Whew! What a week!

Sorry I haven't posted, folks, but it's been a busy week where I work. I work in a university library, and this is finals week. We've been knee-deep in studying students, and it can get rather crazy-hectic during this week.

Plus, we've had more than our share of characters. I don't think these people would normally act in the unpleasant way that they do, but the stress of finals probably pushes them into behavior patterns that they normally wouldn't exhibit. Normally we try to be understanding of the pressures that they're under, but once in a while someone goes beyond what even finals-induced stress would bring out. Thing is, these kids need to learn that there are good ways and bad ways of handling stress, and that's part of what the college experience is about.

Today is the last day for finals, and we won't have near the number of studying students that we had on Wednesday, but they'll still be coming. And tomorrow, some will graduate. The ends of semesters are always the hardest part of my job, because we usually lose student workers to graduation. I get rather used to some of them, and when they move on, I miss them. It's part of the job, though, to help them prepare for that moment when they leave. Our job is to provide a work environment for them to learn from, so that they can take that experience out into the work force.

Most often, even those that have gotten pretty attached to working here will simply drop out of sight once they make the Big Leap. Sure, they may send an e-mail or three after graduation, but it's rare that they stay in touch after a few months. By then, they're at their new jobs and still settling in to make time to check in on us.

Once in a while - usually during Homecoming - we'll see some of those familiar faces. I'm always amazed at the changes they've gone through - especially in appearance. Back when they worked for us, they were used to dressing very casually, almost slobs in some instances. However, when I see them again, they are dressed very professionally. It's like I'm looking at a whole 'nother person, and in a sense, I guess I am. Even this one dude who had a beard, long hair tied back, and wore nothing dressier than a t-shirt, shorts and sandals virtually the entire time I knew him while an undergraduate returned some months later clean-cut and bare-faced. Mr. Liberal became Mr. Establishment!

Don't get me wrong - there are some bad eggs whom I'm glad are graduating, and hopefully they'll learn lessons out in the workforce that they apparently didn't learn with us. However, such students are far and few between - the exception, rather than the rule. For the most part, I like my student workers, and that's why the ends of semesters can be so difficult. Sometimes some go on to grad school and hang around a little longer - and once in a blue moon, some come back as employees of the university.

However, the vast majority move on and we never hear from them again. Once in a while I like to look at the yearbook from recent years and see if I can still remember some of them. Most often I do, although the further back it's been, the less I remember them and their personalities. That's just what comes from having known a parade of students that I've known in my time at the library. But each adds a little something to my life, and I hope that I've added a little something to theirs. If they're doing well in their new lives, then hopefully their experiences with us are part of the reason why.

Topic of May 2008: The Democratic Primary

I've been discussing the topic of the ongoing Democratic primary anyway, so I am going to make it official: May 2008 is going to be on that primary. Like the Energizer Bunny, the primary just keeps going and going and going.... No doubt both candidates – Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, in case you didn't already know – are beyond tired of it. But not me. I find it endlessly fascinating to watch the party of political correctness go out of its way contorting itself trying to please both of their traditional "victim's groups" of blacks and feminists. Sooner or later, the axe is going to drop on one of the candidates, and either the blacks or feminists are going to go away empty-handed and most likely bitter – even more bitter, actually, than the religion and gun clinging voters of Pennsylvania (I’ve gotten a lot of mileage out of that one comment from Obama. Ask anyone who knows me in real life).

In truth, the nomination is Obama's to lose. In order for him to lose the nomination, he'd have to have SO wild, outrageous and colossal an implosion that even his famed eloquence couldn't talk himself out of it. I don't see that happening; especially when Clinton makes so many foolish and amateurish mistakes of her own – like her now-famous line of dodging sniper fire in Bosnia. Had Clinton been conducting herself like a pro – especially, had she handled her campaign like her husband handled his - she most likely would be doing better than she is now. Clinton is where she is only because of the power and influence that her and her husband have over the party. Without that, she would have fallen faster than the Dallas Mavericks did in this year's playoffs (can you tell that I'm still upset about that?).

While I chide Obama about his gun-clinging statement and how arrogant that sounded, Clinton has failed to “close the deal” on a nomination that she assumed was hers because she is arrogant. She couldn’t imagine it going to anyone else – especially an upstart like Obama.Despite the fact that Obama pretty much has the nomination locked up, I still think that the process should go along as it’s supposed to - even if it ends up at the convention floor. The whole point of having "super delegates" was precisely to make a decision such an event. Well, that moment is here, so let's not deprive them of it. It's their own petard that they're about to be hoisted by. It's their bed that they made, and now they must lie in it. They need to walk the walk. And other such metaphors.

Howard Dean is trying to force either the super delegates to vote or one of the candidates to drop out, but he should stop doing that. He should let the people decide by allowing all the primaries to have their say (including Florida and Michigan), and he should let the process play out as it has been written. For him to be making such statements makes it sound like he's trying to change the rules midstream so as to save face.

Here's the problem with the super delegate option: That was really meant for times in which there are two white dudes to decide between. Having to decide between two black dudes or two white women probably would be only a little more difficult. In a situation of deciding between a black dude and a white dude, most likely the nod would go to the black dude - especially if it's someone as eloquent as Obama. That might also be the decision if it were the case between a black woman and a white woman.

To understand the reasoning of selecting the black candidate over the white candidate, you'd have to understand the term "white liberal guilt". White liberals feel that "due to the oppression that the African American race had endured in American history, we owe it to them to give the black candidate the nomination as one small means of making up for that evil time in which African Americans were enslaved. Granted, this won't make up for the many decades that the U.S. had institutionalized slavery, but it's a good start." So thus, in the instance of choosing between a black and white dude or a black and white woman, "white liberal guilt" says that you select the black candidate.

However, in this election season, there's an additional wrinkle at play here, and it's an aspect of “white liberal guilt” called “while liberal male guilt”. That is, just like the country owes African Americans various means of making amends for this country’s past sins, such is also the case when it comes to women. Did you know that the black man actually got the right to vote before women? Blacks actually had very, very limited voting rights early on, and gained even more rights after the Emancipation Act in the 1860’s. Women didn’t get the right to vote until the 1920’s – six decades later!

That, plus the fact that we live in a paternalistic, male-dominated society means that we – that is, the country – owes womankind for all the abuse and mistreatment that they’ve endured over the course of American history. So if there were ever a time that a female candidate (well, actually a female Democratic candidate, since Elizabeth Dole tried to run some years ago – but for that other party) ran for office, then we should support that woman as one way of making up for the sins of the past. Granted, this won’t make up for the many decades that the U.S has had institutionalized sexism, but it’s a good start.

Okay, that’s all well and good. And indeed such an occurrence has happened. Actually, such occurrences have happened, for not only do we have a black candidate for-whom-we-owe-the-chance-to-run, but we also have a female candidate, for-whom-we-also-owe-the-chance-to-run. DAMN! Why did this have to happen both at the same time??

Thing is, both the Obama and Clinton camps are saying that they'd rather be judged on the issues rather than about something that they have no control over. In fact, the Democratic Party would also say that their race and gender doesn't matter. However, it does. When it is all said and done, there is virtually no difference in the views between Obama and Clinton - they're both very left-wing Democrats. In fact, all that really matters for ANY Democrat running is that they are of a very left-wing philosophy. Thus, all that is left to decide between the two candidates is whether they want to appease the black vote or the feminist vote. A decision worthy of Solomon, to be sure.

So thus, we are now waiting to see what the Dems end up doing. Lately, it's looked more like a matter of whose campaign will implode first rather than who is going to make the better candidate. I don't envy the position that either of them are in right now. Well, Tuesday may help clear things up, or they may make things worse. Only time will tell. I, for my part, hope Hillary wins both primaries, because I just made the Democratic primary my topic of the month, and I'd hate to end it so quickly! GO HILLARY!

