Friday, December 26, 2008

Economy Solution - The New York Yankee$

I believe the true answer to the financial crisis is to allow the New York Yankee$ to buy the top five banks in America as well as the big three auto makers.

Apparently, there is no economic recession if your last name is Steinbrenner, as in New York Yankee$ owner Hank Steinbrenner.

In the past 12 months or so, the New York Yankee$ have signed five players... FIVE... to contracts totaling more than three-quarters of a BILLION dollars!

They have a brand new stadium, being funded in part by taxpayer bonds.

And what's more scurrilous about this is the way the Yankee$ have most recently gone about it. For recently signed first baseman Mark Texeira they waited until all of the other teams bidding for his services played out, then trounced the top bid by an insurmountable sum at the last second.

Certainly, they will win at least 105 baseball games this year as well as the World Series. If not, they should fire every manager, coach, and executive with the team.

Do all of the citizens of New York really want their tax dollars going to buying every top level baseball player available? If so, I'm sure they'll pay $2500 a seat at the games and $11 a beer in droves, and I'm sure won't mind a few dollars going to bail out the Republican recession as well.

The Yankee$ are truly the evil empire, but they can turn that around by becoming our benevolent benefactors.

I hope the people of New York are happy cheering for their championship team while they're looking for a job, declaring personal bankruptcy, losing their health insurance (such as it is these days), and seeing a radical increase in violent crime. People of New York, you will get what you pay for.

So how about sharing some of your tax dollars with the rest of us? It's only fair if we're going to be the whipping boys for your store-bought All-Star baseball team.

Sunday, September 21, 2008

Awful McCain Mistakes on Foreign Policy

In a week in which the Dow lost 1,000 points on Monday and Wednesday, John McCain was insisting the economic fundamentals in America were strong. Wha???????

OK, the economy is, by his own admission, not his strong suit. So does he have a strong suit?

The media has attempted to portray McCain to have knowledge on foreign policy, but his repeated mistakes prove he is not intelligent enough to handle that, either. As a recap, here are some of McCain's recent foreign policy gaffes in which he said that:

1 - Iraq and Pakistan share a border.
2 - Czechoslovakia still exists.
3 - He was confused as to the difference between Sudan and Somalia.
4 - He was confused as to whether it was more U.S troops or more NATO troops he wanted to send to Afghanistan.
5 - He was confused as to what troop levels are in Iraq.
6 - He was confused about Iran's relationship with Al Qaeda.
7 - He was confused about the difference between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.
8 - He referred to Russian President Putin as being the leader of Germany.
9 - He jokingly sang about bombing Iran.
10 - His running mate spoke of bombing Russia.

11 - And now this week, he has referred to our friendly European ally and fellow democracy, Spain, as being our adversary, and...
12 - being located in Central America.

McCain is showing himself to be weak-minded, weak-willed, lacking judgment, lacking intelligence, lacking stamina, and choosing the worst, most unqualified running mate in U.S. history (supplanting even Dan Quayle).

Apparently, he does not have any strong suit at all.

Despite the media's attempts to keep the race close for their own ratings benefit, John McCain is showing such a lack of ability to be president as to even overcome that propaganda to register in the polls whose methodology already favors the republican candidates by skewed selection of those they poll.

Sunday, August 3, 2008

Red Sox Add by Addition

Some are arguing the Red Sox accomplished addition by subtraction this week by trading Manny Ramirez and acquiring Jason Bay, meaning they took a step back by making the switch, but accomplished more in the long run by removing a problem player.

They’re wrong. The Red Sox have added a more accomplished player in Bay.

Those who don’t like the deal are only looking at the raw numbers:

Ramirez - .303 BA, 21 HR .936 OPS through 8-3-08.

Bay - .283 BA, 23 HR, .906 OPS.

Those are the UNADJUSTED stats. Adjust for all of the factors and you’ll see Bay is the superior hitter and player.

Factor #1 - Ball Park

Ramirez played home games in Fenway park, a hitter’s park. His stats were inflated because of where he played half of his games.

Bay played his home games in Pittsburgh, a pitcher’s park that made hitting stats worse.

Factor #2 - Pitching staffs

Ramirez didn’t have to face above-average Red Sox pitchers so his numbers were compiled against slightly below league-average pitching. That made his batting statistics better than if they were against average pitching in the league.

Bay didn’t get to face below-average Pirates pitchers so his numbers were compiled against slightly above league-average pitching. That made his batting statistics worse than if he got to face average pitching in the league.

Factor # 3 - Defense

Ramirez was often replaced late in games to allow a better defensive outfielder to play in LF. When David Ortiz was out with an injury, Ramirez moved to DH, a spot he’s more suited for.

Bay is better in the field and can stay in ball games to provide good fielding with his range and his arm.

Factor # 4 - Speed

Ramirez was slow on the base paths, and that’s when he actually tried to run. Ramirez could have gotten extra hits by running harder on misplayed ground balls he assumed would be outs. With him, they were because of his lack of effort.

Bay has always hustled in his career. He plays the game with full effort and won’t accept an out as automatic. This season he is 7 for 7 in stolen base attempts.

Factor # 5 - Age

Ramirez is 36.

Bay is 29.

Factor # 6 - Contract

Ramirez makes $20 million a year and is a free agent after this season.

Bay is signed through 2009 when he will make $7.5 million.

Factor # 7 - In the Clubhouse

No one will ever say that Jason is just being Jason - in a bad way, that is.

Sunday, July 13, 2008

An Awful Week in McCain's Political Life, but the Media Covers it up

If John McCain weren’t the darling of the media, he would be in BIG trouble after this past week. I cannot remember a politician having such a disastrous string of mistakes, missteps, and misstatements in so short a time. Yet, it's almost being completely ignored by the media.

First, McCain promised to balance the budget by the end of his first term from all the money he would save by winning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan even though he has said in the past that there’s no reason to bring troops home if they’re not getting killed anymore. Of course, he has also said that we can’t bring the troops home as long as they’re getting killed. In other words, we stay if we are getting killed and we stay if we’re not getting killed. So where does the money being saved come from?

He then attacked Barack Obama for not voting for something he didn’t vote for, either - the Kyl-Lieberman amendment.

He claimed to have a record with veterans that he really doesn’t have. It was Barack Obama who supported the G.I. Bill and John McCain who refused to vote for it. That just backs up all Veterans’ groups overwhelmingly scoring McCain’s support of soldiers among the worst in the Senate.  

McCain ignored the Iraqi Prime Minister calling for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq even though McCain had said before that if the Iraqis wanted us to leave, we would leave.

McCain joked about wanting to kill Iranian civilians by giving them lung cancer.

On Monday, McCain described social security as a total disgrace, not saying that it needed to be fixed, but saying, “We are paying present-day retirees with the taxes being paid by young workers in America today.” That just happens to be the entire premise of social security, which he has stated he wants to privatize.

