Archive for the ‘Elections’ Category

posted by perkiset on Mar 4

I am REALLY PLEASED because I just heard on CNN, Howard Dean commit to the notion of, “We started this process with a set of rules… and you can’t change the rules after you start” regarding seating the Florida and Michigan delegates. This is absolutely the most appropriate thing, so that the Clinton camp can’t try an end-run and grab delegates from two states where Obama was not even on the ballot.

If you are unfamiliar with the process, Florida and Michigan went early and tried to tie themselves into Super Tuesday by moving their primary dates up. The DNC told them not to, or their delegates would not be counted at the convention. They went ahead and had what are ostensibly useless primaries. Now they want the votes to count. The problem is, in Michigan for example, only Hillary left her name on the ballot - everyone else was removed - so she “won” Michigan because the only other thing you could vote for was “Unassigned.” If you wrote a candidate it then your ballot was eliminated as well.

So MI and FL deserve what they are currently getting - but I REALLY feel for the voters in those states - they effectively lost their democratic voice because the local Democratic party had a hard on and had to blow their load early. The stink of all of it is that there have been rumors that the Clinton camp was trying to get those delegates seated - which is obviously unfair, but since they’re more and more desperate they’re going to probably try every trick they can.

Well done Howard - reasonably Democrats all over applaud your fairness and objectivity. Unfortunate for the voters in MI and FL, but best for the country and the democratic process in general.

posted by perkiset on Feb 25

Ralph Nader is responsible for the war in Iraq.

And just when we thought the race was really getting interesting, Ralph Nader steps in to make a mockery of it all.

Let’s face it: The name “Ralph Nader” used to be synonymous with consumer protection, safety issues, consumer advocacy… he was practically a household name in this arena. But in the last 3 presidential elections his name has been mud at best – criminally negligent at worst. Well, at least morally negligent.Simple math: if Nader’s name was not on the Florida ballot in 2000 Al Gore is president. Iraq never happens. Thanks a lot Ralph – lots of great safety and advocacy props there pal.

Ralph you have lost your way. You know it is flat out impossible for you to become president – and if you don’t then you shouldn’t be anyway because you’re completely delusional – so why not spend your time in advocacy of a important topics rather than this boneheaded, ill conceived notion YET AGAIN. It concerns me to think that you do not take personal responsibility for the state of our nation today – indeed even the world. You may personally be the largest single Gum In The Works that has ever existed. Stop it. Right now. Please while there is still some good legacy left of you.

Hillary, Hillary, Hillary.
Strike One: Slams Obama repeatedly about plagiarizing a component of one of his speeches. Doubles down with a crappy Xerox that obviously one of her writers thought of. Gets booed, but stays with it. Then essentially re-quotes Edwards concession speech closer with her “We’ll be fine” closing to the Texas debates. Shrill and hypocritical rhetoric unfortunately classic for the Clinton team.

Strike Two: “Shame on you Barack.” A new low. Sorry Mrs. Clinton – you cannot take credit for all of the good things that occurred during your husband’s administration and yet be absolved of responsibility for the not-so-great things – particularly when you have been so vocally pro-NAFTA in the past, for example. The Obama campaign’s flyer that went out does not cite anything untrue or explosive – it states the facts of how you have supported things in the past yet take no responsibility for them now. Your sudden explosion about it smacks of desperation and tactics, not real political anger.

Strike Three: Making fun of Obama and his supporters? Now that is really politically dumb and frankly, insulting. You and Bill – the eternal optimists… trading on hope and a vision for the future that was better than today – making fun of Obama and his supporters as kool-aid drinking rose-colored glass wand wavers? (OK, that’s not what was said – but that was the timbre) That is playground politics at the worst. To have shifted from someone purporting her vision of the future to someone talking about how hard it’s going to be and “[with Obama as president] The skies will open everything will be alright” is the mark of someone that has clearly hit a desperate point.

Thank you, for having proven exactly what kind of character you have while under pressure – you’ve made my choice ever so much easier. Since it’s either you or Obama, he gets the support. You lose and rightfully so.

posted by perkiset on Feb 4

Consider this, my right-wing warmongering friends:

If we honestly believe that one of the reasons Dubya went to Iraq was to avenge the contract put out on daddy, then is it too far a stretch to imagine that a President McCain would keep us in Iraq as long as necessary to vicariously repair the damage done to him during his 5 year imprisonment in Viet Nam?

Clearly, with his rhetoric about 100 years or more, “We are making progress,” “We will win regardless of what it takes.” “With honor” and such he is reliving his Viet Nam through the middle east and feels the pain of the soldiers there. Would it not be better for him to care for his military brethren  by bringing them home and retask the money he would put into bullets towards hospitals and care for those that have given so much?

Why must we be subjected to McCain’s mental torment over losing Viet Nam at the expense of our economy, our future and most importantly, the lives and health of our youngest and strongest?

To our future president: Please, for the love of god, country and countrymen, get us out of that quagmire. Let us start to endure the inevitable embarrassment and national shame we deserve for our imperialist excursions and FINALLY start to learn how to behave as an international citizen nation, rather than the school bully. Let us begin to scab over the wounds we have gut in our national body and our relationships with the rest of the world. Let us begin the process of growing up.

posted by perkiset on Jan 14

OK this is really isn’t just about Hillary, but more about Dumbocrats and perhaps the single most compelling reason why we should NOT win the white house next November.

More and more lately, as Barack has taken hold of the race and eliminated the “inevitability factor” of Hillary, people are getting desperate in their support of their favorite candidate. Most particularly, vocal women who think that if you’re a woman and not supporting Hillary you are a sexist.