Barack Obama is equal opportunity after all!

It just occurred to me that Barack Obama is actually equal opportunity after all! Why do I say that? Well, so far he has thrown both his white grandmother and his black pastor under the bus! ;-)

I gotta reassess what I think of the man, now...

Picasso's "Guernica" in 3D

Check this out:

http://www.lena-gieseke.com/guernica/movie.html

It is Pablo Picasso's "Guernica" rendered in 3D. I see stuff in this that I didn't see in the original painting. VERY interesting.

Obama throws pastor under the bus

Barack Obama finally felt compelled to throw his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, "under the bus". No doubt Wright was just a tad miffed (and probably more than that) that Obama was previously trying to distance himself from him, which is mostly likely why Wright spoke out like he did earlier in the week. Wright's comments were enough that Obama finally had to cut ties with him totally. I can absolutely see Wright describing his recent experiences this way: "I have gone from sitting in the back of the bus to being thrown under it, and I'm not sure which hurts more."

Howard Dean: "Git 'er done!"

Howard Dean, party chair of the Democratic Party, wants either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race once the primaries are over. I say that this needs to play out like it's supposed to. Let the process settle this like it's supposed to.

Thing is, the Dems made the "superdelegate" system PRECISELY to settle issues like this. That the two candidates happen to both be representatives of the classic Democratic "victim's group" makes this all the more interesting, because the superdelegates are in the painful position of having to decide who gets the nod and who gets left behind.

What we have, then, is a classic case of one being hoisted by one's petard. The only way that this could have been set up any better is by having been written that way! To me, that's proof enough that there is a God! :-D

Clinton to Obama: Let's have a Lincoln/Douglas style debate

This is my 450th post of my blog. Just thought you'd like to know. ;-)

Hillary Clinton recently challenged Barack Obama to a Lincoln/Douglas style debate. The Obama campaign basically responded with "We've debated 21 times already - a primary record". If I were Hillary, I'd respond with something like "And you'll debate for a 22nd time, and a 23rd, a 24th, and a 25th time until the Democratic party has an official nominee. And to be mentioning a debate count almost comes across as whining. I say 'man up' and get down to it."

I believe that Obama should accept this challenge, because the voters no doubt have more questions now about him - largely due to stuff about him or people that he associates with that has raised questions about him and his character. Since he's asking us to vote for him for president, we have a right to know what we're getting. Also, because he is more articulate than Hillary, he could utilize this to his advantage. This could really turn things in his favor if he plays his cards right.

Also, he might as well get some practice in, because if he is the nominee, he'll also be debating John McCain - maybe even 21 times. He and his camp really need to stop mentioning how many times it's been - because we're bitter and we need some reason to stop clinging to our guns and our religion. So far he hasn't given us a reason yet to let go.

Pennsylvania primaries are today!

Today is the primaries for the state of Pennsylvania! Go out and vote. Vote early and vote often!

My hope is that Hillary Clinton wins, so that this contentious primary season can continue. While she is behind in the delegate count, she is not behind by much. She's given a very small chance of winning the nomination, but this is probably her only shot at this. I think she should see this out all the way to the party's national convention, if need be.

Hopefully by that time, the Democrats will see how futile and destructive their devotion to mindless political correctness is, and they will finally let it go and get back to being a real party again. So far, supporters of Barack Obama are still crying "racism" for virtually all criticisms of him, and the supporters of Clinton are still crying "sexism" for criticisms of her.

What this shows is that political correctness still has too strong a hold on the party, and that it still needs to be burned off. Thus, the solution is to keep at this primary season until even the Baracks and Hillarys can see that mindless political correctness is destroying the party. We might not get another opportunity like this to force the Democrats to see what PC is doing to the party.

And thus, I say, "Go, Hillary, Go!"

Barack Obama's favorite show?

I think I now know what Barack Obama's favorite show is. It's "King of the Hill". I say this after his comments at a fundraiser in San Francisco in which he referred to us regular folks who have been undergoing hard times as "clinging to guns and religion". Heh. That's funny. For him to say such a thing anywhere - but especially to a group of wealthy, like-minded individuals - suggests the possibility that he might view the show as a reference source for what "the rest of us" are up to now. Yep, we're just a bunch of Hanks and Dales and Bills and Peggys and Luanns! :-D

Hey, folks - check out this list of characters from King of the Hill and see which one you might be!

The Coming Storm: Poll of what's most likely to hit us next

So what worldwide disaster is most likely to hit us next? That's the topic of the new poll.----->

Will it be a world war? Or an epidemic like the 1918 flu? Or how about a financial disaster like the 1920's depression? Or - perhaps the long-prophesied effects of global warming finally come home to roost. What do you think? Vote in the poll, and if you wish, send me a comment and let me know what you think.

Blog news

One more class to teach tomorrow, folks. After that, I shall relate my experiences in that class. I've really enjoyed it so far. It's also the reason that I haven't posted as much. But I will post something either tomorrow or Thursday. Election stuff keeps coming up that I want to comment on!

New blog feature!

Check it out! ------------------------------>

Now this blog site allows the posting of polls!

Cool, eh?

I'll think of other polls to post at another time. In the meantime, enjoy!

Election news

Sorry I've been slow in posting, but I am still teaching a blogging class at this time. There is one class tonight, and the last one is next week. More on that at another time. Let's go ahead and hit one news item on the election.

Dr. Condolezza Rice once again denied rumors that she is interested in the VP nod from John McCain (who has not even publicly listed potential candidate). The articles I came across, though, said that she "left the door ajar" - suggesting that she might be interested if circumstances play out in the right way. I think that she would almost have to join McCain, or that he would have to at least select another woman or a male minority candidate, because otherwise the Dems are going to go non-stop with either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton being the "first black/female candidate" while pointing out that the GOP once again has "two white guys" on their ticket.

McCain has nothing but the election to lose and everything to gain by encouraging Dr. Rice to join the ticket. And what a historical moment that would be to have a black or female candidate on one ticket, and then a black AND female candidate on the other ticket. If Dr. Rice is indeed on the ticket, then it might make it that much more important for both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to consider sharing the ticket. What's that saying about politics making strange bedfellows? I think it would have to apply here.

Obama and Clinton need to stop defeatist talk

In this election season, we have had something unprecedented in our nation's history. Not only do we have a black candidate for office, we also have a female candidate. As with most elections, things have gotten tense and contentious at times. Each is trying to treat the other like a rival candidate - but not too much, because one doesn't want to be accused of racism on the one hand, and sexism on the other. And the GOP candidate keeps apologizing whenever he feels that one of his supporters made a comment that MIGHT possibly be construed as racist or sexist.

It's for this latter reason that conservative blowhard Rush Limbaugh has been conducting his "Operation Chaos: Rush the Vote", so that the two Dem candidates can rough each other up, because it's okay if they rough each other up, because each belongs to one of the Democratic Party's classical "victim's group" - namely, blacks and women. Limbaugh figures that if the GOP won't lay a finger on them, then the two Dems will have to "bloody" each other up. It's why his radio show has been encouraging normally GOP voters to vote in the Democratic primaries so as to keep Hillary Clinton in the race. I discuss Operation Chaos in another blog entry, so refer to that.

Anyway, there have been times when either Obama, Clinton, or some of their supporters have expressed their frustration with words along the lines of "Maybe this country isn't ready for a black/female president." Know what that is? It's defeatist talk. Both of these candidates need to realize something: Not just the black candidate, not just the female candidate, but BOTH candidates beat out white dudes to get to where they are! So HELL YEAH, people are ready for either a black president or a female president!

