but this isn't a high school campaign for president, it's a campaign for leader of the free world!! We're not playing games and even though she says this same thing in this video, indeed she is the one playing games with this display of pulling on everyone's heart strings. Oh boo hoo, poor me. Vote for me because my feelings were hurt in Iowa. Get over yourself Hillary. I'm so done with her.
Get on some anti-depressants and go home. I take all kind of meds for my emotional breakdowns so take my suggestion, get on some anti-depressants and go home and take care of yourself.
---End of Transmission---
GOI: The key appears to be the independents who are a big voting block in the live free or die state and we all know that you can not win the White House without independents and new voters which Obama is doing with awe. I am very proud of my fellow independents for believing and becoming apart of this powerful and thrilling movement.
He's a phenomenon in politics and carries himself as a rare commodity in American politics and that is a statesman. Such a candidate and potential president only comes around perhaps once in a generation. I don't want to miss that boat folks. Bill Clinton was the last great president and I love him but Hillary is no Bill and the Clinton phenomenon has become status quo anyway which happens to even the greatest of movements. The time has come to pass the torch to the next generation and watching the Clinton's trying to desperately to cling to power is just becoming sad, obstructive and selfish to me.
I am tired of cynical, pessimistic politics and I believe that there are new and better times ahead for America and Obama is just the kind of personality that we need to channel and direct that hope. There are those who are quick to pop that bubble of change before it even has a chance to develop. American politics has languished in the swamp of the status quo for decades now and the same old politics that the Clinton's represent just isn't getting us anywhere. We are just spinning our wheels right now and we need a big push to get us back on track and progress into a brave new world. Obama is that leader and I say let's give him a chance. He may crash and burn but let's embrace a new path and see where it leads us. If he isn't getting us anywhere then we vote him out in four years. That's the beauty of a democracy.
Join the movement, let's make history together. Often greatness can not be achieved without taking some chances. We can does this. Together with Obama as our leader we can revitalize American and move boldly with hope and confidence into the future.
---End of Transmission---
Saturday, January 05, 2008
But being her true self she blamed others for her lose in Iowa namely, the entire state of Iowa.
"Iowa does not have the best track record in determining who the parties nominate. Everybody knows that."
She just can't stop playing the role of super bitch. This is her true nature, this is yet more evidence that she doesn't really care about voters. She only cares about winning and will do and say anything to get where she wants to go. Of course, before the Iowa primary she was talking up Iowa as if it was Shangri-la. She was saying how smart they are but they saw right through her smoke screen and voted instead for the more sincere, Obama. Now that she lost, she sees Iowans as worthless idiots who don't know shit. I would like to see what she would say later to Iowans in the general campaign if she were to somehow get the Democratic nomination.
She may think saying such things won't hurt her anymore because the Iowa vote is over but once again is under-estimating people by over playing her hand. Does she not think that the rest of the country won't notice her bashing Iowa? If she has such disdain for them, what does that say about her concern for the rest of us? Not much. Is she going to blame New Hampshire voters too if she should lose again there? Probably. So this is her typical attitude, it's everyone's fault but hers.
New Hampshire might be a new state and a new opportunity for her to win but she's still her same old arrogant self and you can't polish a turd.
She's still trying to sell this, "I'm so experienced" crap. Experienced at what? I'll tell you what, manipulation. Dissing Iowans just shows us how divisive she would be as president and more sharply contrasts with Obama's inclusive message of hope and change. If she is so quick to divide her own party, how does anyone expect her to heal the wounds of this country and be even somewhat successful at bringing the two sides together? She's a charlatan and chameleon. Her campaign slogan changes with the polls. She does represent change but negative change in that she changes her opinions and message whenever it seems politically expedient. I know most politicians do this to one degree or another but its her only card because she doesn't know how to be real and sincere. She's not "ready to lead on day one" but rather "ready to divide on day one."
---End of Transmission---
Friday, January 04, 2008
I mean, look at all the experience that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had amongst them and yet they royally messed things up. Abraham Lincoln didn't have much experience, nor did JFK and they both turned out to be two of our greatest presidents. So lack of "experience" (whatever that even means now) isn't as important when you look at history.
In fact Lincoln had a similar political career as Obama, before his successful presidential campaign. And like Obama, Lincoln was known for bringing change to his party, his state and his country, in addition to being able to bring opposing sides together. Remember the Obama staple speech that there are no "red" or "blue" states? Yep. I honestly believe that he can bring people of all beliefs and ideas together. Clearly as he gained a huge chunk of the independent vote last night.
So with all that being said I now turn to the other big reason that I am switching to Obama. As you all know I'm a great admirer of Dennis Kucinich and trust his political instincts. He is a thoughtful and brilliant man who has the best interests of America at heart. Thus, when I heard Kucinich say that Iowan caucus goers should vote for Obama if his supporters [Kucinich] didn't meet the requisite 15%, I took notice. Obama is the future for America and the one best suited (I think) to return to favor with the rest of the world. He represents a breakthrough, an attitude and presence that America is changing--for the better. I wanted to believe and now I do.
Check out his stirring victory speech from last night:
Now it's on to NEW HAMPSHIRE!!!!