Yup that’s right: You are supposed to vote for your gender/race/whatever or your an “ist” ie., I can only vote for a middle-aged white male, because if I vote for Hillary I’m sexist and if I vote for Obama I’m a racist.

You heard me right friends and neighbors, I am not allowed to vote for the right candidate with the right policies and political views I must vote with bias towards my race and gender. Of course voting for your religious comrades is also important, so I guess this leaves me with voting for Richard Gere, who is the only handsome, somewhat wealthy middle aged white Buddhist I currently know of. PinkHat, unfortunately, has no candidate at all because I can’t find any gorgeous AND intelligent blonde Catholic breast-cancer survivors who don’t cook or shop, but likes Pina Coladas and getting caught in the rain. If you know of any please let her know, she’s feeling rather let down by our political process at the moment. (Note to self: Check on Cheryl Crow for PinkHat, perhaps she dyes her hair)

So to my fellow progressives: please fulfill your inner urges and smack down these stupid Dems that vote simply because of their similarity with a candidate. Lots of backward, ignorant red-state trailer trash white men that can’t say “Nuclear” managed to steal the election the last 2 times, let’s not give them a 3-peat. And if we do win, let’s all hope and pray that the person elected is both the best possible candidate (such as it is today, none of them blow my skirt up) and are truly up to the task of guiding us out of the morass of self-centered religiously-fueled hypocrisy we’ve dug ourselves into.

posted by perkiset on Jan 11

What is with the Hillary Hate?

First off, let’s be square: I am no great fan of hers. I really liked her husband as president, but I have not forgiven him for embarrassing the Presidency with his antics nor for handing over the nation to the murderous gluttons that are in power now as a by-product of his antics. I am more a fan of Obama, Edwards, Biden, Dodd or Kucinich, the last 3 being my favs. I think she is stiff and unconvincing - much of the same ailment that Al Gore suffered from - and very divisive.

But I do not understand the kind of frothing at the mouth hatred that comes at her - it just seems WAY out of line compared with any evil she has done. (Note: I do not believe she had Vince or whatever his name was killed, nor several other horrible stories. I do not believe she’s a lesbian, although that would not bother me in the slightest). Even people of a left-leaning persuasion seem to take huge umbrage to the possibility that she could become president. As if Huckabee, Mr. “You can’t have freedom without religion” would be better. Or perhaps Guilliani, the textbook definition of Mr. FUD (That’s Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, not Elmer).

OK, so she tried to push through a health care system and got smacked down for it. It is arguable whether it would have been any good or not (I’m of the opinion it would have been great) but the argument seems to be, “It’s OK to kill innocents in other countries, let assassins run free (bin Laden), profit wildely from oil spoils of an illegal war, eviscerate our social services, convert education from a thinking creative benefit of our country to a robotic last-place among first world countries, ignore our Constitution, defy the separation of Church and State, blatantly ignore our civil liberties and in fact work hard to eliminate many of them, reclassify people specifically for the purpose of torturing them or restraining them in prison without counsel or judgment by a jury of their peers, or simply being an asshole to other nations… but DON’T YOU DARE try to give our American people health care you commie loving pinko scum radical bitch.

I mean really! What am I missing here? At the Syndk8 there’s arguments about how fake she was and how contrived it was to “cry on camera.” Well I am of the opinion that Politicos are People Too and where Howard Dean might issue a resounding HOOOOOOaaaaahhh! Perhaps Hillary got choked up. Is it only right that politicians get emotional when WE want them to? There’s also discussion about how “Men think logically and women do not.” A post went up about how “research” shows this, and if I simply think back to my last relationship, I’ll understand. My response to some of this nonsense:

WOW you’re myopic. I’ll bet the reason you can say that about past relationships is because you clearly perceive the world from that perspective. In my experience, women are brilliant, logical, warm, caring and balanced partners. Are there nasty useless bitches? Of course. Are there useless self-serving asshole men? Of course. But the women that come into my life reflect the way that I see them. And in general, that fits considerably better with the research than what you are saying.

By the way: methods of thinking & personality are outlined by fundamental Jungian personality characteristics, further distilled by Isabel Myers and Katherine Cook in the 20s. The 4 major archetypes are NT (Thinker) SJ (Organizer) NF (Feeler) and SP (Adventurer). Typing is spread pretty evenly across males and females, although NT and SP men have more pronounced features and markers as do SJ and NF women ergo, they stick in our mind as the master sterotype for all people of that gender. This of course explains why you think that men are thinkers and women are feelers. PinkHat and I actually do training classes in personality identification and gender studies for small to mid-sized companies, having run all of our employees through multiple traning classes in the late 90s, and continuing to work with our existing client base on an as-needed basis. We have a reasonable body of experience that is backed up by hard science and we continue to study to this day.

So back to my original point: your assertion is sexist and unschooled. You are mouthing what you have heard and what fulfills your feelings as opposed to knowing your ass from a hole in the ground.

Even with that brilliant and articulate summation, my opponent was unmoved.

I’m inclined to believe that Obama is going to take the nomination, but I am not quite ready to write Hillary off. If she gets it I’ll be completely satisfied that she survived the most difficult selection process in the world. She won’t have been my first choice, but I’ll be satisfied that she’s not another damn Republican. I will hope that she allows her emotions to show a bit, and that she allows us to see her as a real human.

And I hope that the people of the United States, who seem so willing to give Republicans a honeymoon period when they first take office (Reagan, Bush Sr. and Dubya all had this little vacation) will give the next president, particularly if it’s Hillary, the benefit of the doubt and her full support. As they should.

Copyright © 2006-2008, ME3 Inc. All Rights Reserved
WordPress Theme by Perkiset