So they and their supporters need to shut such stupid talk up, because it comes across as whiny. Not only that, whichever candidate ends up losing will have to keep from saying "People turned me down because I'm black/female!" The reason for that is because, as the first representatives of their respective "victim's group", they need to lose with dignity. That is, they need to show that their "victim's group" is capable of handling their loss in a manner that suggests that "the people have spoken, thus the case is closed". No whining, no fussing that there was cheating or voter manipulation, or Rush Limbaugh messed them up, or any of that nonsense. As precedent-setters, they need to set the precedent on how to handle losing. And throwing tantrums isn't going to cut it!

Given the tone that the election has had so far, I don't anticipate a graceful exit from happening, but hey, at least I told them what to do.

Sports, continued

Last time I talked about football. Today it's basketball.

Locally, the Dallas Mavericks are close to not making it in the playoffs. They're one of the bubble teams that has to not only win, but depend on the other bubble teams to lose. Not only that, they are without Dirk Nowitski for maybe a few more games - games in which he is desperately needed. The Mavs started slipping after the Jason Kidd trade, and while it's easy to just blame Kidd, it's not necessarily his fault. Someone like Kidd is different from what the Mavs are used to, and his entry into the team is disruptive to team chemistry. Adjusting accordingly is going to take a while - maybe more than the games we have left in the season. Come post season - if we are in it - perhaps the Mavs are going to have to learn very quickly, or they're going to get bounced out faster than Eliot Spitzer was as governor of New York.

In the meantime, the college basketball playoffs are going on, and I couldn't care less this season. No more of my teams are in, so I don't care anymore, other than to show the BCS how a playoff series should go. For that reason alone, I hope that the Final Four is as exciting as this year's Super Bowl. In local sports news, TCU's men's basketball team recently let go of Neil Dougherty after six seasons. In those six seasons, he had only one 20+ wins season. He's a decent guy, but he wasn't cutting it as a coach. It was time to try someone else.

I miss Billy Tubbs, though, and his high-speed and high-scoring style of basketball. It wasn't Billy Tubbs that TCU hired, though, but Jim Christian from Kent State. During his six years, he's been winning, and I hope that he carries that over to here. In the last month of the basketball season, former coach Dougherty had encouraged fans to come to the games, and some did. But it's not enough to cite school pride to bring fans to the game, the home team also needs to win games, and that they didn't do enough of. Here's hoping that Christian will make a difference.

Sports stuff

I haven't talked sports in a while. Mainly that's because the local teams haven't done much to talk about!

Let's start with my local university team, the TCU Horned Frogs. The football team is a great team coached by a great coach in Gary Patterson. However, The Mighty BCS is geared to "the big boys" - that is, big schools with big bucks - so that smaller schools don't have a chance. Each season to have ANY chance that the BCS Boys will even look their way, TCU has to go undefeated. Once the Frogs get that one loss, then they're out of it.

Some teams can have TWO losses and still have a shot at the national title. This past football season demonstrated most clearly how screwed up the BCS system is. And yet, despite the "changes" that they're going to implement next season, the TCUs of the world are still not going to have a chance to win it all. We need a playoff system in which anyone with enough heart and soul can take it as far as they can go. THAT'S the classic American underdog story that we all know and love so much. The BCS has to go.

We saw an example of how much better a playoff system is with this year's New York Giants team. Little ol' NYGs took on the big boys (including my team, the Dallas Cowboys), and even beat the previously undefeated New England Patriots. See folks, THAT'S an underdog story! THAT is what the college playoff system should be! I would hope that the BCS Boys would be listening, but they're too busy listening to their cash registers to pay attention.

Coming later in the week, more sports reporting, including the baseball season, which just started today.

Campaign new nuggets

The election season just keeps getting interestinger and interestinger. At least from the Democratic side. The only thing left to resolve on the GOP side is who John McCain will choose as his running mate. My suggestion would be for a female candidate of any race, or a male minority candidate as a way to counter the Dems' eventual choice of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. If the GOP is going to go with another white dude, then my suggestion would be Joe Lieberman. If that occurs, then he'd be the first running mate that was on the ticket for both parties.

As for the Dems, there have been more calls for Hillary to step down. However, she currently has no plans to, nor do I think she should step down. She's gotten this far, and she does have a large number of votes - not as high as Obama's of course, but certainly not chump change. I think she - and her supporters - deserve to see how far this would go. Let the voters decide, not the party hacks and bigwigs who are only concerned about wrapping things up in a hurry rather than settling things right.

It's also for that reason that I think the Dems should go ahead and have a re-vote in Florida and Michigan. It wasn't the voters in those respective states that caused the punishment to be laid down on them by the Democratic party, it was the party heads in those states. Thus, the voters in those states should not be punished for the actions of people that they had no control over. And besides, after the 2000 election, the Dems should have a problem "disenfranchishing" any voter - particularly those from Florida. I say let the re-vote happen, or we'll be hearing from Hillary and her supporters about it for years to come if she doesn't get the nod as the presidential candidate for the Dems.

Whoever gets the eventual nod, there is going to be a very large group in the Democratic party that's going to go away very unhappy. However, I think that this could eventually be a good thing. For too long, excessive political correctness has had an iron hold on the party, and it's way past time for it to let go. The party has been buckling under the weight of its own gnat-straining for decades, and their obsessive/compulsive behavior over not offending anybody anywhere has made them into a party of incoherent ramblers that is increasingly out of touch of what allegedly is their power base: the common man.

Once a candidate is nominated, then either the pillar of their black constituency or their feminist constituency is going to be yanked away, which would cause the party to buckle even more under the weight of their gnat-straining - hopefully to the point of collapse. I have been saying for years that the party needs to crash and burn to start over again. In the time that I've kept up with the political scene, I have learned that slow change from within isn't going to change the party in any meaningful way, so the alternative is for a quick and spectacular collapse so that EVERYONE'S eyes will be opened as to just how corrupt the Democratic party is.

In any case, either the black constituency or the feminist constituency will have their eyes opened, and hopefully that group will learn the lessons that I learned long ago: The party needs to start over - desperately. Right now, the party is rife with cronyism, and minute changes to how things are done are not going to accomplish anything meaningful.

And last, the issue of cross-over voting. Some election officials are so certain of crossover voting solely for the sake of altering the election results of the Democratic primary in Ohio that they are threatening to sue. Think about that: They want to sue people for voting! What a lovely way to crush any sense of civic duty to threaten to sue if the voters don't vote the way party officials want them to vote! They blame Rush Limbaugh and his "Operation Chaos: Rush the Vote" for this.

My response: Even if these voters did "crossvote" at the urgings of the big conservative blowhard - so what? Isn't it the right of voters to vote as they please? Rush didn't force those voters to "cross their vote", but it sure as hell looks like Ohio wants to force the voters to vote a certain way! I can think of little else so Orwellian as threatening to sue anyone over how they voted. Plus, if they sue Limbaugh, he's only going to milk it for all it's worth, so why make him a martyr? Bottom line: There is no way that suing voters is going to look good, so Ohio should just drop it. I also encourage both Obama and Clinton to tell Ohio to just drop the matter. All is going to depend upon how dense and short-sighted the Ohio officials are going to be about the matter. We'll soon see.

Stay tuned, folks! There's still more to come!

First blogging class

I had my first class last night, and was I nervous! I apparently did a good job of hiding it, because I got a few compliments on my patience. I think, though, that answering their questions helped keep me busy, which kept me from thinking about how nervous I was.

What I learned last night, though, is that there is so much to learn! I tried to keep from stating too much to keep from being overwhelming, but this blog site has so much flexibility that I had to think on the fly on what needed to come first. Making your basic post came first, but within the post, there's stuff you can do, and I hadn't even touched on that part yet. At least I told them enough to get them started.