This is all getting exciting!!! Finally.
---End of Transmission---
Thursday, January 03, 2008
She sounded in her speech like she had just woken up from a nap and even for her standards she really sounded fake. She looked like she was pushing buttons like a machine, a robot. She was phoning it in (didn't put much effort into it) and just co-opting Obama and to some extent Edwards message of change. She's so shameless. She bashes Obama over the head with "Experience is more important then change" and then she's now on the change band-wagon. Watch the amazing, nauseating and world famous Clinton spin machine as it twirls off its axis in over-drive!!
This brings me to John Edwards, whom I deeply respect and really like but the hand-writing is pretty much on the wall for him. He came in second for the the last two elections and thus, showed no improvement. Now he turns to the north as the icy winds of New Hampshire are now blowing against him being that the granite state hasn't been kind to him. In the 2004 election he came in fourth in the live free or die state. Especially since Obama will roll into New Hampshire with the big mo (momentum), massive press attention and an influx of cash.
Edwards wasn't doing very well in NH before tonight, anyway and with the the Obama freight train thundering into the state, Edwards looks to be run over. Perhaps I'd still give Edwards a chance in the NH primary if he was second to Obama by only a few percentage points but he finished behind Barack by nearly 10%. Yes, he only won by one point when you restrict the numbers to just Democrats. However, being able to reach out and win independents is how you win a presidency and Obama won them over big time in Iowa. Don't forget, New Hampshire is a famously proud independent state. Score another point for Obama.
The odds for the great state of North Carolina's favorite son are indeed long and he doesn't have much time to improve them before the NH primary. It is time for the party to coalesce behind a candidate and for that reason and the others listed above, I am fully backing Barack Obama. To not only win the White House but even more exciting, make history in the process and usher in a new generation of leadership in America.
---End of Transmission---
Dallas County's record-setting list of innocent inmates cleared by DNA testing grew to 15 Wednesday when officials learned that Charles Allen Chatman could not have committed a rape for which he has served almost 27 years in prison.
Most of his family died while he was in prison, she said. He probably suffers from learning disabilities and does not know how to use a computer or cellphone.
He's lost his life," said Terri Moore, the first assistant district attorney.
"I'm bitter. I'm angry," Chatman told The Associated Press during what was his last night in jail Wednesday.
GOI: I'd be bitter and angry too. In fact, if I was him I'd move away from Dallas, as far away away as possible since they have the largest wrongful conviction rates than any other county in the country.
According to reports, 30 inmates in the state of Texas have been released from prison after DNA findings revealed they had been wrongly convicted. Texas sure loves to put people in prison and kill them as fast as possible.
Texas has executed the most people than anywhere else in America. Texas accounts for sixty percent of America's total executions. It's like a sport down there. I probably would have asked someone in prison to just kill me about the first 10 years.
Seems like we here about these cases a couple times a year and it is just more proof that our justice system is severely flawed and biased towards minorities. I haven't done a in-depth study but it seems like the majority of those wrongfully convicted of crimes end up being minorities.
I heard he will be financially compensated. I hope he is given a million dollars.
This case is yet more proof that the death penalty should be illegal as the potential for executing an innocent person is too high of a risk it.
---End of Transmission---
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Earlier this month, Pope Benedict XVI issued his message for World Peace Day. Entitled "The Human Family, A Community of Peace," the message argues that peace begins with the family. That's a reasonable point. But then the pope writes, "Everything that serves to weaken the family based on the marriage of a man and woman ... constitutes an objective obstacle on the road to peace."
The family thus constitutes the primary agency of peace, and attempts to deny or restrict family rights "threaten the very foundations of peace," he said.
By the way, homosexuality was mentioned well before the environment and poverty. It wasn't until nearly the end of his speech that he addressed the threat of war and general violence.
GOI: Laughable since people like him are the ones "attempting to deny" and "restrict family rights!!" Homosexuals don't want to tear down traditional, heterosexual families, they just want to be included!!! So after slamming gays and sowing hatred toward homosexuals, he then turns around in this New Year's day speech and calls for prayers of peace!!!
He goes on, "May the peace proclaimed by the angels at Bethlehem take ever deeper root in men's hearts and inspire the whole human family to live in harmony, justice and fraternal solidarity," he said in English.
GOI: Unless your gay, right "Holy Father?" Since homosexuals are obviously apart of the whole human family, how do you expect to live in harmony and fraternal solidarity with them when you just called them real obstacles to that very peace and harmony you are calling for?!!! He probably doesn't include them because he most likely sees them as animals and not people.
So, this is typical double-talk from a so-called religion of peace.
And why not? Everyone knows that if we allow gays and lesbians to marry that the whole world would become homosexual over-night and civilization would end because there wouldn't be anyone around to pro-create.
If this kind of thinking wasn't so dangerous I might actually laugh. Apparently these people think that the gay community is militant and secretly planning world domination as if they belonged to SPECTRE or something!! SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion) being the fictional terrorist organization featured in many James Bond movies.
Yep, you never know when a gay man might be lurking outside your house waiting to break into your home, kill the women and rape the men so that just like a vampire, they will become gay once fucked up the ass with the insidious, infectious gay dick.
---End of Transmission---