McCain’s top economic advisor, Phil Gramm, who largely caused the mortgage crisis in America by creating the Enron loophole while a Senator, called Americans a bunch of whiners for an economy he said was only in a mental recession. Despite this, he got to keep his campaign co-chairman position.

Another top economic advisor, the formerly ousted Hewlett Packard CEO, Carly Fiorino, told reporters that McCain was just as upset as she was that insurance companies cover Viagra for men, but not birth control for women leaving McCain befuddled and bewildered on his campaign bus when reporters asked him about it.

Finally, McCain lied about his own life story just to pander to a Pittsburgh TV morning show. When McCain was held in Vietnam by the North Vietnamese, he had always said he gave false information under torture to make the torturers stop. He even stated it in his autobiography and the film that was made about it. Instead of naming his squad mates and squadron commander, he named the offensive line of the Green Bay Packers - the best team in football in the 1960s.

At the time, the Pittsburgh Steelers stunk. They were completely insignificant with no outstanding players although they would later become the best team of the 1970s well after McCain left Vietnam.

In talking to this Pittsburgh TV reporter, McCain changed his life story by saying he named the Pittsburgh Steelers famous defensive line of the time just to show what a great Pittsburgh fan he was. Too bad the famous Steel Curtain defense didn’t exist yet!

Furthermore, he formerly used this Green Bay Packers story to illustrate how ineffective torture is. A victim generally says anything just to end the pain. Of course, McCain completely changed his anti-torture stance under the direction of the Republican dictatorship who used incorrect information gleaned under torture to justify the irresponsible spending of American blood and taxpayers’ dollars in Iraq.

It’s a good thing for McCain that the media is the lapdog of the Republican machine or else he’d never hear the end of this week’s gaffes.

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

McCain, Republicans - No (truthful) Energy Plan Whatsoever

The latest atrocity being pushed by John McCain and the Republicans is that we need to boost oil production by drilling off the gulf shore shore and in the Alaskan National Wildlife Arctic Refuge (ANWAR).

Virtually every reason they give for this is, at best - completely baseless; and, at worst - a total lie.

The fact is that the Republicans’ stance on energy and oil has been abysmal and that McCain has no plan whatsoever to offer other than to keep doing what Bush is doing - subsidizing oil companies like Exxon-Mobil who made $8 billion per year when Bush took office, but who now make over $40 billion per year giving them the largest yearly corporate profit in the history of planet Earth.

We also have no reason to need it. The oil companies are sitting on 68 million acres of leased drilling land in the United States and purposely NOT drilling on it. They are hoarding at our expense and their republican backed puppets are floating other abominations now.

Misrepresentation #1 - Increasing offshore drilling will help bring down the cost of oil quickly.

Fact - Increasing offshore may produce a little more oil by the year 2025 or so, but the amount will be only a slight fraction of the nation’s total output. Republicans are basing this on the theory that we can drill our way out of the problem.

This is truly the most ludicrous of all their arguments. The United States has two percent of the world’s oil, but use 25 percent. Increasing that to 2.02 percent in 20 years will not make up the difference. If it was a difference maker, why won't they drill on the already secured 68 million acres they're sitting on? Because we're already refining oil at our full capacity. More oil won't get us more gasoline or lower prices.

Misrepresentation #2 - Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005 did no damage to the environment from offshore oil platforms. McCain said, “They’re safe enough.”

Fact - Hurricanes Katrina and Rita forced 700,000 gallons of oil to spill during the hurricanes. The chance of further disasters not related to weather also factor into a possible catastrophic disaster to not only the ecology, but also the gulf states’ industries along the coast, such as the seafood industry and tourism on the beaches.

Misrepresentation #3 (actually a blatant lie) - “China is drilling off the coast of Florida...” (optional aside - “with the help of Cuba.”)

Fact - It’s a LIE. This rumor has been alleged by Vice-President Dick Cheney, Republican Congressmen John Boehner and Roy Blount, and media personalties Michelle Bachman and George Will over the past week. Dick Cheney actually apologized and corrected himself the day after this assertion, but it has a life that lives on thanks to Bachman and friends at the Republican Headquarters known as “Fox News.” It simply happens to be a fabrication.

Misrepresentation #4 (and the most fanciful of all) - ANWAR helps caribou in Alaska because the pipeline is warm. One Republican congresswoman from Minnesota even said the caribou will have coffee klatches with such a warm pipeline! I’m not making that up.

Fact - This is the silliest one yet. Think about it a second - the animals native to Alaska... are freezing??? Wouldn’t they have moved or become extinct long ago if they needed more warmth? And oh, by the way, why would we be HEATING the oil to such a degree that it will make the outside of the pipes warm? Is there some reason we’d need to do that? Would we need portable heaters along the pipeline to keep it warm the entire length? If not, then why has no one ever proposed simply putting in heaters FOR THE CARIBOU?

The simple truth is that the wealthiest corporations in the history of civilization, who are already being subsidized with additional tax dollars paid by hard-working Americans, want more. The Republicans are just the people who will rob the bottom 99 percent to make it happen.

Sunday, June 15, 2008

Bobby Jindal - Puppet, Heretic, Exorcist

Bobby Jindal is the Indian-American, 36-year-old governor of Louisiana and the only non-white Republican to hold high political office in the United States.

Some have thrown out his name as a possible vice-presidential running mate for John McCain. It won’t happen because, if for no other reason, the age difference would make John McCain look really old.

Jindal has been appointed to most of his positions by upper-echelon Republicans who taught him to obey, and he has throughout his career in Congress and, now, Governor. He has voted with George W. Bush more than 95 percent of the time and kissed up to every conservative politician who came into the state.

He was a Hindu until converting to Catholicism at 15. But it was revealed this week that he admitted to committing one of the most  egregious sins in the Catholic church when he took the role of a priest in performing an exorcism.

That’s right - he performed an exorcism - on a girlfriend he once knew. He wrote about it in a magazine article.

In the Catholic church, only an ordained priest can perform an exorcism, and, even then, it takes quite a high authority to appoint a priest to that function.

Obviously, Jindal thought rather highly of himself to appoint himself to this task.

He said it worked. He claimed the demon was cast out of the girl’s body.

Furthermore, Jindal said he also cured her of cancer!

It’s too bad he can’t use some of those magical powers to keep some his campaign promises about transparency in the Louisiana governor’s office regarding ethics.

Maybe the devil made him do it.

Saturday, June 7, 2008

Obama's Record on New Orleans

I wrote yesterday about more misstatements by John McCain about Iraq and New Orleans.

Obama's record in speaking out against Republican lies on Iraq is well-documented, but less well-known are his actions regarding New Orleans. Here's a rundown of what Obama has done for this area. Here's what the blog, "Think On These Things," compiled through February 2008.


Sept. 2, 2005: Obama holds press conference urging Illinoisans to contribute to the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts.