As I was writing my notes this week, it occurred to me that bloggers today have something that even the most famous of writers of the past did not have: A potential audience the size of all of cyberspace. I used a theatrical metaphor: The blog is your stage, and your audience is everyone who has Internet access. Thus, your potential audience can literally run into the millions. As I wrote that note, I thought to myself that for a writer, realizing that concept can be both exciting and frightening.

Well, that's one class down, and three to go! I'll discuss more of what I talked about in my first class on Saturday or Sunday.

Blog news - I will be away until Thursday

Sorry I haven't posted much, but there's a good reason for it. On Wednesday, I will be teaching a blogging class. It's for two hours a week for four weeks. This is the first time I've tried something like this, so I'm a little nervous. I think I'm more excited than nervous, though, and I'm looking forward to this.

Anyhow, I've been busy the past few days and I am going to be busy the next couple of days putting stuff together for my class. But at the same time, I want to keep you updated on how the class is going, so if I am a bit sparse in my posts in the coming weeks - well, now you'll know why. :-)

But I will try to keep at least a once-a-week pace, if for no other reason than to keep you updated on the class' progress. It's a paying gig, and if I help someone take up blogging, then that'd be even cooler. If this works out, I may keep on doing this. Stay tuned, folks - more writers may be on the way!

Obama's pastor

The issue of Barack Obama's pastor has been in the news in recent days, due to some video clips of Rev.Jeremiah Wright making some inflammatory remarks during some of his sermons. I'm sure you've seen clips of Rev. Wright's sermons, but if you haven't, go to YouTube and check it out. Probably you'll find it with the search parameters of "Obama" and "Jeremiah" and "sermon". They weren't pleasant, and they were such that you wonder how Obama could sit and listen to these sermons for 20 years.

To help with damage control, Obama made a speech about the issue, and about the racial divide in general. Here's a link to a transcript of what he said. It came out to 8 pages when I printed it out. If you read it, you see that Obama is indeed an eloquent speaker and writer. But eloquence alone isn't going to cut it. Here's why:

Obama is really, really good about hitting all the right notes at the right time, and he tries to cover everybody. He tries, but he's missing someone, and it's someone significant enough that it's enough to keep me from voting for him.

Had Obama been on the prolife side of the abortion debate, I could very much believe that he means what he said in that speech. But not only is he prochoice, he is probably THE most prochoice of all the candidates that are or were running in both parties. What that means is that he's leaving out the unborn in that eloquent speech of his. All the wonder and the glory that he hopes for all of us stops short of helping the unborn, the most helpless and defenseless of us all. If he can't find room in that big ol' tent of his for the unborn, then it undermines the credibility of his claim to want to help everyone.

But then there's more.

There is also the matter that he's a politician. It is the nature of politicians to try to say things that appeal to the broadest amount of people as possible. But not only is he a politician, he's also a politician running for office. That tweaks the need for him to watch what he says and how he says it.

But there's more still.

Not only is he a politician running for office, he's running for the office of President of the United States, the grandest stage of all. That increases the need for him to watch what he says several times over. He HAS to say the right thing at the right time, whether or not he believes what he says. And there's reason to doubt that what he said in his speech was just words. I already mentioned that he's a politician.

However, consider that he was part of Rev. Wright's congregation for 20 years. A pastor's influence on one's life is not like a local barber or butcher - this person serves a highly critical role that is surpassed only by one's spouse and children. Obama couldn't have sat in the pews for that long and not be affected by what Wright has said - either in a positive way or a negative way. I have no doubt that Wright has good Christian qualities, but some of the sermons he gave shows that he also has a dark side. And the question then becomes: Did that dark side reach out to Obama?

Consider this: Obama won't wear an American flag pin on his lapel, this despite his eloquent speech about being proud to be an American. Why not? My guess that it could be partly because of what Wright had said about this country and the many sins that it has committed. I also love my country, and I also know that it has committed many sins in the past. I also believe that it commits sins today with legalized abortion. But I love my country just the same - enough to wear an American flag pin on my lapel.

That Obama refuses to wear one, even though he is a politician running for the highest office in the land. Remember, it's crucially important that politicians try to do and say things that will reach out to the most people possible. Wearing an American flag lapel pin would be one of those things. You reach more people that way, and it costs very little reputation-wise to pin on one. And yet, he won't do it - despite how important it would be. It costs him more to his reputation to be known for refusing to wear one than actually wearing one would cost. Logically, it just doesn't make sense.

That's enough of a cumulative effect that it makes me wonder just how far apart his views are from mine. Right now, it's already far enough, and he's not getting my vote, because all of the above is enough to make me suspect the sincerity of his words. That is, I highly doubt that he actually believes what he states in his speech. Bottom line, he is a politician saying what he needs to say, and very little else.

Getting back to Rev. Wright, I had forgotten about this, but the Brite Divinity School (located on the campus of Texas Christian University) will be hosting Rev. Wright in an event that is scheduled to award him for his life's work. However, TCU expressed a concern for safety issues, and succeeded in getting the event moved off campus. I think that, since the Brite school had already made those plans, they should have gone ahead as planned. But something must have come up to cause this change, but neither TCU or Brite is talking. We'll just have to wait and see what happens when that time comes. The event is scheduled for the 29th, and I'll let you know if anything happens.

When Holidays Collide...

If you haven't checked a calender lately, today is St. Patrick's Day. AND, Sunday is Easter! It's not often that these two holidays come this close to colliding with each other. At my workplace, we had to decide which holiday we wanted to decorate for. It wasn't long before we decided that we're going to decorate for both holidays!

Note the pics below:






Have a Happy St. Patrick's Easter!

Dare to dream!

From an e-mail that I sent to another group of people I know:

-------------------------------------------------

Hey, all.

I’ve been in a discussion with others about the pursuit of one’s dreams. I thought of all of you and our time with (our city newspaper's) community columnist panel. I am writing to you all now, because I thought that maybe you can relate to what I’m about to discuss below.

What brought this topic up is the fact that I’ve been writing and drawing for years. My dream is to either be a columnist or an editorial cartoonist for a city newspaper, and preferably both. But the field of column writing and cartooning is difficult to break into unless you are either of a very exceptional talent or you have connections. And yet, despite the fact that very, very few “hit it big”, there are many, many dreamers out there hoping for such success in their respective fields. So the topic of discussion then became “When is it time for the dreamer to stop dreaming?”

Of course, the news biz has struggled in recent years, and is not really looking to hire for such positions from outside its current staff, except by freelance or in a part time/temp (and in our case a couple of years ago – unpaid) way. That limits my options, of course, and the only way I can keep in the practice of writing is by blogging – which I am doing. So, with the odds against me, why do I keep on?

Maybe I’m too stubborn or too stupid to realize that it’s nearly hopeless, but it’s just not in my nature to quit. Plus, success stories HAVE happened, and some of them have happened to people with even more odds against them than I’ve had. In addition to that, I have others – young people, including my nephews and niece – who look up to me and watch what I do. What kind of example would I set by giving up on the dream? I guess I’m saying that I’d rather go down fighting than one day find myself wondering “what might have been” had I kept on just a little longer.

And yet, not everyone gets to be a big rock star. Not everyone gets that role where they get an Oscar. Not everyone gets elected president. Not everyone gets to be the starting point guard for the Dallas Mavericks. For every Jason Kidd, there are thousands of point guards out there who would love to have his job. But even Jason Kidd had to start somewhere. Maybe it’s not the goal, but the journey. (I’m starting to get philosophical here!).

