Party Political

Stupid Reasons To Fear Obama

2008-10-21T12:58:00.000-07:00

There’s a lot of talk about how Obama could be perceived as a scary individual, and therefore is not trustworthy of running our country. There is also a doubt as to whether or not he would offer our soldiers the respect they deserve, seeing as how he has never served in combat. But I don’t think just because he has never seen action on the battlefield is enough to say that he doesn’t value our troops. I would think that everybody in America supports our troops.

Then there’s that word play. Barack Hussein Obama. Hussein! “Barack sounds like Iraq!” “Obama is like Osama!” “You can’t say of abomination without Obama!” “The only difference between Obama and Osama is the BS!” “Obama Biden is just a few letters away from Osama bin Laden!”

But none of that really matters. If you watched the presidential debates, and many haven’t apparently, you can see that both Obama and McCain have a clear understanding of our current situation, what happened to get us here, and how we can improve our state going forward. But, there are key differences between McCain and Obama that make it obvious that Obama has an edge, in more ways than one. McCain tends to repeat himself, and when searching for new things to say, has more difficulty than Obama. Indeed, Obama seems to be knowledgeable on pretty much every political subject. When McCain tried to throw him a curveball, pointing out that Obama hadn’t mentioned the situation with vouchers in Washington, DC, Obama immediately replied and made it clear that he knew exactly what was going on there, and that he’d taken that into account in his previous statement.

Obama seems quicker on his feet, more knowledgeable, and less prone to using force to win an argument. There was a debate in which McCain had forcefully interrupted Obama, and talked over him. Obama acted calmly and rationally, and allowed McCain to proceed. So McCain may have “won” that moment by speaking loudly and continually, but when you weigh the ideas that each is expressing, it seems that Obama comes out on top. Perhaps this is evidence of a major difference between the two. Obama did interrupt McCain, or tried to interject rather, when McCain said things that Obama considered to be false. But Obama didn’t continue to speak and try to drown out McCain, whereas McCain had done that at one point to Obama. What if this means that McCain is more likely to use force to resolve a situation than ideas or diplomacy? And wouldn’t that mean that Obama is more for diplomacy and smart thinking, and less for unnecessary war? But what do I know.

Obama, JFK for the 21st Century

2008-10-06T11:34:00.000-07:00

I read a report a while ago speculating that if the economy were to take the center stage, a Democrat would likely win the Presidential election. On the other hand, if war and military concerns became more prevalent, the Republicans would likely win.

A few months ago McCain was doing great. Military concerns were of great importance. But now the economy is really hurting. Looks like Obama’s got a major chance.

Just this morning I was reading that the $700 billion bailout will apparently take a little while before it produces any helpful results. That delay by itself caused widespread doubt and other negative feelings that led to a drop in the stock market of around 500 to 600 points. The last time I looked at it, it was under 10,000. Around 9,800 or 9,700. Crazy.

I’ve also heard that there are fears America’s economic woes will lead to a cascade effect that affects many nations. So obviously Obama has his work cut out for him.

He certainly does seem a little bit like what I have heard of JFK, in that he is a highly inspirational leader. I hope he can live up to his image, and do everything he says he can.

It's All Up In The Air

2008-09-22T12:16:00.000-07:00

I hope the bailout works. I hope our stopgap solutions are enough. I hope they don't make things worse.

I'd read a while back that if the economy takes center stage, Obama would be likely to win. If war took the spotlight, however, McCain would be the stronger candidate.

Lately the news has been shifting quite quickly from huge story to huge story. From hurricanes, to Russia's aggressiveness, to Sarah Palin's experience, to the economy. Whew!

Let's see, what to worry about today... Nuclear War with Russia? Nah. Let's go with money.

I saw a story citing a guy's change in mental attitude based on the negative economic news we've been getting lately. This guy went out and bought a lottery ticket. "If I win, I won't have to worry..."

I'll bet everyone is concerned to some degree. Even lottery winners.

