|
Blogging to the attention deficit generation |
Hello All,
I am in Hawaii on the painfully beautiful island of Kauai, looking into this "states" independence movement. I am getting some good stuff out here and will resume blogging on this and other topics June 4, 2008. Internets don't come cheap in these parts, so, until then, keep fighting the good fight...
Nauseated by American flags, lapel-pins, and anthems? Has this campaign season driven you to contemplate what it would be like to live abroad... forever? Do images of large crowds of Americans placing their hands over their chests and mindlessly reciting a pledge of allegiance to an amorphous land-mass remind you of goose-stepping morons?
Well... me neither. But Flag of Your Choice gives you the chance to change the whole thing around anyway. With hundreds of flags to choose from, you can see John McCain and Barack Obama attempt to blather their ways to the White House in front of the flag of your choice.
Go check it out. It's a fun twenty-three second break from the monotony of everyday life.
 |
| My creation at FlagOfYourChoice.com: John McCain in front of the Iranian flag and Barack Obama in front of the North Korean flag |
We have forgiven you fawning over the fairness of Fox News while they were still calling you a murderer.
...
We have forgiven you quoting the electoral predictions of Boss Karl Rove.
...
We have forgiven you the 3 a.m. Phone Call commercial.
...
We have forgiven you President Clinton's disparaging comparison of the Obama candidacy to Jesse Jackson's.
We have forgiven you Geraldine Ferraro's national radio interview suggesting Obama would not still be in the race had he been a white man.
...
We have forgiven you for boasting of your "support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans"
...
We have even forgiven you repeatedly praising Senator McCain at Senator Obama's expense, and your own expense, and the Democratic ticket's expense.
In case you missed Keith Olbermann's volcanic reaction to Senator Clinton's Freudian gaffe yesterday, feast your eyes on one pissed off white boy:
For those of you not aware, Senator John McCain has dumped the support of two radical and psychotic pastors whose support he sought on the path to the GOP nomination. For those that missed it, the Washington Post reports:
Sen. John McCain on Thursday repudiated the presidential endorsement of the Rev. John Hagee after learning about a sermon in which the megachurch pastor from San Antonio declared that God allowed the rise of Adolf Hitler because it resulted in returning Israel to the Jewish people.Sticking with the "rejection Thursday" theme at Camp McCain, he dealt another blow to radical right:The Arizona Republican's decision to distance himself from Hagee came after months of mounting criticism, particularly from Roman Catholics, over his acceptance of Hagee's endorsement in late February. Hagee has called the Catholic Church a "false religious system" and a "false cult system" and has suggested that the church played a role in the Holocaust.
After rejecting the three-month-old endorsement of televangelist pastor John Hagee on Thursday because of newly reported comments Hagee made about Jews and the Holocaust, Republican presidential candidate John McCain also rejected the endorsement of Ohio preacher Rod Parsley, who has said that Islam is inherently violent. "I believe there is no place for that kind of dialogue in America, and I believe that even though he endorsed me, and I didn't endorse him, the fact is that I repudiate such talk, and I reject his endorsement," McCain told the AP.Here is a headline from the Arab press:
Al-Riyadh (Saudi Arabia): McCain seeks support of hateful pastor who insults the prophet and religion – Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain called for the support of an evangelist who calls for destroying Muslims and describes Prophet Muhammad as the "spokesman for Satan's evil conspiracy." McCain sought the support of this Zionist pastor of Ohio, Rod Parsley. In a campaign speech in Cincinnati, McCain described Parsley as "one of the great leaders of America, a moral compass and spiritual guide."This is far worse than the Reverend Wright pseudo-fiasco. For starters, McCain sought these two men out, as a 70 year old adult, for the sole purpose of political gain. He has no spiritual connection with either of these clerics, and that makes the behavior all the more whoreish. To this point, McCain went on to say:
I have said I do not believe Senator Obama shares Reverend Wright's extreme views," McCain said in the statement. "But let me also be clear, Reverend Hagee was not and is not my pastor or spiritual advisor, and I did not attend his church for twenty years." He added: "I have denounced statements he made immediately upon learning of them, as I do again today.That's right. You sought out religious figures solely for the purpose of political booty. While McCain is not alone in such behavior, such behavior is deplorable and against the spirit of the U.S. Constitution and the very idea of religious sanctity. Not to mention this sort of behavior is part of reason of why the American political system is floating in the toilet.