Even if I never reach my goals, I still learned lessons along the way, including finding out that I can do it. I can write columns and stories that get published and are enjoyed by others. I can draw cartoons that make people laugh and think. The talent IS there. That knowledge alone is comforting in that it tells me that I wasn’t wasting my time by practicing writing and drawing. And if I can teach my nephews and niece to not make the same mistakes I did, then maybe I can help them achieve THEIR dreams.

Maybe that’s what my journey is about. If I can at least do that for them, then it will make my own efforts and struggles worth the trip. And so, I press on, but I do it for them, and for others who look up to me. I do it for those who have supported me, and have wished and prayed for my success. It’s for all those people that I press on, and it’s my hope that one day I can give them the happy news of my success. But if it never happens, at least they’ll know that I tried. So the answer to the question of “When is it time for the dreamer to stop dreaming” is: Never. Go down swinging, but learn to pick your fights.

Campaign notes: Geraldine Ferraro

Geraldine Ferraro's remarks demonstrate that one can have a ton of experience in being a politician, and yet still screw up once in a while. The controversial statement is thus:

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position, and if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

Thing is, even if it's true, she should have known better than to say something like that. There was no way that her statement was going to be taken in the manner that it was given. She was more upset that her candidate, Hillary Clinton, isn't doing well in her campaign than expressing a racist statement, so in truth Ferraro was basically venting frustration. And she apparently forgot that Obama is half white.

Odd thing is, when Obama first began his campaign, various pundits pondered as to whether he would be "black enough" for black voters (not this pundit, though, who thought the whole idea of "being black enough" as rather silly). Now apparently he's too black for Ferraro! She did the right thing in resigning her role as a fundraiser, but the damage may already be done. It certainly didn't help Hillary, who needs all the help she can get right now. Time will tell what effect this has on her campaign.

Topic for March 2008: Journalism and the free press

My dream is to work for a city newspaper either as a columnist or as an editorial cartoonist, and preferably both. I love journalism, mainly because of the impact and influence that it can have on our society. Most of the time, that impact is positive, but sometimes it is negative. It all depends upon how it's done. Done right, and even the so-called "powers that be" have to stand and take notice. Done wrong, and it will be a long time before that media outlet will regain lost readership or viewership.

So during the course of the month, I shall be commenting on the journalism field and the freedom of the press. I shall also discuss why I love the field, and why it's a love that won't die despite the increased difficulty of breaking into the field. By the end of the month, I hope you'll see why we need a free press now more than ever.

Stay tuned, folks. More to come.

What a ride! Clinton takes 3 out of 4 states.

In all my years of existence, I don't think I've ever seen a wilder Texas primary/caucus. It was pretty cool - or at least as cool as such political events get.

If you've been living in a cave or otherwise disconnected from the outside world the past 24 hours, Hillary Clinton took 3 out of the 4 states with primaries yesterday, including the two big states of Ohio and Texas. Despite these victories, Barack Obama still has the lead.

Earlier today, Hillary hinted that she'd be willing to share the ticket - provided that she is the top. Obama replied that he still has the lead in delegates. I've said it before, but I'll say it again: I don't think they'll share the ticket, because it would mean that one would be "subservient" to the other, and their egos are too big to accept stepping down for the other.

Meanwhile, remember when I said that the campaign between Hillary and Obama is a battle of who holds the stronger "victim card"? Well, today NYTimes columnist Maureen Dowd said basically the same thing! Since that site requires that you register, the title of the column is "Duel of Historical Guilts (NYTimes, March 5, 2008)". Ha! I love it when I'm right! I already beat you to the punch, Maureen! >:-D

Just a quick note, folks - I will be away until Sunday, trying to finish a column that I've been working on for a while. It's about the freedom of the press, and why it's important for our country. I'll fill you in on Sunday.

See ya!

Today is primary/caucus day in Texas! Go vote!

Today is Super Tuesday Jr.! After today, we should pretty much have the GOP candidate locked up. As for the Dems, I'm pulling for a Hillary sweep so that the Dems can continue to fight it out, perhaps all the way to their convention this summer. There's certain issues that the Dems need to hammer out and settle, and if this thing ends too soon, then they'll never get to that point. The main issue to settle is: How prominent a place should they have for political correctness (PC from here on)?

First, don't get me wrong: PC has its uses and its place, and one of those places is indeed in politics. One of the natures of politics is to get even disparate groups talking to each other. However, when used by the Dems, it has been a hammer to use against those who they disagree with. For instance, the Dems say that we must support legalized abortion because it is a woman's right to choose, and anyone who disagrees with it is opposed to women having rights.

There are, of course, other examples that are just as bad, but there's no need to elaborate on each and every example. Suffice it to say that it is Dems who use PC like a club. The GOP does this as well, but to a lesser extent and over fewer issues. The reason that it is a largely Democrat activity is because the Dems are the party with "institutionalized victims' groups" or "permanent victims' groups". Those terms deserve more elaboration, but I'll do that later, and not at this time. I think you can figure that out yourself enough for now; as I've digressed far enough from my topic, and it's time to get back to it.

Getting back to my topic, I hope that Hillary sweeps the states today, or at least picks up Texas, because then it would mean that the Dems would have to slug it out a little longer. Then the Dems would have to continue to slug it out over which PC value they value more. Hopefully in the process, they will realize that by holding on to PC so dearly, they have been handicapping themselves all along. It's like trying to run a 100 yard dash with a cast on one foot when your foot is perfectly healthy. Hopefully they'll also learn that running with a cast on your foot when your foot is perfectly healthy will not only slow you down, it might even damage your foot or ankle. That's what the Dems have been in recent decades: Hobbling with a deliberately self-inflicted ankle injury.

So far nothing has been able to shake the Dems from the hold that PC has on them, and it's my view that it will take a catastrophic shake-down before they are able to see it. I'm hoping that this election proves to be that very shake-down. But if Hillary is swept today, then the opportunity for a catastrophic shake-down slips away, and the Dems will go on hobbling with a cast on their foot when their foot is perfectly healthy. Stay tuned, folks....

Revealed! Liberal bias in the media!

A recent Washington Post story discussed a Saturday Night Live skit starring "Fauxbama", who is an actor spoofing Barack Obama. Below is the video that is referred to in the article:



Yesterday, these two skits took place on SNL, one of which included Hillary herself:





This was the first time I've watched anything related to SNL in years. For me, it hasn't been the same since the old days when it had John Belushi et al. However, I watched these skits, because it states something that has been repeatedly denied: There is a bias in the media.

I've said before on this very blog that there is a left-wing bias in the media, and often which is almost as bad as shown on the SNL skits presented here. However, it didn't become obvious to the left-wingers until recent months, when Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were getting neck-and-neck, and the left-wingers had to decide whether they were going to support the race card or the gender card. Race and gender, of course, are the two historical "victim" groups that have been the bread-and-butter of the Democratic party.

However, in this election season, the Dems had the painful choice of deciding between representatives of each of those victims' groups. You couldn't have asked them to make a more painful decision as this, because they had to decide which of their victims' groups was more "entitled" to have their first representative on the ballot. You might as well have asked a parent to decide between twin children.

Thus, with such a backdrop, it was bound to happen that one group of supporters was going to complain about the coverage of their candidate, and right now, it is the supporters of Hillary Clinton. For my part, I think that this can eventually become a good thing, because it will mean that at least half of the usually blind left-wingers will have their eyes opened on just how ubiquitous the bias is in media coverage.

For a pundit such as myself, I am having a field day enjoying all this, because it's all unprecedented. I'm enjoying it so much that come Tuesday, when the primaries come to Texas, I just may vote for Hillary just so that this can go on - hopefully all the way to the Democratic convention. If it gets to that point, then, my friends, you will see fireworks in the convention room the likes of which haven't been seen for decades. Let's hope it comes to that, because I promise you that it will be something to watch.