McCain Shot Down 5 Times - Daily Show

2008-09-08T11:57:00.000-07:00

I used to really enjoy "The Daily Show," but ever since "The Best F****** News Team" made its debut, the show's fun level has decreased for me. I know they're trying to be funny, but a lot of what they do seems awkward. It's neat when someone like Anderson Cooper is shown laughing and then saying, "I'm sorry," because he just ruined a bit in which one of the members of The Daily Show "pretends" to insult him. But I don't think it's nearly as funny when the actors go to a convention and bully regular people, who don't appear aware that it's just a gag.

I still think John Stewart's good, though.

Anyway, according to "The Daily Show," John McCain was shot out of the sky five separate times. The show used that information in a segment that seemed to be emphasizing how McCain wasn't/isn't really all he's supposed to be.

But I think if you can get shot down five times, and keep staying alive, you've got to be doing something right.

"Obama's VP Highlights Weaknesses, Not Strengths" - Duh

2008-08-25T10:26:00.000-07:00

I saw a headline in Yahoo! News about how Obama's choice of Biden for his running mate only emphasizes Obama's own weaknesses, and does nothing to highlight his strengths.

I thought that was a pretty lame idea for an article.

Obama is the candidate for change because he's new. And being new, he has a much shorter list of experience than the other guys. That means that we don't know what his strengths are.

If Obama were an economic expert, then Biden would emphasize Obama's financial prowess by providing contrast with his own military background.

In fact, anything that Obama has a strength in, that Biden doesn't, would automatically be highlighted by choosing Biden. People would say, "Obama chose Biden because Biden's good at X, and we all know Obama's good at Y."

It makes perfect sense to balance out the team's strengths. The only reason taking that action would ever highlight weakness is when the team captain doesn't have any strengths to be contrasted with.

So then, any new expert teammate just highlights how Obama isn't an expert in that teammate's specialty.

The point is, Obama could have chosen pretty much anyone, and that headline about "highlighting his weaknesses" would still have applied.

Obama in Afghanistan: The Real Story

2008-08-11T10:35:00.000-07:00

I got this email forwarded from the wife of a soldier:

From: Shapiro, Bonnie A Civ USAF ACC 23 WG/SEA
Date: 7/25/2008 7:45:35 AM
Subject: FW: Obama in Afghanistan

Hello everyone,
As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass
along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on
his visit to 'The War Zone'. I wanted to share with you what happened.
He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the
area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here
at Bagram.

As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and
didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the
General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty
much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work
out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing
basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to
thank them for their service.

So really he was just here to make a showing for the American's back
home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are
going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank
those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you.
I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the
Dallas Cowboy Cheer leaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to
be the President of the United States. I just don't understand how
anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that
he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and
our great country.

If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to
know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news
is all fake.

In service,
CPT Jeffrey S. Porter
Battle Captain
TF Wasatch
American Soldier

That message was provocative. But it's so easy to check online to see if it's accurate.

After quick search I found that CPT Jeffrey S. Porter later retracted his email, saying, "After checking my sources some of the information that was put out in my e-mail was wrong."

Snopes.com features accounts of other service men and women who met Obama and can attest to his friendly behavior. There are pictures backing them up.

There is also a "Department of Defense video [which] shows Senator Obama meeting, talking, and eating breakfast with U.S. troops in Afghanistan":

Wikipedia and the Army Times say pretty much the same.

According to Snopes, "Tales of prominent Democrats snubbing or acting rudely towards military and security personnel ... have been a common form of political rumor over the last few decades."

Globetrotter Candidates

2008-07-28T11:19:00.001-07:00

I think Obama has set a precedent that future Presidential candidates will seek to repeat. In traveling abroad, and apparently campaigning internationally, Obama has opened up a new era encompassing all nations in the consideration of America's next President.

I believe that after most mentions of Obama's trip in the media, the reporter or anchorman would add that McCain had done something similar a few months ago. And yet Obama got major coverage for it! It makes him seem like the hero of the world. But some people still believe McCain knows more about leading the country.

Last night while channel surfing, I saw Obama's face on at least 7 different networks. Pretty much within a five-minute period. Maybe he said something really important. But it struck me as possibly evident of a polarized media. ...Nah.