Sept. 5, 2005: Obama goes to Houston to visit evacuees with Presidents Clinton and Bush.

Sept. 7, 2005: Obama introduces bill to create a national emergency family locator system

Sept. 8, 2005: Obama introduces bill to create a National Emergency Volunteers Corps.

Sept. 8, 2005: Obama co-sponsors the Katrina Emergency Relief Act of 2005 introduced by Senator Harry Reid

Sept. 8, 2005: Obama co-sponsors the Hurricane Katrina Bankruptcy Relief and Community Protection Act of 2005 introduced by Senator Russ Feingold

Sept. 12, 2005: Obama introduces legislation requiring states to create an emergency evacuation plan for society’s most vulnerable

Sept. 15, 2005: Obama issues public response to President Bush’s speech about Gulf Coast rebuilding.

Sept. 21, 2005: Obama co-sponsors bill to establish a Katrina commission to investigate response to the disaster introduced by Hillary Clinton

Sept. 21, 2005: Obama appears on NPR to discuss the role of poverty in Hurricane Katrina.

Sept. 22, 2005: Obama and Coburn’s Hurricane Katrina financial oversight bill unanimously passes Senate committee.

Sept. 22, 2005: Obama’s amendment requiring evacuation plans unanimously passes Senate committee.

Sept. 28, 2005: Obama and Coburn issue statement about the need for a Chief Financial Officer to oversee the financial mismanagement and suspicious contracts occurring in the reconstruction process

Sept. 29, 2005: Obama and Coburn investigate possible FEMA refusal of free cruise ship offer

Oct. 6, 2005: Obama and Coburn issue statement on FEMA Decision to re-bid Katrina contracts

Oct. 6, 2005: Obama co-sponsors Gulf Coast Infrastructure Redevelopment and Recovery Act of 2005.

Oct. 21, 2005: Obama releases statement decrying the extension of FEMA director, Michael “Brownie” Brown’s contract. Obama calls Brown’s contract extension, “unconscionable.”

Nov. 17, 2005: Obama and Coburn introduce legislation asking FEMA to immediately re-bid all Katrina reconstruction contracts.

Feb. 1, 2006: Obama gives Senate floor speech on his legislation to help children affected by Hurricane Katrina

Feb. 2, 2006: Obama introduces legislation to help low-income children affected by Hurricane Katrina

Feb. 23, 2006: Obama issues statement responding to a White House report on Hurricane Katrina. Obama noted that the top two recommendations that the report had for the federal government were initiatives he had been working on since immediately after the storm hit. Obama called the administration’s response “delinquent.”

May 2, 2006: Obama gives speech about no-bid contracts in Hurricane Katrina reconstruction

May 4, 2006: Obama’s legislation to end no-bid contracts for Hurricane Katrina reconstruction passed the Senate.

June 15, 2006: Obama and Coburn announce legislation to require amendment to create competitive bidding for Hurricane Katrina reconstruction for federal contracts over $500,000. Although it passed previously, the language was stripped in conference.

June 15, 2006: Obama releases podcast about his pending Katrina reconstruction legislation in the Senate.

June 16, 2006: Obama and Coburn get no-bid Hurricane Katrina reconstruction amendment into Department of Defense authorization bill.

July 14, 2006: Obama and Coburn’s legislation to end abuse of no-bid contracts passes senate as amendment to Department of Defense authorization bill.

August 11, 2006: Obama visits Xavier University in New Orleans to give Commencement address

August 14, 2006: Obama and Coburn ask FEMA to address ballooning no-bid contracts for Gulf Coast reconstruction

Sept. 29, 2006: Obama and Coburn legislation to prevent abuse of no-bid contracts in the wake of disaster passes Senate to be sent to President’s desk to become law.

Feb. 2007-Present: As Obama begins his Presidential campaign he references Katrina as a part of his stump speech as he travels around the country in his familiar line, “That we are not a country which preaches compassion and justice to others while we allow bodies to float down the streets of a major American city. That is not who we are.”

June 20, 2007: Obama co-sponsors Gulf Coast Housing Recovery Act of 2007 introduced by Senator Chris Dodd.

July 27, 2007: Obama and colleagues get a measure in the Homeland Security bill that will

investigate FEMA trailers that may contain the toxic chemical, formaldehyde.

Aug. 26, 2007: Obama outlines a detailed Hurricane Katrina recovery plan.

December 18, 2007: Obama calls on President Bush to protect affordable housing in New Orleans.

February 16, 2008: Obama releases statement on toxic Gulf Coast trailers.

And something tells me he's not finished speaking to the problems in the Crescent City.

Friday, June 6, 2008

More McCain Blunders - Iraq (again), Iran (again), and New Orleans

Because I've been away for awhile, I haven't been able to keep up with all of the recent John McCain goofs. Still, the last seven days have shown us that even upon reflection the best McCain can do is compound the errors with more mistakes.

On his least knowledgeable topic, the Middle East, his seemingly unending streak of misstatements, foul-ups, and lies continued last week with his assertion that troop levels in Iraq were below what they were before the Republican escalation of the war in January 2007. WRONG!

In fact, troop levels are higher now. So he tried to “correct” that the next day by saying he meant they would be below pre-surge levels by July.

Again, that simply wasn’t true. The ending of already Republican-extended troop deployments will force levels to reduce somewhat this summer, but they will still be a full 10,000 troops above what they were before the January 2007 troop escalation.

The week began on Monday with McCain speaking to the conservative Jewish group, AIPAC, and bashed Barack Obama for proposing to speak with other countries before beginning to bomb them. McCain made his point by speaking about the divestment campaign against South Africa and how that lead to the end of apartheid. If only he were president, he would begin a divestment campaign against Iran as well.

That was all good, except for three BIG problems.

First, the Senate already proposed an Iran divestment bill last year. It was written by Barack Obama. Oops. In case you think it was a democrat version, it wasn't. In fact, the bill was co-sponsored by conservative republican Sam Brownback.

Second, John McCain voted AGAINST the bill he's now proposing. Double oops.

Third, he had also voted years ago against the divestment bill against South Africa, the very example he held up as a basis for pursuing one against Iran!!! WHAT A MORON!!!

McCain continued his sightseeing tour of forgotten truths this week when he was asked why he twice voted against independent investigations into governmental failings before and after Hurricane Katrina. McCain said, I’ve supported every investigation and ways of finding out what caused the tragedy." WRONG!

In 2005 and in 2006, Democrats proposed an independent commission to look into the problems regarding the handling of the worst natural disaster in American history. It would have been comprised of non-federal-government analysts appointed by both Democrats and Republicans.

McCain and his fellow Republicans killed both proposals.

Again, McCain tried to later “correct” his misstatement by saying he voted against the bills because they were filled with pork barrel projects that had “billions for projects and programs that had nothing to do with the recovery of the city of New Orleans.”