I've mentioned before that, whichever candidate wins, he or she should ask the other to be his or her running mate. That would be the ideal, but I doubt it would happen, because it would mean that one of the candidates is going to be "subservient" to the other - and I can't see either Clinton or Obama willingly step aside for the other.

If indeed the losing candidate is not offered or refuses to become the running mate of the winning candidate, then I think that John McCain (the presumed GOP candidate) should ask the losing candidate to join his ticket instead. It will probably get cold in hell before such a scenario plays out, but oh, what fun it would be if it does!

Stay tuned, folks! Come Wednesday morning, we'll see how things go from here on!

New politically correct terms

From an e-mail that I received yesterday:

-------------------------------------

Subj: New Politically Correct terms

Due to the climate of political correctness now pervading America, it should be noted that Kentuckians, Tennesseans and West Virginians will no longer be referred to as 'HILLBILLIES.' You must now refer to them as APPALACHIAN-AMERICANS.

And Furthermore...

HOW TO SPEAK ABOUT WOMEN AND BE POLITICALLY CORRECT:

She is not a 'BABE' or a 'CHICK' - She is a 'BREASTED AMERICAN.'

She is not 'EASY' - She is 'HORIZONTALLY ACCESSIBLE.'

She is not a 'DUMB BLONDE' - She is a 'LIGHT-HAIRED DETOUR OFF THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY.'

She has not 'BEEN AROUND' - She is a 'PREVIOUSLY-ENJOYED COMPANION.'

She does not 'NAG' you - She becomes 'VERBALLY REPETITIVE.'

She is not a 'TWO-BIT HOOKER' - She is a 'LOW COST PROVIDER.'


HOW TO SPEAK ABOUT MEN AND BE POLITICALLY CORRECT:

He does not have a 'BEER GUT' - He has developed a 'LIQUID GRAIN STORAGE FACILITY.'

He is not a 'BAD DANCER' - He is 'OVERLY CAUCASIAN.'

He does not 'GET LOST ALL THE TIME' - He 'INVESTIGATES ALTERNATIVE DESTINATIONS.'

He is not 'BALDING' - He is in 'FOLLICLE REGRESSION.'

He does not act like a 'TOTAL BUTT' - He develops a case of RECTAL-CRANIAL INVERSION.'

It's not his 'CRACK' you see hanging out of his pants -It's 'REAR CLEAVAGE.'

Clinton, Obama butt heads, Nader joins in, Araujo presses on

This primary season continues to be endlessly fascinating to this pundit. Over the weekend, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama traded barbs over some comments she made. Here's what Hillary said:

"I could just stand up here and say 'Let's just get everybody together, let's get unified.' The sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect,"

Now that's more of what I expected from them - especially Hillary the baby boomer. Hillary, actually, is showing signs of imploding. Imagine things from her perspective, though. Here she was, expecting the candidacy to be given to her because she's a woman, and someone else is stealing her thunder. Who is this person, stomping all over her dream? I actually expected more of this reaction from her earlier on, and perhaps we are finally going to see it, because we are talking Hillary's dream here.

See, thing is, in their most recent debate, they were still too civil. Dang, people! This ain't a tea party - you're running for president! The next debate, which I believe will be before Texas' primary on March 4, I want to finally see the head-butting, the face-slapping, and the knee-groining (all in the metaphorical sense, of course) that I've been expecting all along. Will Hillary finally show some signs that she is taking this seriously and stop being so gushy of Obama? Time will tell.

In the meantime, that ol' gremlin Ralph Nader announced that he will be running again. I call him a gremlin because that's how the Dems view him and his 2000 campaign. The Dems felt that Ralphie took votes away from Al "I invented the Internet" Gore that he needed in Florida, and that's why Bush won instead of Gore (and as the Dems put it, "We were then subjected to 8 years of hell". The embellish just a tad, I think). Nader is just a convenient scapegoat, though. Nader didn't lose it for Gore - Gore did that on his own. And the Dems did it as well by picking such an inept candidate that couldn't beat a socially awkward and clumsy George Bush.

On top of that, in 2004 the Dems selected another inept candidate in John Kerry who was just as wooden as Gore. Think about the 2004 election: Bush at that time was still the same socially awkward and clumsy candidate that was in addition a wounded candidate because of his handling of the war. Kerry couldn't beat even a weakened Bush. What this shows is not some sort of Nader jinxing or Karl Rove manipulations, but that the Dems were both blind and stupid so as to pick the same type of candidate a second time around!

I was really hoping that the Dems would crash and burn in 2006 so that they can start over, but nope - Bush's ineptitude finally caught up to him, and the Dems ended up taking over both houses of Congress - thus making them feel emboldened again. And now we are here in 2008, with two contenders that are essentially both of the same left-wing stripe fighting over who is the bigger victim - the woman or the black man. SIGH. There's no blaming Nader this time - he's a non-factor, so if the Dems lose, it will be their own fault.

Well, it's up to me, then. Still no delegates, and with an even less of a chance to win the presidency than even Ralph Nader. However, I am determined, if nothing else, and I still think that you good folks would prefer me over Obama, Clinton, the GOP candidate John McCain, and even Ralph Nader. C'mon, folks - let's make the big dogs sweat and vote for me!

Notes: Campaign and otherwise

First, just to let you know, I will have a busy rest-of-the-week, so I won't be posting again until probably Sunday. I might be able to post Saturday, and you'll see it if I do. Otherwise, it'll be Sunday. Now on to campaign notes.

Even though Barack Obama has momentum going, I still think that Hillary Clinton will do something to gain the nomination. I can't see her giving up. At all. I think that this will go down in her favor one way or another. I say this even if Obama wins Ohio and Texas in early March. Somehow, someway, she'll pull something that swings things in her favor, whether it's calling in favors, threatening blackmail, getting superdelegates on her side, showing more cleavage, whatever it takes. I just can't see her stepping aside even for Obama. Mark my words, folks - this will come down in her favor eventually, and it may have to get ugly before it does.

As for the GOP, Mike Huckabee is hangin' in there, even though everyone and Mitt Romney's mother has endorsed John McCain. I give Huckster credit for hanging in there, because he is making the GOP a show to watch as well. The Obama/Clinton show is still by far the more interesting show, but Huck is helping to at least keep one eyeball glued to the one TV that is keeping up with the GOP campaigns.

And I still don't like any of the candidates other than myself. So far, I like what I've said, and I've agreed pretty much with the views that I have put out. I've even made myself laugh with my humor, and the Che Guevara poster was a hoot! But even with all that, my odds are pretty heavily against me. I'm just watching now to see what other candidate I'll endorse before making my decision on who to vote for.

One last, non-political note: I'm glad that the Jason Kidd trade finally went down. Now all he has to do is help us get a championship. We won't take any less.

Campaign notes - Who needs Che?

While Barack, Hillary, John, and Mike have been out stumping for their respective campaigns, I have made a new campaign poster. It's based on this well-known image of Che Guevara:





Che was a Communist, but I'm an American! What I mean is this: The nature of Communism is to believe in the state, which comes at the expense of the individual. However, I believe in the power of the individual over the state. While communists and Communism claim to be a "workers' party", it actually serves the state - the infamous "Big Brother" of George Orwell's 1984. I, however, plan to be a "man of the people" instead of a Big Brother. I will actually be helping the little guy rather than the almighty State.

I intend to be an "old school" Democrat the way the Democrats used to be, instead of the special interests and big money servant that they are now. I guess this would make me a "regressive" rather than a "progressive", because if what the Dems advocate now is progress, then leave me out of it. I'd rather regress to what they used to be.