New McCain Ad: Nicely Done

2008-07-14T15:17:00.000-07:00

I saw an ad for the McCain Campaign the other day, and it hooked me. The music was great, the background information was solid, and the images were moving. The narrator was fantastic.

At the end, it said something like, "Don't hope for a better tomorrow. Vote for one. McCain."

Then the McCain logo came together swiftly. It was a pretty neat effect.

I enjoy seeing well-made advertising on television, especially when so many commercials seem pretty stupid.

Obviously the "Don't hope, vote," message was a swipe at Obama and his Hope-based platform. But based on the difference in speech quality between Obama and McCain, and the fact that Obama seems to prefer generalities while McCain deals in specifics, the ad seemed completely justified in its jab.

McCain Rules!

2008-06-30T10:33:00.000-07:00

I was watching a speech by John McCain the other day. I noticed something. Something big. Huge, even.

McCain was citing all kinds of ways he planned to fix every conceivable problem this country is facing. He rattled of solution after solution. And he almost hit the charisma peak that we all want to see. But not quite.

Obama, on the other hand, seems to make bland promises, without really saying how he hopes to accomplish his (and really, our) goals. But he is one heck of a speaker. He can rally up the crowd. But is that what we want? All bark and no bite?

So what if McCain doesn't have super charisma and the energy of youth? He's got experience, knowledge, and well-defined plans for how to make this country greater than ever.

McCain vs. Clinton vs. Obama vs. Homeless People

2008-06-14T13:19:00.000-07:00

I recently heard on The Daily Show that Democrats come up with no ideas, while Republicans come up with bad ideas, which Democrats then make worse.

I just got a political email dealing with something similar. In it, a Republican comes up with an idea, a Democrat copies it, and a second Democrat does nothing but speak about change.

Here's the full text:

"The Difference

John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama were walking down
a Washington DC street when they came upon a homeless man.

John McCain gave the man his business card and told him to come
to his office for a job. He then took $20 out of his pocket and gave it
to the man.

Hillary was very impressed, so when they came upon another
homeless person, she decided to help. She walked over to him and
gave him directions to the welfare office. She then reached into
John McCain's pocket and got out $20. She kept $15 for her
administrative fees and gave the homeless man $5.

When they came upon yet another homeless person, Barack told him
to "have hope...change is coming..." and gave him nothing.

Now do you understand the difference?"

SNL vs. Hillary Clinton

2008-06-02T11:03:00.000-07:00

I saw a 3-week old episode of Saturday Night Live a couple days ago, featuring the Indiana Jones Shia LaBeouf (as opposed to the Transformers one).

In that episode, Amy Poehler again portrayed Hillary Clinton, and really slammed her pretty hard. Poehler, as Clinton, talked about how Obama simply wasn't up to her standards. The qualities that Obama lacks, but Clinton possesses are apparently those of a sore loser with no ethical standards, and racist supporters.

Poehler-Clinton said Hillary was spiteful enough that if she didn't win, she wouldn't be super gung-ho about helping Obama win the General Election. But if she did win, Obama would be glad to help her, according to Poehler. Also, Hillary apparently stops at nothing, like playing the Gender Card, while Obama refuses to play the Race Card. Lastly, people who support Clinton are all racist (according to Poehler), but those who support Obama aren't.

This was really weird. I didn't know SNL favored one candidate over another. I thought they'd make fun of all equally. Even the audience seemed to look past Poehler's jokes and see her speech for what it really was - an endorsement of Obama.

But what really struck me as interesting was how most of what she said could have been flipped around and applied in reverse direction. She could have said that all supporters of Obama are racist, that Obama has played the race card in some fashion, subtly or not, and that he would be a sore loser. After all, speculating about a candidate's potential future actions leaves room for any conclusion. You could argue, "Oh, Hillary's no good because if she was ever in a hostage situation, and a crocodile was pointing a gun at her, she'd use the nearest child as a human shield." The point is that just because Poehler says Hillary won't (future tense) support Obama, doesn't mean that would happen.

It's so weird. I see stuff in different places highlighting one aspect of one candidate, when the other candidate seems to have (or likely has) the same characteristic. And yet the article or story treats their issue as being incredibly important. Like Yahoo.