I think it is useful to try and see ourselves as other parts of the world see us...thus I post this clip from Russian Television:
I like the guy that comes on at 2 minutes, 21 seconds, and how they portray him...
While expansive data mining programs meant to find potential terrorists and criminals have long been goals of our law enforcement and intelligence agencies, futurist, science fiction writer and BoingBoing.net blogger Cory Doctorow eviscerates our culture of political fear mongering in a new column for the Guardian, The odds are stacked against us - Our dangerous statistical ignorance simply by crunching the numbers as to these programs' effectiveness."Statisticians speak of something called the Paradox of the False Positive. Here's how that works: imagine that you've got a disease that strikes one in a million people, and a test for the disease that's 99% accurate. You administer the test to a million people, and it will be positive for around 10,000 of them – because for every hundred people, it will be wrong once (that's what 99% accurate means). Yet, statistically, we know that there's only one infected person in the entire sample. That means that your "99% accurate" test is wrong 9,999 times out of 10,000!
Terrorism is a lot less common than one in a million and automated "tests" for terrorism – data-mined conclusions drawn from transactions, Oyster cards, bank transfers, travel schedules, etc – are a lot less accurate than 99%. That means practically every person who is branded a terrorist by our data-mining efforts is innocent."
Shocking absolutely no one, House Minority Leader John Boehner is a complete hypocrite. In a piece for the Politico, Boehner's wiretapping stance draws ire, Chris Frates details how Boehner and lawyers representing him against Representative Jim McDermott in an illegal wiretapping case reaped a million dollar reward even as Boehner has vocally sought to squash Electronic Frontier Foundation and ACLU suits against telecoms who are widely accepted to have acted illegally in wiretapping Americans without a warrant at the behest of the Bush Administration.(12:39 AM EST) Oregon with 80% in:
| Precincts Reporting 80% | ||||
| Candidate | Votes | Vote % | Delegates | Projected Winner |
| Obama | 309,327 | 58% | 26 | Winner |
| Clinton | 221,834 | 42% | 18 | |
| Candidate | Votes | Vote % | Delegates | Projected Winner |
| Obama | 271,974 | 58% | 26 | Winner |
| Clinton | 196,313 | 42% | 18 |
| Obama | 249,545 | 58% | 18 | Winner |
| Clinton | 181,636 | 42% | 10 |
| Real-time Race Results: | ||||
| Candidate | Votes | Vote % | Delegates | Projected Winner |
| Obama | 225,221 | 58% | 10 | Winner |
| Clinton | 165,641 | 42% | 7 | |
| Real-time Race Results: (all times Eastern Standard) Precincts Reporting 11% | ||||
| Candidate | Votes | Vote % | Delegates | Projected Winner |
| Obama | 89,041 | 63% | 10 | |
| Clinton | 51,852 | 37% | 7 | |
Candidate | Votes | Vote % | Delegates | Projected Winner |
| Clinton | 458,955 | 65% | 33 | Winner |
| Obama | 209,763 | 30% | 14 | |
| Uncommitted | 18,027 | 3% | 0 |
| Candidate | Votes | Vote % | Delegates | Projected Winner |
| McCain | 142,854 | 72% | 0 | |
| Huckabee | 16,238 | 8% | 0 | |
| Paul | 13,439 | 7% | 0 | |
| Uncommitted | 10,629 | 5% | 0 | |
| Romney | 9,151 | 5% | 0 | |
| Giuliani | 3,126 | 2% | 0 | |
| Keyes | 2,138 | 1% | 0 |
Dear Illiterate Electorate --
The polls are closed in Kentucky and votes are being counted in Oregon, and it's clear that tonight we have reached a major milestone on this journey.
We have won an absolute majority of all the delegates chosen by the people in this Democratic primary process.