Over the weekend, someone asked me if I was serious about running for president. I said: "It depends. Let's put it this way. William Tecumseh Sherman once said, 'If nominated, I will not accept; if drafted, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve.' However, I say this: 'If nominated, I will accept; if drafted, I will run; if elected, I will serve'".

What I mean is, if there indeed arises a groundswell of desire for me to run, then I'll see what I can do to actually run for office. What a message it would send to politicians for the American voter to give me any votes, much less enough for the pols to take notice.

So, while I was initially kidding about running, I also decided that if enough people actually want me to run, then who am I to deny the will of the people? Even so, I still don't anticipate getting any sort of following - but I'll be open to the possibility just in case. It's up to you, folks.

News Nuggets 2-15-08

Previously on my blog, I had what I called "Weekend Wrap-ups", but keeping a weekly schedule was not easy, especially since there wasn't always newsworthy stuff to report on week in and week out. So as of today, I shall be starting what I call News Nuggets, which shall be brief commentary on recent news events. That way, I can take care of such commentary while such news is still current, rather than waiting until the weekend. While I’ll be posting the News Nuggets sporadically, I’ll semi-aim for Fridays to post them. So thus, we begin!

Roger Clemens steroid controversy
One thing I noticed right away about Brian McNamee is who he resembles. Here's a pic:



Does he not look like this guy?:



That second pic is, of course, Jughead Jones from Archie Comics. Those of us who read Archie Comics knew Jughead to be a lazy loafer who preferred hamburgers to chicks. Well, maybe this is who Jughead became. He changed his name and became a trainer for the New York Yankees so that he could afford to feed his hamburger habit. Thus, I wouldn’t trust this dude if I was a member of that Senate committee!

Dolly Parton is wagging puppies!
Recently, Dolly Parton had this to say:


"I know I have been breaking my neck and bending over backwards trying to get my new Backwoods Barbie CD and world tour together, but I didn't mean to hurt myself doing it. But hey, you try wagging these puppies around a while and see if you don't have back problems!"


What I want to know is - in light of the recent news stories about Michael Vick and his abuse of dogs, how can Dolly go around wagging puppies - much less joke about it! They must be some heavy puppies if she’s straining her back wagging them, because she’s a tiny woman (well, except for a certain part of her). Anyway, there she was, wagging puppies, and the reporters don’t say anything about it? And where’s PETA in all this?

Dallas Mavericks’ Jason Kidd trade
As of now, the trade still hasn’t happened, still because of Devon George because of the “Bird” rule that allows him to nix trades. Thing is, he asked to be traded not too long ago, so I’m sure that the Mavs felt that he would be okay with it. However, they probably should have asked so as to spare them this whole embarrassing episode.

They probably didn’t expect George to be holding up a trade like this, but the lawyers should still anticipate such things. George feels that he could lose out on potential free agent money by going through with this trade, but I think that now, because of this embarrassing episode, he’s in such a bad light now that I doubt that he’d get that extra money.

According to some news articles, he probably wasn’t going to get extra money anyway, because he’s not a top-notch player – but again, the Mavs could have asked first. In any case, I think George should now cut his losses and go through with the trade, because if the deal collapses because of him, then he’s going to be getting grief for the rest of the season - and he probably won’t be signed anywhere else unless he takes a drastic cut in pay. I don’t recall a trade causing this much interest, though. It actually took our minds off of the Clinton/Obama news for a while.

Thanks, folks! Have a great weekend!

My take on some issues

The New York Times had run an article on the views of the candidates when there were still a bunch of them. The article listed each view in a capsulized form. Here's the article.

And so, keeping with this format, I too, shall give my views on those same issues in the same capsulized format. Here goes:

Health Care
Democrats want universal health care where Big Brother handles all our medical needs. The GOP wants the free market to run things - that is, Big Money and Big Pharmaceutical. I propose a halfway point. I advocate getting the feds out of health care and handing it over to the states. That way, if New York or California want socialized medicine in all its glory, then their respective taxpayers can pay for it. If Texas or Florida want to give the free market a try, then they can have a go at it. However, I will require that all states cover their citizens in some way, shape, or form - even if it's a state version of Medicare. This will allows for all forms of health care to be tried out, and hopefully from that, we can learn what works best - whether it's socialized medicine, free-market, or some combination of both.

Abortion
I'm opposed to it, as is evident in different parts of my blog. I will advocate the overturning of Roe vs. Wade and let the matter revert back to the states. If I can at least get that much done, that'd be great. I would also then work on the state level so that I could help former president Bill Clinton not only live up to his promise of "making abortion rare", I would try to make it non-existent. There needs to be more airing of the prolife side of the debate, and I'll be the president that gives the prolife side the air time it needs.

Climate Change
I support cleaning up the environment, and I will crack down on major pollutors, charging them whopping fines so as to pay for my "a computer in every household" program. However, I am iffy on the "global warming" thing, because I'm old enough to remember when scientists were warning about global cooling. If they were wrong then, then maybe they're wrong now. Plus, if the granddaddy of environmentalism Al Gore can't clean up his own house, then that speaks volumes about the credibility of the whole global warming movement. I'd also crack down on the con artists out there selling "carbon credits" and give the fines toward actual programs for environmental clean-up.

Immigration
We are a nation of immigrants, and I won't change that. However, those here illegally will have to resolve their illegal status if they want to remain in the country. I oppose total blanket amnesty, because that is not fair to those immigrants who are here legally and have been going through the process of legalization the right way. I will give them 6 months to a year to resolve their illegal status by paying fines and starting the process of citizenship, or face deportation. Those here illegally who are criminals will be deported immediately.

Iraq
Here we have an example of the damage being done. I opposed going to war back in 2003, but that's past history now. We have gone there, upset the controlling authority, and we are now the controlling authority. To leave now would be chaos not just for Iraq but the whole Middle East. We must help the Iraqis get back on their feet so that the can self-govern, and only THEN can we leave. We owe it to them, because we caused the disruption to their country, they didn't ask us to come.

Iran
Wholly, totally opposed to going to war in Iran. After what we went through in Iraq, to go into Iran with the same boneheaded plan would make us look stupid in the eyes of the world, because we hadn't learned our lessons with our experiences in Iraq. And we aren't done in Iraq, anyway. Why stir another hornets' nest?

Economy
I would insist on a line item veto, and if I don't get it, politicians better be prepared for me to veto the hell out of bills that contain pork or other earmarks. If we are going to ask the rest of the country to tighten their belts, we should be setting the example by tightening our own belts. Our economy will improve with all of us learning better spending habits. I would also work on cutting current taxes for useless and expensive programs that contribute nothing to our country. Or if they don't get cut, I'll divert the extra taxes to my "computer in every household" program.

More to come.

Araujo '08 campaign promises

I type this again in a restaurant that has free Wi-Fi. That made me think of one campaign promise that I can make: Free Wi-fi. As your president, I will do everything within my power to give the nation free Wi-Fi.

I'd also look into getting a computer in every household. I feel that the more households with computers that we have, the better connected we can all be. Then we can all do a better job of keeping our alleged public servant politicians on their toes, so that we have just as much access to them as their big-money corporations and special interest groups that they are whoring themselves for.

I'd also insist on total transparency for politicians as to who is funding their campaigns. Those pols, corporations, and special interest groups who are abusing their power will be subjected to monstrous fines that will go towards funding the program that I will have to provide computers to all households. Understand that I'm not opposed to corporations and special interest groups donating to campaigns, but I will be mindful of abuses, and will be just as quick to pounce on violators.