Yahoo said, "Oh, wow, look everybody, Obama planned for the long haul, but Hillary didn't!" I would assume both candidates did pretty much equal planning, and just because a reporter doesn't get answers, doesn't mean those answers don't exist.

Like, "Hillary and co., did you guys plan way far ahead?"

"No comment."

"Hey everybody, she said, 'No!'"

I'll bet Hillary had some guy somewhere working on a long-term plan just in case any short-term fast-win goals didn't get met.

I keep hearing about why Obama is better, but it's not really concrete stuff. It's more like, "He's better because the general consensus says so, and here's some soft evidence." I'd like some hard evidence, and that's rare. It really comes from hearing each candidate speak, and seeing their actions. But most of the stuff has all been hearsay. I'm kind of tired of it.

And SNL's point seemed to be, "Hey, Hillary's bad, so who you gonna vote for? Only 1 option..."

Oh, guess they mean I can't vote for McCain...

Internet Ads Compare Obama to McCain

2008-05-19T15:35:00.000-07:00

A few months ago, it was Hillary vs. Obama, and a couple of times you'd see someone else like Huckabee or Edwards. What I'm referring to are the square blocks of ads that show Presidential candidates' faces and then ask a question. "Who will win? Click here!" A decent marketing tactic.

Anyway, the most recent one I've seen shows Obama on the left, smiling toward the right, showing his teeth, and McCain on the right, smiling toward the left, no teeth.

Obama looks friendly, but the shape of his face seems almost...evil. Sure, this has nothing to do with anything. But I think his ears and chin seem a tad longer than ideal.

Take a look:

Myanmar Cyclone Kills 22,000 - Truth?

2008-05-06T12:52:00.000-07:00

I saw the title of an article on Yahoo talking about how a storm killed 22,000 people in Myanmar. I didn't read the article. But I did have a thought.

What if someone nuked a city? And the cyclone story is a cover-up?

The reason my mind went into conspiracy-land was because there was an episode of Smallville on recently showcasing government lies. Clark Kent was experiencing an earth in which he'd never existed, where Lex had become President.

Lex Luthor told America that an enemy was launching nukes at us, so we had to retaliate. But no such enemy action had occurred. It was a sham, a lie in order to justify a preemptive strike by the U.S. against the enemy.

And with other stories like "Wag the Dog," it makes me wonder how much of "the truth" in the news we take for granted.

Honestly though, I figure the cyclone in Myanmar really did occur. I'd rather believe in the news than not. For all I know one of you reading this had firsthand experience with the horrific storm. I don't mean to offend.

Miles Dyson For President

2008-04-28T11:21:00.000-07:00

I was watching an episode of "House" on USA last night. On a side note, USA now has a green logo that appears in the lower right hand of the screen, like many other channels. Anyway, the actor who portrayed Miles Dyson in "Terminator 2" was going to run for President on "House" once he regained his health. He said he wouldn't win. House said why run if he wouldn't win? Dyson alluded to the idea that he would be running for a purpose other than victory. He wanted to create positive change by convincing as many people as he could that a black man could be the President.

That made me wonder what Obama's intentions are. I think he really could be elected. Maybe he was coached (or decided on his own) to continue the race as long as possible in order to convince as many people as possible that he, a black man, is a viable option for the Presidency. So even if he doesn't win, he'll go down in history as a door-opener for the black community. Awesome! He can't lose!

This makes me wonder, then, if it is appropriate to say, "Stop it Obama and Hillary!" I can understand Obama's goal, and Hillary's too. Why not allow them as much time as they need?

Hillary vs. Obama Seems Almost Scripted

2008-04-21T16:11:00.000-07:00

I was watching the news the other night, and the polling figures for some place came up. Hillary had around 49% of the people's favor, while Obama had 48%.

I thought to myself that this seemed almost like it was designed in such a way that a child could grasp it.

I mean the fact that a woman, who if elected would be the first woman President, and a black man, who if elected would be the first black President, are competing on such nearly perfectly even terms just seems like it's too good to be true. Like it was scripted. Cliché, even.