Once again, McCain’s attempt to explain away his earlier incorrect recollection was completely wrong. The bills would have provided $3 million for the projects, but had no allocations for anything else.

McCain’s Magical Misery Tour continues.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

The Conventional Wisdom is Wrong

Conventional Wisdom #1 - Hillary's done with the campaign.

She can't win, mind you, but she's not done yet. She loaned herself another $6.4 million before Indiana and North Carolina. She'll likely be loaning herself more money this month before Kentucky, West Virginia, and Oregon. By staying in she can pay back the Indiana/North Carolina loans, and after the other three on May 20th she'll have won two more of them. This will allow herself to raise enough so that she can be paid back for this month's loans to herself.

It's all about her financially breaking even now.  It's not about the presidential election anymore because she can't realistically do that. Even if she were to subvert the process or overtly take advantage of what would have to be an egregious error by Obama, it would so fracture the Democratic Party as to make her unelectable.

Obama's in. He just has to be patient for a few more weeks.

Conventional Wisdom #2 - Obama and McCain differ on Hamas.

While Cindy McCain was saying Thursday morning that John McCain would not run an attacking campaign, John McCain was running an attacking campaign against Barack Obama by linking Obama to the Palestinian terrorist group.

McCain hypocrisy aside,  the fact is that Obama and McCain have exactly the same stance on the now duly elected entity of the Palestinan government. Obama has stated he will not speak to them unless they:
1 - denounce violence,
2 - recognize Israel's right to exist, and
3 - live up to their previously agreed to accords.

The candidates have no differences when it comes to Israel.

Conventional Wisdom #3 - Obama gets the most-favored press.

At a recent Associated Press gathering, reporters on the McCain beat proclaimed themselves to be traveling on McCain's "Straight -Talk Express" while presenting him with his favorite chocolate sprinkle covered doughnuts. At the same gathering, Barack Obama was addressed as Barack Osama.

I think Obama will still be waiting in November to be presented with his favorite doughnuts by the press.

Friday, April 11, 2008

McCain STILL Making Same Iraq Blunder!!!!!

You'd think by now John McCain would be humiliated into knowing the truth.

If the media wasn't his lapdog, the embarrassment would likely have caused him to admit to senior moments if not absolute stupidity.

Because no one is calling him on it, he continues to show his complete ignorance of reality in Iraq.

He actually doesn't have a clue who's fighting in Iraq. He doesn't know who's killing Americans - you know, his fellow citizens.

To recap, AlQaeda are Sunnis and Iran is Shiia. They aren't the same. They're as different as Red Sox and Yankees. Even more accurately, they're as different as Boston Red Sox and New York Giants - they're both sports teams , so in McCain's world they must be the same thing. After all, they both use a ball in their games.

AlQaeda and Iran - hey, they're both Arabic, right? and they both call God (the same one that Jews and Christians pray to, by the way), "Allah", right? They are all the same in McCain's world.

"So let's kill 'em all," McCain is basically saying, even if they fight along side us as Iran did in Basra last week against the Mahdi Army. And that is despite the fact that AlQaeda in Iraq wasn't there until we invaded, that they have no connection to the international terrorist group because they're just a tiny splinter organization, that they're just as happy killing Shiite Muslims as they are American occupiers because we're all infidels to them, and that they number about 1,000 out of some 8.8 million.

No, John McCain will never let facts get in the way of a good, but wholly incorrect propaganda story the media is only too happy to help him perpetrate on the American people.

So McCain continues to conflate AlQaeda and Iran. Even after being publicly corrected by a former Democrat.

Let's recap the repeated misstatements.

First came the speech in Houston in February when he said Shiia Iran was helping Sunni AlQaeda.

Then he said the same thing on Hugh Hewitt's right-wing radio show in March.

Then he said it twice to reporters on his trip to the Middle East before Joe Lieberman corrected him.

Then there was three days ago at the General Petraeus hearing when he said, "Al Qaeda isn't just an obscure sect of the Shiites... (pause) ... or Sunnis or anybody else." Well they're definitely not Shiites, and not likely anybody else unless they've been recently adopted by the Baptists, or the Mormons, or the fundamentalist born again whatevers, or, as he said, "anybody else."

Finally, Fox Noise yesterday gave him the opportunity to clear up any confusion people may perceive that he has about the situation by hand-feeding him what to say:

Fox Noise: "Do you understand the difference between Sunni and Shiia, and how would you like to respond those who claim you don't?"

McCain: "I've been to Iraq eight times. I know the leaders. I know the situation on the ground. I know that Sunni and AlQaeda are closely tied."


Like buses and subways are closely tied to mass transit?
Like the shape of wheels is closely tied to a circle?
Like football, baseball, and basketball are closely tied to America's three most popular team sports?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. HE STILL CAN'T GET IT RIGHT!

What a blithering idiot.

For the last time (I hope), allow me to explain.
AlQaeda is Sunni.
Saudi Arabia is Sunni.
15 of the 19 AlQaeda 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia under the leadership of AlQaeda in Afghanistan.
0 were from Iraq.
That's because Iraq had 0 AlQaeda until the US invasion.
Iran is Shiia.
AlQaeda's sworn enemy is anyone not Sunni, and Iran is not Sunni.

Got it, McCain? Got it, media?

We're not as stupid as you want us to be.

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

McCain's "plan" for Iraq - HA!!!!!!!!

John McCain said on April 7, 2008 - in between his humorously sad, consistent conflation of AlQaeda (Sunni) with Shiite Extremists in Iraq even after being corrected on camera by former Democrat Joe Lieberman - that we don't have to be in Iraq for 100 years or longer provided certain conditions are met.

Iraq merely has to secure U.S. interests by being a country that is:

1 - Stable;
2 - Prosperous;
3 - Democratic;
4 - Not a threat to its neighbors (exception - see number 8 below);
5 - A terrorism fighter;
6 - Happily entertaining international entities (i.e. allows foreign oil companies to remove Iraq's oil for no money whatsoever);
7 - Accepting of all religions; and
8 - Starts treating Iran like an enemy.

Gee, wouldn't it be nice if the United States could meet some of those criteria, too?

I'd especially like the USA to fulfill numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 because we're sorely lacking in each of those under our current Republican dictatorship.

100 years, McCain? Under those conditions we're going to be there closer to 1,000 years.

And there's certainly no better strategy for accomplishing those goals than by having your country controlled and occupied by a foreign military.

Think for a minute - do you suppose the USA would be more stable, prosperous, democratic, neighborly, terrorist-fighting, and increasingly tolerant of religions if, say, we were occupied by the armies from Japan (enemy in WWII) or China (enemy in Korea), countries who now hold most of our ever-increasing national debt?

Naaaaaaah, i didn't think so either. Otherwise, we probably wouldn't have spent so many lives fighting them before.

Of course, those were Democratic presidents who fought those wars so maybe our Republican emperor and his puppet yes-men have a different idea of what democracy and America stand for.