From the beginning, this journey wasn't about me or the other candidates. It was about a simple choice -- will we continue down the same road with the same leadership that has failed us for so long, or will we take a different path?
Too many of us have been disappointed by politics and politicians more times than you can count. We've seen promises broken and good ideas drowned in a sea of influence, point-scoring, and petty bickering that has consumed Washington.
Yet, in spite of all the doubt and disappointment -- or perhaps because of it -- people have stood for change.
Unfortunately, our opponents in the other party continue to embrace yesterday's policies and they will continue to employ yesterday's tactics -- they will try to change the subject, and they will play on fears and divisions to distract us from what matters to you and your future.
But those tactics will not work in this election.
They won't work because you won't let them.
Not this time. Not this year.
We still have work to do to in the remaining states, where we will compete for every delegate available.
But tonight, I want to thank you for everything you have done to take us this far -- farther than anyone predicted, expected, or even believed possible.
And I want to remind you that you will make all the difference in the epic challenge ahead.
Thank you,
Barack Obama
Congratulations Obama. I hope you slay that crusty goblin in the fall.
Poor white people in Kentucky prefer a very rich white woman over a somewhat rich black man.
Yawn.
This is like watching preseason football in the post season...
Stay tuned for Oregon, this could be an interesting night.
John McCain took another disingenuous and illogical jab at Sen. Barack Obama today:MIAMI, FL -- In the city that nearly half of the nation's Cuban
He went on to say that such a policy legitimizes corrupt and tyrannical governments.
Americans call home, McCain again today criticized Obama, saying that his
rival's willingness to meet with Raul Castro would send "the worst possible
signal to Cuba's dictators."
For starters, nothing about our Cuba policy has worked since before JFK was president. So McCain's status quo approach shows an absolute lack of understanding or imagination in foreign policy. It also shows that he will do or say anything to anyone in order to win. Fortunately for Obama he has experience against such an opponent, but I digress....
His speech got me thinking. Just last week, President Bush meet with the Saudi leadership. I got to thinking, "aren't they just as bad as the Cuban government?"
So I visited the Freedom House Organization, who compiles a database of countries and how they fare in regards to freedom of speech, assembly, suffrage, ect. It turns out that while Cuba is slightly worse off than Saudi Arabia, both countries near the bottom of their rankings. So then, why do we meet with them?
Too bad one can't run a car off of cigars...
...not in biology class. That's my reaction anytime I hear about Creationism still being taught in public schools. It's no longer shocking some still try to get around the many court decisions that would have seemed to have decided this issue. But, Wired's Science blog writes about a report that 25 percent of biology teachers around the country are still teaching Creationism, or some derivative like Intelligent Design, in public classrooms, and that they believe it's a viable alternate theory to evolution. Many in fact believe the scientific community accepts that these "alternate theories" are scientifically sound.
While this issue is nothing new, the final point is one of interest to Michael B. Berkman, Julianna Sandell Pacheco, and Eric Plutzer with their paper titled Evolution and Creationism in America's Classrooms: A National Portrait. While progressives have focused on the courts as the bulwark against religious fundamentalism crossing over into public schools for decades, the researchers show this is not enough. Nor should it be.
Many of the beliefs of these teachers are not merely set by their families and communities, but also by their own education in science - or lack thereof - as well. As such, Berkman, Pacheco and Plutzer put forth a no-brainer: Mandating that teachers actually need to have taken evolutionary biology as part of their accreditation. With exposure to actual evolutionary biology, and the scientific process, it would be much clearer for some what a theory actually is. While there are always hardliners, among the remaining 1-in-4 teachers who think it's okay to push their religious views on students and call it science, this is an important idea. While it's simple, there is no silver bullet that will forever resolve this issue, and this is a common-sense, practical step that should have been taken years ago.
This is very sad news. Hang in there old friend...
The data strongly suggests that the less money and education you have the stronger is the likelihood of a vote for Clinton. Political scientists and sociologists alike will examine this phenomena for years to come, but on the morning of the Kentucky and Oregon primaries, I thought a brief bit of anecdotal observation might be appropriate.