It's weird that after all these years of people wondering when we'd have a lady President, or a black President, we've got two terrific options all of a sudden, forced to compete against each other.

It's like making a movie about Batman vs. James Bond.

Quick Explanation Of US Electoral System

2008-04-16T14:08:00.000-07:00

Super quick!

The gist I get is that the system is unnecessarily complex, but definitely can be boiled down to a simple question of who has the most money.

Money can get you behavioral experts who coach you to be the person the citizens love. Money can pay for surgery and haircuts. Money gets you signs, ad time, good directors and actors for those ads, and maybe even undercover actors seeded among the citizenry in an effort to persuade the unsure.

[Candidate gets an idea from reading this -- "That's it! Covert political agents..."]

Hillary Being Bought Off?

2008-04-07T20:53:00.000-07:00

Not with money.

Hillary Clinton was recently telling a story about a woman and her problems with a hospital. Those problems led to the death of the woman and her unborn child.

The hospital claimed that Hillary's version of the story wasn't accurate.

Now we find that that is true, Hillary's story wasn't 100% correct. But the facts have come to light, and the situation described in the story is pretty much the same as it truly was in reality.

Hillary could continue telling the story with the newly updated details...

But the hospital asked her to stop. She said ok.

So, did the power and influence of the hospital cause Hillary to abandon communicating things to the public that are of public concern?

Could Hillary be manipulated while in office to keep secrets from us, and withhold information about situations that will become harmful if we're not kept in the know?

Or is she simply letting the media tell everybody else the rest of the hospital story?

Edwards No Go On VP

2008-04-04T20:46:00.000-07:00

I can't believe it. I was honestly expecting Edwards to return as a major player in the Democratic Party.

Sure, he was before he dropped out. And some people thought Obama and Hillary might team up.

But then they got to attacking each other, and Edwards seemed like he might be able to fill the role of VP should Obama win and reject Hillary, or should Hillary win and reject Obama.

He didn't specify who he supports (at least not at the time when I first heard about this). I think that's just because no one is on top yet. If he supports Obama and Hillary wins, that would weaken her nomination because the 3rd place Democratic candidate wasn't behind her. It makes sense for him to wait before "making up his mind."

Could he change his mind later and become VP anyway?

Hillary Dividing The Party?

2008-04-02T21:15:00.000-07:00

Obama said as far as he's concerned, she can run as long as she wants.

Bill Clinton said let's have some good old fashioned arguments, and that will strengthen the party. In fact, the Democrats are guaranteed to win.

Some of the media says that Hillary vs. Obama makes McCain stronger.

I saw a piece of internet art that insinuated Hillary pursuing the Democratic nomination to the very end would make the object of her desire irrelevant.

I wonder...

When John Kerry Ran, I Sought Obama

2008-03-31T20:28:00.000-07:00

Four years ago when John Kerry ran for President, I thought that none of the major candidates was really great. I wanted someone younger, someone more idealistic. Someone like Obama!

Now we have him, and yet there are serious doubts harbored by some as to whether he can really be counted on to represent America. After all, his name is Barack Hussein Obama. Barack sounds like Iraq (meaningless?), Hussein, the last name of Saddam, and Obama sounds like Osama. That's three in a row, an unlikely coincidence.

Could he be Muslim? Came out of nowhere, incredibly charismatic, idealistic. Willing to sell out?

I want to believe in him.

McCain and Romney Set Example For Clinton and Obama?

2008-03-28T01:45:00.000-07:00

I read that Romney is now helping McCain. Formerly, they were bitter rivals. Now they are working together in the hopes that their cooperation will further cement McCain's pull with Republicans.

Obama and Hillary haven't been too friendly with each other so far. They've been competing. Some say it is difficult to imagine any kind of union between the two once one establishes him/herself as the definite party leader. Still, seeing it work out between Romney and McCain, I'll bet a similar Democratic union is possible as well.

Here's a thought: What if the Democrats consistently fail when it looks like they're guaranteed success on purpose? Could it be a...Conspiracy?

"No dummy, for this reason..."

Oh, it's so simple. I just couldn't see it. Wait! You're part of the conspiracy too!