Sunday, April 6, 2008

Radio Show Host Randi Rhodes Ridiculously Suspended

Air America Chief Charlie Kireker suspended Radio Show Host Randi Rhodes because she performed a stand-up routine at a public appearance off the air in which she called Geraldine Ferraro a whore for racist comments made against Barack Obama. Mind you, she was not using the term in the "prostitute" connotation, but rather in the "selling out your principles" definition. She then called Hillary Clinton one as well for not calling out Ferraro on her bigoted remarks.

Two weeks later, Kireker took action.

First, video shows the audience understood the context and laughed. Second, Rhodes was warmly received after the event. Finally, Rhodes has been on the air for two weeks with no public reaction.

So here are my Top Ten reasons Why Air America Overreacted:

10. Kireker got upset because he didn't understand another word used by erudite radio show host Lionel today and Randi is tired of having to be the one to explain it to him - several times.
9. Kireker heard right-wing wacko Neal Boortz might be looking for a new gig.
8. Randi's last name isn't Rhodes, but Kireker doesn't understand the whole "Show Biz name" thing. Watch out, Lionel.
7. Cruise Ship envy - Randi -2, AA - 1.
6. Kireker wants to be memorialized in name for the NEXT San Francisco Sewerage Plant.
5. Total misunderstanding - When Randi told a Clinton supporter she was "right", she actually meant "correct" - not "anti-left".
4. Isn't this Air "America"? Oh yeah, I suppose South American dictatorships can technically be called "America".
3. Kireker figured that his network had too much "Talk, talk, talk" and not enough action. He's hoping Hulk Hogan returns his calls soon.
2. She can't come back until she agrees to wear a Tucker Carlson bow tie.
1. Three words - Fox America Radio!!!

Saturday, March 29, 2008

Bush, McCain = Baghdad Bob

Do you remember the Iraqi Information Minister under Saddam Hussein, Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf aka "Baghdad Bob"? This was the guy who would tell the English-speaking press corp that the Americans were nowhere near Baghdad while American tanks were passing by in the street behind him.

This week, President Bush and John McCain both reached that level of unreality in speaking on the same subject - life in Iraq at present.

Friday saw a fifth straight day of rocket fire and mortar fire into Green Zone of Baghdad. Several Americans and Iraqis were killed in these attacks on this American-fortified "safe" zone.

Basra, the second largest city in Iraq, has been under siege for more than a week. Markets are closed. People can't go to work, can't get food, have no electricity, have no access to medicine, and can't even get fuel for generators.

Shiite extremists - misnamed as al-Qaeda three times last week by John McCain just before letting the world know that Purim is the Jewish Halloween - are led in Basra by the largest of these groups - the Mahdi Army led by Muqtada al-Sadr who control government, traffic, and killing.

On Tuesday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Malicki launched an assault on Basra, which led to more killing and a further spread of widespread violence in Shiite-held districts in Baghdad and other places in Iraq where Shiite militiamen hold sway over local and Federal governments.

President Bush said this week:

"The surge is doing what it was designed to do. It's helping Iraqis reclaim security and restart political and economic life." He said, "Normalcy is returning back to Iraq."


John McCain, who is looking to continue each and every George W. Bush policy down to the letter, commented this week:

 "Dramatic reduction in violence has opened the way for a return to something approaching normal political and economic life for the average Iraqi. People are going back to work. Markets are open."





Fellow Americans, I give you Baghdad Bobs - George W. Bush and John McCain.

Sunday, March 9, 2008

Media Missteps of the Week

John McCain and John Hagee - John McCain appeared in person this week to embrace and accept the endorsement of a hate-filled, anti-Catholic, anti-Semitic bigot whose faith tells him the greatest contribution he can make in life is to take the money of his followers to enrich himself on the way to bringing about Armageddon via a cataclysmic World War III event.  How do you suppose the media reacted to this?

Yawns were in evidence.

How do you suppose they would have reacted if an alleged religious leader who called the Catholic church a "whore religion" and said God destroyed New Orleans because of its sinners endorsed Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton?

Even more telling would be how Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton would have reacted. I dare say neither would have bothered to appear onstage with this human reptile much less embrace his radical followers' beliefs into their points of view.

The media darling in the presidential race has been declared. Hint: he's the old, white man who has pledged to bring us four more years of following the Bush regime to the letter.

Barack Obama wins Texas - I know this may come as a bit of a surprise. After all, didn't Hillary Clinton win Texas, Rhode Island and Ohio to Obama's Vermont on Tuesday?

No, the media was incorrect and are not in any hurry to correct the information.

Barack Obama won a projected 98 Texas delegates to Hillary Clinton's 95. His Texas caucus victory was much greater than Hillary's primary victory. The momentum didn't shift very much at all. She gained fewer than 10 delegates Tuesday night while trailing Obama by 152. She's still so far behind that she doesn't have a realistic mathematical chance of winning the pledged delegate count.

Hillary Clinton does not have more legislative experience than Barack Obama -The media has continually harped on Hillary Clinton's "3 a.m. phone call" ad THAT ONLY RAN IN TEXAS (a state she lost) to repeatedly play nationally on her behalf to give her free publicity on the issue of experience in government. Although Clinton has two more years as a U.S. Senator than Barack Obama, he actually has more legislative experience. Regarding security clearance as First Lady, Hillary Clinton had none. If you count her time as First Lady in government, than perhaps Barbara Bush or Laura Bush should be considered for John McCain's running mate.

Of course, McCain has more legislative experience than either Democrat, but then again, it's not like longtime Senators offer any special advantage to becoming great presidents, do they, President Dole or President Kerry?

The Democratic Party, for whichever candidate it nominates, is losing ground every day that Hillary Clinton is telling America that she and McCain have the most experience. On the other hand, maybe she's looking to be McCain's running mate. She'd certainly have a much greater chance of taking over the presidency during his administration than if she ran with Obama.

Sunday, February 17, 2008

Nothing Unusual

There is nothing unusual about George W. Bush overriding the U.S. Constitution to increase power and control over money and life itself.

There is nothing unusual about George W. Bush protecting corporations over people.

There is nothing unusual about George W. Bush showing contempt and disrespect for the bottom 99 percent of the U.S. population.

There is nothing unusual about George W. Bush ignoring the rule of law.

There is nothing unusual about George W. Bush not caring about freedom and liberty.

There is nothing unusual about George W. Bush terrorizing his own country by promoting weakness, hatred, and fear of outside terrorism to accomplish the above. 

What is unusual is when all of the above statements come together in one act. It became clear this week when George W. Bush actually stated his intention to veto FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act designed to actually protect Americans against acts of terrorism, if Congress didn't also grant immunity for past criminal acts carried out by phone companies at the request of Bush.

Mind you, the FISA bill doesn't expire until August. So why is he throwing a tantrum about it now? Because the immunity for criminal behavior expired yesterday.