First off, a lower level of education and income must be understood in their proper context, as we eliminate black voters from that metric. Your income and education level will help predict your voting behavior only if you are white. For whites, these are the most important variables amongst the poor and uneducated. If you are poor, uneducated, and black, then your race becomes a greater indicator than your the other two variables.
So why does this matter? It matters because poor and uneducated white people are going to deliver big for Clinton. Race does play a part, but it might (and I stress the word might) not be as fundamental a source of causation than one might think. It is my opinion (or guess) that race is playing a larger role for black voters than it is for white white voters.* It is possible that the poorer and less educated you are, the more intoxicating something like a "gas tax holiday" might become. This makes sense. If your macro-economic literacy is limited, and what you understand is that gas is getting more expensive and that Clinton wants to make it cheaper than her message will better resonate with you. You are more concerned about saving 70 bucks this summer than someone who reads the Economist, a publication that costs more than 70 dollars a year. The more educated and farther from the poverty level you fall, the more likely it is you will understand the long term stupdity of Clinton's proposal, and be able to decipher it as exploitation of the desperate.
Thats why I say that race may be a more significant metric for poor and uneducated black voters, for they are just as desperate for economic relief. However, it is my opinion that racial justice is understandably still paramount to their lives, and that the election of Barack Obama is not going to necessarily bring that about.
But I digress...Here are some Bushisms:
Apparently our money is not only increasingly worthless, it is also illegal... a federal appeals court today found that our money is just plain not-fair. It seems that having all bill denominations printed on the same size puts blind people at even more of a disadvantage. So tear the stuff to shreds... you were only going to use it to pay for gas anyway.
Geraldine Ferraro (whom you may recall argued that Sen. Obama could never have made it this far in life if he were not black), has apparently been watching the 1995 film White Man's Burden, and has been confusing socio-fiction with reality. Of Obama, she now says:
I dug through the NYT story and couldn't find why she thinks he is sexist. I have never heard that charge before. Perhaps it is because he had the chutzpah to take down the most viable female contender to date? I don't see how that makes him sexist.
Ferraro, in the NYT story, terms Obama "terribly sexist." And, as a result, she says she may not be able to cast her ballot for him if, as anticipated, he gains the Democratic presidential nod.
This is a video and tune were put together by two Iraq vets, one of whom I know...many of the photos are first hand shots taken by the guys themselves:
Obama spoke to 72,000 in Portland, OR yesterday. Here are some photos:
For more please click here.
Here are a few classics from the early days of Internet(s) streaming. I remember trying to watch these with 56K...enjoy:
Some 300,000 of the 1.6 million US soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from the psychological traumas of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression or both, an independent study showed last month.
I don't know what to say. I should say something, but I am not sure what I can say about this:
Yesterday, I said that Obama needs to take this appeasement nonsense and use it to his advantage. He needs to light a fire under the GOP's giant ass.
Today he did just that.
Just a heads up...Sen. Obama is currently speaking to the press (11:30 pst) so if you are by a tube, tune in. He is looking very "presidential" and has offered to take McCain on anytime and anywhere to discuss foreign policy, of which Obama clearly has a good grasp. As I have heard mentioned before, if we selected our candidates on foreign policy experience alone, then Dick Cheney would be the obvious choice. Quality trumps quantity, and I when I think McCain, I don't think quality...
Note: We will be live blogging the Oregon and Kentucky primary all day and night this Tuesday.
But I digress....
As many of you have by now heard, President Bush took aim at Sen. Obama through an indirect jab by asserting that talking to one's enemies is a dangerous form of appeasement that leads to genocide:
Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as
if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,''
Bush said in an address to the Knesset today which drew repeated standing
ovations for his commitment to stand by Israel against all enemies. We
have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in
1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to
Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this
what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly
discredited by history.
This is not the message, overt or otherwise, that our leader should be delivering to the legislative body of one of our most important allies. Like Joe Biden said:“This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in the Knesset and make this kind of ridiculous statement.”
nge significantly when a new president is sworn into our nation's highest elected office. It is important that the candidates who seek to lead our country after President Bush define their objectives and what they plan to achieve not with vague language but with clarity.