Hillary: Told To Lie, Lied On Own, Or Honest Mistake?

2008-03-26T17:02:00.000-07:00

She gave a speech. Said she visited a country and had to dodge bullets. Then a video surfaced. Showed her visiting that country. No bullets.

I recently saw a speech she gave regarding her previous claims. She said she had a different memory of the event.

I wish she would have gone into further detail. It makes since that you might get two different visits abroad confused. Maybe she had to dodge bullets in another country. What country, then? When? Is there footage?

Her just saying she had a different memory, and leaving it at that... it makes me think that maybe she originally decided to tell an outright lie. Or maybe she was told to. I figure when you're that high up politically, you've got coaches and managers left and right, planning everything out in advance for you.

It does make me question her. If she lied, then she's a liar. Can't be trusted. If she was telling what she believed to be the truth, then she has a faulty memory. In that case, how can we trust her to remember the information she needs in order to do her job well? If she was told to lie, then we can't trust her staff, her choice of staff, and again, we can't trust her because she willingly went along with it.

But Obama said some erroneous stuff to. I guess we can't trust anybody.

Is McCain A Secret Democrat?

2008-03-24T15:39:00.000-07:00

I heard somewhere that McCain used to be a Democrat. What if he secretly still is? What if he's running a campaign that bases itself on ideas similar to those of George Bush, but with enough individuality and change so as to make electing McCain seem like a good idea? What if some genius out there figured that if most of America would willingly reelect Bush for Term 2, then they'd probably go for McCain as a Republican in 2008?

What if he is elected President, and then reassumes his true identity? What would he do? Maybe he's a Super Democrat. Maybe he'll pull us out of Iraq in Day One, instead of leaving the doors of possibility open so wide that we might stay there for 10,000 years...

Obama Speaks, Plays On Emotions, Dictates Our Lives

2008-03-22T15:43:00.001-07:00

I was listening to Obama speak after Bill Richardson handed over his endorsement, and I found myself attracted to the ideas Obama was using. He basically spoke of change, how things were going to be different next year, that he was going to fix the economy, end the war, fix the energy crisis, and make things better in every conceivable way.

But from a logic standpoint, what is he really saying?

Things are bad.
I will fix them.
I won't say how.

And that doesn't seem fair. Or even believable, from a purely logical perspective. But Obama doesn't necessarily use logic to win support. After all, positive change is definitely an emotional issue.

We all so badly want someone we can believe in, since Bush has effectively let everyone down as far as they're concerned. And faced with all these problems, we're desperate for a solution.

For a second, I found myself afraid of what President Obama might do in office. During his speech, he mentioned the idea of telling us who we should be, and how this nation should be run. Sure, a Prez's job is to run the country, and sure, JFK told us we could all be better people than we were. But hearing Obama mention how he might one day dictate our lives... that just sounded weird.

He didn't go into too much detail. When you leave a statement like that general, it usually ends up being interpreted based on other factors. So I'm assuming all the fanatics behind him were giving him the benefit of the doubt, and assuming that him telling us who to be is really him inspiring us to be better.

But someone against Obama, who sees him as all talk and no walk, a puppet or pawn of hidden forces, might figure that when he says he'll tell us who to be, he means his Presidency will open up a can of Fascist, Totalitarian worms...

And that's scary.

New South Park: Britney Spears

2008-03-19T19:55:00.001-07:00

I just watched a brand new "South Park," featuring a story about Britney Spears. [SPOILER ALERT] It was told keeping her feelings in mind, and showcasing how cruel paparazzi and society in general can be. The continued negative media attention led to Spears' attempt at suicide on the show. She survived, and it was later revealed that the media coverage was an outright attempt to get her to kill herself.

Initially, the episode conveys the idea that most people are stupid in that they don't see or care about how their negative gossip stories affect Britney. Then later, it turns out there's a whole sinister plot with roots in human sacrifice.

In the real world, I think it's just human curiosity and fascination with lame stuff taken to a pretty sick extreme. I'm wondering if there should be government regulations regarding the right of the individual to be left alone by the media. Freedom of Speech should remain, but I'm thinking about guys with cameras stalking your car. That shouldn't be happening.