He's actually willing to create a greater threat of terrorism against the United States because he's not getting immunity for his business criminal buddies having broken the law at his command. He's doing it by telling (i.e. lying to) the American people by saying holding up immunity of these past criminal activities helps terrorists win, and. by golly, he'll actually help terrorists win just to prove it.

The Republican Congress made a big show of storming out of Congress (after the media had assembled their cameras, naturally) so they wouldn't have to do their job of checks and balances against their savior, George W. Bush. It also helped that they were scheduled to vote on contempt charges against John Bolton and Harriet Miers for ignoring Congress' orders to testify before them. Imagine - two reasons for Republicans in Congress to show their cowardice at one time.

And what was the law the corporate criminals broke the Republicans favor? They spied on American citizens, collected email, telephone, text messages, web activity, and every other bit of information they could find by peering into the private thoughts of Americans, recorded it, and refuse to destroy it or turn over this illegally-obtained information to anyone.

They stole our privacy and they don't want to give it back. But most of all, they don't want to be held responsible for their criminal activities - even it if kills us.

I can't believe this is what Americans wanted to vote for in 2000 and 2004.

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Recent Abominations of the Radical Right

John McCain - Last November, John McCain sponsored an anti-torture bill that came up for vote this week in the Senate. McCain was tortured himself in Vietnam, and spoke out against torture until his meeting with Bush in 2003 when he emerged a Bush-loving neocon through and through. Still, in the interest of clarification, he pushed through this piece of legislation republicans widely opposed.

This week, John McCain voted AGAINST the exact bill he himself sponsored just a few short months ago. It's time to crown him the Pander Bear for not even having the courage to vote for his own bill because he wanted to prove that he, too, can be a pawn of the radical right.

Republican Gun Nuts - Six students at Northern Illinois died this week after a student off his medication for mental illness brought three guns - that despite his mental medical condition were legally purchased, owned, and registered - onto campus and opened fire on students. Here's a recap of recent similar incidents.

June 2000 - University of Washington, Seattle - Two dead.
August 2000 - University of Arkansas - Two dead.
May 2001 - University of Pacific Lutheran - Two dead.
January 2002 - Appalachian State School of Law - Three dead.
October 2002-  University of Arizona Nursing College at Tucson - Four dead.
May 2003 - Case Western Reserve University - One dead from a seven hour shooting.
September 2006 - Shepherd University shooting - Three dead, father and his two sons.
April 2007 - University of Washington, Seattle (again) - Two dead.
April 2007 - Virginia Tech University - 32 dead.
September 2007 - Delaware State University - One dead.
October 2007 - University of Memphis - One dead.
December 2007 - LSU - Two dead.
LAST WEEK - Louisiana Technical College at Baton Rouge - Three dead.
THIS WEEK - Northern Illinois - Six dead.

This doesn't even include the wounded or maimed for life. I'm only including colleges, not high schools or student shootings at malls.

Northern Illinois had a plan for this type of situation. It was implemented as well as it could have been, which means this was the best possible outcome under the circumstances.

So what was the radical right's response to this horrible tragedy?

THEY SAID THAT WE NEED TO GET MORE GUNS ON CAMPUSES. They said that if more guns were carried by more students, then that would solve the problem.

I can't believe this is what Americans wanted to vote for in 2000 and 2004.

Sunday, February 3, 2008

And now, fighting out of the blue corner...

Wow, what a difference a week makes. South Carolina and Florida primaries plus a debate by each party has defined the presidential race as no other week has so far. And next week may prove almost as significant with 22 states voting on Super Tuesday.

DISCLAIMER - I am currently a candidate for the office of Democratic State Central Committee in Louisiana - District 82 - to be elected February 9, 2008 in conjunction with the Louisiana Presidential Primaries. I have already been elected by default to the office of Democratic Jefferson Parish Executive Committee.

This past week saw the expected dropout of Rudy Giulliani on the republican side, and the unexpected dropout of John Edwards on the democratic side.

Giulliani, running for President of 9/11, came in a distant third in Florida. He spent more money per delegate earned (two in all) than any other candidate in history. John McCain’s slim victory over Mitt Romney gave him all of Florida’s delegates by the republican’s rule of winner-take-all. That makes McCain almost a sure thing as the republican nominee. He’ll likely sew it all up this week in the Super Tuesday primaries.

John Edwards’ problem was one of being ignored by the media at large compared to his more well-heeled opponents. Although it’s ridiculous in this or any other day and age to judge a candidate on the basis of race and gender, the media likely found it hard to consider the one white male among the final three candidates to be a candidate of change, and did not cover his campaign as much as it did the other two.

THE BLUE TEAM – the Democrats

Their debate Friday evening in Los Angeles was the greatest debate I’ve ever seen in my lifetime. Never before have issues been really debated in such detail one by one. The night before, the four republicans spoke, at their request, for a reduced 90-minute session. The two democrats, on the other hand, sat and discussed substantively for the full two hours CNN wanted. It was seen by a record number of viewers.

Hillary Clinton – If she had a different last name, she wouldn’t be so hated by conservatives. The fact that republicans mention her so much more often indicates that this is the candidate they prefer to run against. In fact, she has voted with the republicans quite a lot. Clinton voted for the Iraq War Resolution, every Iraq funding bill, and the Kyl-Lieberman resolution on Iran. She voted for both Patriot acts and the nominations of Supreme Court nominees John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Despite all this, the right-wing slime machine propagandizes her as a liberal. She’s no Mary Landrieu or Joe Lieberman type of democratic conservative, but she’s not that far off in many cases.

Her explanation for the initial Iraq vote is, “If I knew then what I know now,” but not ever saying it was a mistake. Clearly, it was a vote for Bush to invade and she wanted to stay on the popular side of the resolution.

On the other hand, Clinton has been unfairly judged for once having sat on the board of Wal-Mart. She did so at a time that Sam Walton was still alive and the theme of Wal-Mart was “Buy American.”

Despite a conservative voting record, Clinton brings some great strengths. She is still the front-runner in the campaign. Her name recognition and the backing of her spouse, a popular former president, is a plus. Neither she nor he will back down from a fight. She will not be “swift-boated” like John Kerry was in 2004.

Her domestic agenda is also stronger on healthcare where she realistically doesn’t promise universal healthcare in the first term, but looks to achieving that goal by the second. She stands for negotiating drug prices for Medicare and expanding electronic records and the Family Medical Leave Act.

Clinton is strong on her energy policy to cut tax breaks for oil companies (Exxon made $41 billion last year – an all-time record), and cutting their other subsidies.

On the minus side, besides being weak with her conservative voting record on Iraq, she also hasn’t gotten very specific on her economic platform. Instead, she has outlined goals and principles such as stabilizing social security, becoming more independent from foreign oil, balancing the budget, and returning to the tax structure of the far more prosperous Bill Clinton years.

Her immigration stance has also been conservative in calling for building a security fence with Mexico, but centering that by also helping undocumented workers find a path to citizenship.

She has oodles of money and has the delegate lead because she has the most “super” delegates, the independent ones not tied by primary and caucus voting to one candidate. In other words, that lead could reverse itself against her if the momentum shifts.

Barack Obama – The 20th century had three great orators – Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. Barack Obama is the first great orator of the 21st century. He is electrifying in front of large crowds whereas Clinton is better in more intimate settings.

Obama and Clinton tend to be strong in different areas.

Obama spoke out against the Iraq war in 2002. He calls for combat troops to leave Iraq by March 31 and calls for a phased in redeployment to other parts of the Middle East to conduct counterterrorism operations.

He has specifics to his economic platform calling for tying the minimum wage to inflation and spending $250 million on public-private business “incubators” to help entrepreneurs create start-up companies.

On immigration he doesn’t back the republican proposed partial-fence. He wants more border patrols utilizing more advanced technology, and to require employers to verify workers’ immigration status.

On energy, he calls for a four percent per year increase in fuel efficiency and a “cap and trade” system. This gives industry the choice of cutting carbon emissions, or helping the country raise money for new energy programs. He backs increased research into nuclear programs, but stops short of calling for building new nuclear power plants. He wants 20 percent of America’s energy needs met by renewable sources by 2020.

On the weaker side, Obama’s healthcare plan is not universal, but it does call for reform to the private insurance market to promote competition in pricing and quality. It would have a national plan to insure those without workplace or private insurance, and guarantee insurance for children.

Domestically, Obama’s voting record has been slightly more conservative than Clinton’s. This, he says, will allow him to reach across the aisle to be more of a unifier. It may be a disadvantage, as a relative political newcomer, to take that stance. He is less experienced in tough campaigns than Clinton and may be less inclined to take the fight back against republicans when they begin smearing him. And his spouse will certainly not have the clout of Bill Clinton to help team up against attacks.

Obama leads Clinton in pledged delegates, truly has the momentum following a big win in South Carolina, and just raised more than $30 million in January alone so he, too, has oodles of money. He also has more donors from which to tap again than Clinton. Republicans don't speak as much about Obama leading one to believe they are far more afraid of him.

On the other hand, Obama doesn’t have Clinton’s name recognition; and, when the right-wing slime machine does speak of him, they love to emphasize his middle name, “Hussein”, and lie about his Christianity to appeal to bigoted, uneducated conservatives. Prejudiced Americans are also more likely to be anti-African American than anti-woman. Obama’s voters are younger than Clinton’s, an age group that doesn’t go to the polls as much as older voters. Obama also trails in large amounts to Clinton among Hispanics.

SUMMARY – Both candidates are brilliant, charismatic, and “alive”, especially compared to the republican frontrunner. Could they run on a ticket together? Yes, if Obama wins, but not likely if Clinton wins. I think she has Bill Richardson on her short list.

Just dropped out – John Edwards took an anti-corporatist position on the issues, and brought to the fore the issue of poverty by uniting the country into his populist message of “One America.” He was also the only candidate to make the rebuilding of New Orleans a central campaign issue. I did not expect him to drop out before Super Tuesday, but he decided to put the uniting of the party and the country before his own ambitions by allowing that big voting block day to help prevent a brokered convention. He spoke to both Clinton and Obama so they could assure him they would keep his central programs important in their campaigns as well. Both spoke highly of Edwards at the recent debate. Edwards has not yet endorsed another candidate.

I hardly knew ya' - Dennis Kuncinich was the most left-wing of the candidates, and made even less of an impact into this year’s race than he did in 2004. He has not made an endorsement, but in Iowa asked his supporters to consider Obama as a second choice.

Bill Richardson was the most widely experienced candidate (governor, congressman, ambassador, cabinet member) in the field as well as the only Hispanic. He has not made an endorsement, but is very close to the Clintons. Some feel his candidacy was for the Vice-President’s spot all along.

Chris Dodd and, especially, Joe Biden, were the older and more centrist candidates in the race, but didn’t excite many voters. In that way, they were the Democratic Party’s version of John McCain. Biden was especially intelligent in explaining Congressional votes since the democrats won a razor-thin, but non-veto proof majority in 2006.

Mike Gravell… wait, he’s still in it - officially. He has long since suspended campaigning, he just didn’t tell anybody. Apparently, no one noticed.

WINNER – Clinton has the advantage in Super Tuesday states, but Obama will keep this very close, generating enthusiasm and lots of money. If Obama does well on Super Tuesday, that may indicate a momentum shift he can ride to the nomination. A large voter turnout helps Obama. The surest prediction is that one of these two will be our next president. Democratic voters are far outnumbering republican voters in states that have already gone to the polls.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

And now, fighting out of the red corner...

I know it’s been awhile, but now that we’re in the heat of the election season, it’s time for me to jump back into the blogosphere.

DISCLAIMER - I am currently a candidate for the office of Democratic State Central Committee in Louisiana - District 82 - to be elected February 9, 2008 in conjunction with the Louisiana Presidential Primaries. I have already been elected by default to the office of Democratic Jefferson Parish Executive Committee.

In case you missed it, we’ve got a presidential election going on around the country. Here’s a synopsis of who’s who. Like they say in baseball, you can’t tell the players without a program.

THE RED TEAM – the Republicans

John McCain – Lots of problems with this guy. His 72 years would make him the oldest elected president in history. His temper is also well known. But his biggest drawback is that he’s running on a platform of continuing Bush’s policies to the letter. He wants to continue borrowing over $340 million a day from China so we can stay in Iraq. He has stated that as far as he’s concerned we might be there another 100 years. He said in the recent Florida debate that he knows of no general, including General Petraeus, who doesn't think we can't sustain ourselves in Iraq indefinitely. Actually, General Petraeus said a year ago the army was stretched and straining. Just last month Army Chief of Staff General George Casey said we're deploying at unsustainable rates. Sorry Mr. McCain, but that was incredibly wrong.

His former “maverick” image keeps him from being among the favorites of the radical right, but that image really disappeared after a couple of years of Bush’s first term when he suddenly gave in to Bush’s torture demands almost as suddenly as if he’d been tortured into it himself. Maybe we should check the White House basement for pods. In any case, he voted against Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy TWICE, but he now wants to make permanent what he previously didn’t even want to make temporary. As Paul Begala recently said, it’s sort of like promising to marry a person you wouldn’t even date.

He also stands out as the only republican who is pro-immigration, which keeps the radical right punditry from backing him. He once SPONSORED Campaign Finance Reform in the Senate, but has not agreed to limit himself to matching federal funding for the election.

He also pretty much plays up to his audience, no matter their issue. He’s been an Episcopalian all his life, but upon speaking to a group of evangelicals, said he’s been Baptist for many years. Who knew? Certainly no one on this planet did.

Mitt Romney – This is the stereotypical rich, country-club republican. If he wins the republican nomination, they may have to change their symbol from the elephant to the panda bear – or, perhaps that should be spelled, “pander” bear. This guy changes his stance more often than Senator Larry Craig.

Who wakes up at age 55 to completely reverse their positions on everything from a woman’s reproductive healthcare choice to marriage between same-gender couples except someone who wants to pander to a particular audience when beginning a new campaign?

He is, by far, the most hated person running for president. The other candidates despise him as being a look-down-his-nose-at-you type of snob.

He is also, by far, the wealthiest person running for president. His worth is estimated between 500 million and 750 million dollars. Why anyone would ever give this man a penny is beyond me. All he has to do is reach into his wallet to fully fund his run for the White House. He has a history of buying up companies, selling the pieces off to make great profits, then laying off some workers and cutting back the others’ pay and benefits. So much for this guy improving our economy.

His Mormon religion turns off the fundamentalists who don’t believe in anything so tremendously different from their Bible.

He has made more misstatements than anyone. This former governor of Massachusetts made an analogy to the PATRIOTS winning the World Series (the Boston Red Sox won; the Patriots are Boston's football team). He said his sons helping him campaign for president was the same as others’ sons fighting in Iraq. He used to say he and his father marched with Martin Luther King in Detroit. This election cycle that changed to just him saying he saw his father marching with King in Detroit. When it was revealed that Romney’s father wasn’t in Detroit when King marched there, he changed it to his having seen his father as having marched with King philosophically, but never meant to suggest he saw it with his own eyes. This is from a Mormon whose religion considered black people to be subordinate to white people. He and his wife also laughed about abusing his dog by strapping him in a cage to the roof of the car when driving on an extended road trip.

Speaking of his father, who was a governor that once ran for president himself, Romney has tried to portray himself as a Washington outsider. Romney's mother also once ran for Michigan senator. Somehow the Washington outsider shoe just doesn’t fit any way you look at it.

Ron Paul – A former libertarian whose supporters are crazily enthusiastic, and I mean that in a sincerely complimentary way. “Ron Paul revolution. Give us back our constitution.” They certainly have the best chants, if not the best chance.

Paul is the only republican candidate telling the truth about why we got attacked on 9/11 (because religious extremists felt that the USA building of the now-torn-down Prince Sultan air base in Saudi Arabia was an invasion of their holy lands), that we need to get out of Iraq now, and that the people of the USA deserve to have their freedoms reinstated. He is not well-liked by the other republican candidates, either.

Unfortunately, Paul is also a candidate with a history of bigoted writings filled with racist white supremacy arguments in favor of segregation. He doesn't want anything to do with the United Nations, doesn't want government regulating business practices of any sort, and has pretty much taken an isolationist stance in world affairs.

Rudy 9iu11iani – Running to be President of Florida. He has taken the unusual stance of ignoring all prior states just to win Florida. After a string of sixth place finishes everywhere else, he is, as of this writing, running third in Florida polls. Former democratic candidate Joe Biden had the best line of any candidate to date when he said of Giulliani that every sentence uttered by the former mayor has three things - a noun, a verb, and “9/11”.

If he doesn't win Florida, he won't have a chance. He’s not endorsed by the Firefighters, or First Responders, or even the major newspaper of his own city for the republican primary. He’s not even endorsed by his own children! His public relations firm still today works for U.A.E. who sponsors terrorist acts against the United States. He used tax dollars to chauffer around his then-mistress in the Hamptons. His right-hand man is involved in illegal activities with the mob. Like Romney used to be, he’s in favor of a woman’s reproductive healthcare choice, and marriage between same-gender couples. He’s also considered a bully and one of the meanest candidates in the race. He also has a particular penchant for crossdressing. These kinds of activities tend to not promote the full backing of republican voters. His southern campaign manager is Senator David “Prostitution, not Constitution” Vitter, and, inexplicably, has the endorsement of Pat “Christian Broadcast Network” Robertson. How’s that working out for you, Rudy?

Mike Huckabee – Until Fred Thompson dropped out of the race, he was the second dumbest candidate for president. Congratulations, Mike. Now you’re number one. A Baptist minister, Huckabee does not believe in evolution. I wonder how he feels about gravity and photosynthesis.

The radical religious right likes him, but almost no conservative pundit does. He's charming, but whenever he opens his mouth about foreign affairs he sticks his foot right in it. The recent republican debate in Florida produced this gem from Huckabee about Saddam Hussein’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction: “It doesn't mean they weren't there. Just because you didn't find every Easter egg didn't mean that it wasn't planted.” The “Easter Egg” reference does tend to downplay the lies and extremely costly nature of a war based on false statements. Doesn’t this also somehow harken back to George W. Bush’s horribly offensive joke at the Correspondent’s dinner a few years ago where he’s looking around the oval office asking where those weapons of mass destruction are hiding?

It got worse after the debate when Huckabee was asked to explain that comment. He said he meant that Saddam Hussein probably moved them out of the country to Jordan before the inspectors found them. Jordan? JORDAN??? Even among those who believe this theory of moving the weapons out of Iraq, the country in question was SYRIA. Oh well - Jordan, Syria - they’re all the same to Huckabee. Sort of how Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are the same as Iraq to George W. Bush.

His son was also accused of abusing and killing a dog while at summer camp. This is probably the only thing he has in common with Mitt Romney.

I hardly knew ya’ – Fred Thompson was absolutely the dumbest and laziest candidate in recent memory. The pundits of the radical right loved him.

Duncan Hunter had the endorsement of Ann Coulter. How’d that work out for you, Duncan?

Sam Brownback and Tom Tancredo don’t believe in evolution, either. Tancredo was running on the one issue of immigration (i.e. prejudice is good when it’s against Mexicans), so he was the anti-McCain - big with the "keep-out-the-furiners" crowd, but no one else.

Alan Keyes… wait, he’s still in it. They just don’t allow him to be seen nor heard from anymore.

WINNER – Close between Mitt Romney and John McCain, who really don't like each other. Romney can get the backing of the rich, radical right. He’s hateful enough of the poor, women, foreigners, and other minorities. The fundies will say he’s at least a Christian – albeit of some weird sort. He’s young enough to handle the office and, now at least, has their position on denying women their reproductive healthcare choices and opposing same-gender marriage.

McCain doesn’t sufficiently hate Mexicans to satisfy most republicans, and, at one time, didn’t fall into complete lockstep with the neocon agenda. But McCain does now. He also loves borrowing money from China to be paid back by our children and grandchildren, plus interest, to spend, along with American blood, on Iraq for at least as long as he lives. McCain has the clear momentum right now, but Romney has unlimited money to spend. It's not the betting favorite, but I think Romney still has a shot if he wins Florida. That will be tough considering the Florida governor, Charlie Crist, has endorsed McCain and may very well be his V-P running mate.