For instance, last year Gov. Rick Perry of Texas had suddenly - out of the blue - required that all school-aged girls be vaccinated with Gardasil. No legislature or court order brought this about - it came just from him. Gov. Perry was so obviously whoring for Merck, the manufacturer of Gardasil, that Merck had to make a public statement about it. But still, this was a more obvious example of a politician whoring for a corporation or a special interest group - there are other pols out there doing the same thing, they're just better at hiding it than Governor Gardasil - er, I mean Rick Perry was.

Perry and Merck are examples of a pol and corporation that I would slap my whopping fines on. I'd make a public show of hanging their asses out to dry. That's what I'd do as your president. Vote for me so that we can get it done!

More to come. :-)

Modern day Abbott and Costello

From an e-mail that I received. Enjoy!

---------------------------------------

You have to be old enough to remember Abbott and Costello, and too old to REALLY understand computers, to fully appreciate this. For those of us who sometimes get flustered by our computers, please read on...

If Bud Abbott and Lou Costello were alive today, their famous sketch,'Who's on First?' might have turned out something like this:

COSTELLO CALLS TO BUY A COMPUTER FROM ABBOTT

ABBOTT: Super Duper Computer Store. Can I help you?
COSTELLO: Thanks. I'm setting up an office in my den and I'm thinking about buying a computer.

ABBOTT: Mac?
COSTELLO: No, the name's Lou.

ABBOTT: Your computer?
COSTELLO: I don't own a computer. I want to buy one.

ABBOTT : Mac?
COSTELLO: I told you, my name's Lou.

ABBOTT: What about Windows?
COSTELLO: Why? Will it get stuffy in here?

ABBOTT: Do you want a computer with Windows?
COSTELLO: I don't know. What will I see when I look at the windows?

ABBOTT: Wallpaper.
COSTELLO: Never mind the windows. I need a computer and software.

ABBOTT: Software for Windows?
COSTELLO: No. On the computer! I need something I can use to write proposals, track expenses and run my business. What do you have?

ABBOTT: Office.
COSTELLO: Yeah, for my office. Can you recommend anything?

ABBOTT: I just did.
COSTELLO: You just did what?

ABBOTT: Recommend something.
COSTELLO: You recommended something?

ABBOTT: Yes.
COSTELLO: For my office?

ABBOTT: Yes
COSTELLO: OK, what did you recommend for my office?

ABBOTT: Office.
COSTELLO: Yes, for my office!

ABBOTT: I recommend Office with Window's.
COSTELLO: I already have an office with windows! OK, let's just say I'm sitting at my computer and I want to type a proposal. What do I need?

ABBOTT: Word.
COSTELLO: What word?

ABBOTT: Word in Office.
COSTELLO: The only word in office is office.

ABBOTT: The Word in Office for Windows.
COSTELLO: Which word in office for windows?

ABBOTT: The Word you get when you click the blue 'W'.
COSTELLO: I'm going to click your blue 'w' if you don't start with some straight answers! What about financial bookkeeping? You have anything I can track my money with?

ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: That's right What do you have?

ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: I need money to track my money?

ABBOTT: It comes bundled with your computer.
COSTELLO: What's bundled with my computer?

ABBOTT: Money.
COSTELLO: Money comes with my computer?

ABBOTT: Yes. No extra charge.
COSTELLO: I get a bundle of money with my computer? How much?

ABBOTT: One copy.
COSTELLO: Isn't it illegal to copy money?

ABBOTT : Microsoft gave us a license to copy Money.
COSTELLO: They can give you a license to copy money?

ABBOTT: Why not? THEY OWN IT!

(A few days later)

ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?
COSTELLO: How do I turn my computer off?

ABBOTT: Click on 'START'.

Obama surges on; Araujo makes progress

Yesterday's primaries have come and gone, and Barack Obama surges on. (Hey, that rhymes!) If Hillary wasn't sweating before, she should be now. After all, this was supposed to be "her time". Obama, though, is not making things easy for her, and she doesn't help herself at times, either.

There's been statements made (usually said by Hillary supporters. I wonder why?) that we shouldn't judge them by personalities, but rather on their stands on issues. However, they are both liberal Democrats with very little differing between them, so the only thing left over IS their personalities. Given that they are both very pro-choice, neither of them are getting my vote anyway, but let me help some of the Dem supporters who are still wondering what they should do.

Voting for Hillary Clinton
Plus:
* She's had some experience as First Lady in Arkansas and in D.C., and as a Senator
* She's female, which is likely to get a lot of women voting for her based solely on that
* She's a good role model of a strong, independent woman

Minus:
* She's every bit the glory-grabbing politican as her husband was, but without the charm. She's also inept at hiding the fact that she's a glory-grabbing politican, making silly and foolish blunders that less experienced pols wouldn't make.
* She's got "baggage" from the White House years, which her opponents are likely to exploit the entire time that she is in office.
* There is a big difference experience-wise between being First Lady (both at the state and federal level), and being Governor or President.

Voting for Barack Obama
Plus:
* He's young, charming, and handsome, and easy to like
* Unlike Hillary with gender, he isn't using being black as a club to hit others over the head with
* He's got the endorsement of many prominent celebrities and politicians

Minus:
* He's woefully inexperienced. One criticism of George W. Bush is that he had all kinds of handlers helping him in office - with Obama, it will be even worse.
* His voting track record is very largely "Present". The Oval Office needs a decision maker, and not just a seat warmer.
* If he doesn't live up to the hype, he may become a one-term president - thus helping the GOP in the process.

And while all this is going on, the "veepstakes" have already begun. Despite the difficulties that would come with one being the VP candidate of the other, I think Barack and Hillary should do just that. If it's historical for either of them to be a presidential candidate, why not go with a "double whammy" ticket of TWO historical candidates? Granted, if either or both of them get nasty with each other from this point until one of them is officially made the candidate, then it could cause problems for the one to reach out to the other. But still, I think they should swallow their pride and run with it.

On the GOP side, one name came up, and I think that the GOP should go with it: Kay Bailey Hutchison. If Hillary becomes the nominee, then for sure the GOP should go with Hutchison. I think an even more ideal selection would be Dr. Condoleezza Rice, but Dr. Rice has said before that she is not interested in running. If the GOP goes with another white guy for the VP, then they'll end up making things more difficult for themselves, especially if the Dems go with a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket.

As for my own campaign, I was also busy this weekend. Was I out shaking hands and kissing babies? Nope. Was I out meeting and greeting with folks in various parts of the country? Not quite. Was I out schmoozing with celebrities for dough? Hah!

Nope, none of the above, amigo. Instead, I was making an official Facebook page for my campaign! (Note: You have to be on Facebook in order to see the page).

If you are on Facebook, join my campaign! Just so that you know, being a member of my Facebook campaign does not mean that you have to vote for me. BUT - if a regular Joe Schmo such as myself can get a lot of members, then just maybe the other candidates for office will take note on how willing that you all would go with a good candidate if one became available!

I share one similarity with Ron Paul in that I am a message candidate, and my message is this: The politicians don't run the country, we do. And if enough of you get me to the Oval Office, then the big shots and the big boys can't help but take notice. It's time for us to make the alleged "powers that be" lose bladder control! What say ye? Wanna make a rich guy wet his pants? :-D

Also over the weekend, I've been working on campaign slogans. Let me know what you think of the following:

* The Ultimate Grassroots Candidate (current campaign slogan)
* The Ultimate Write-In Candidate
* The Man of the People!
* Don't Tase me, Bro! ("Bro" in this instance, being "Big Brother" of George Orwell fame)

And so my campaign continues!

Vote for Araujo in '08!

Campaign notes

Super Tuesday has come and gone, and it looks like John McCain may run away with it on the GOP side. This has caused some dilemmas of the Sean Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs of the world, along with their listeners. McCain is viewed as a "de facto liberal Democrat" and they had instead been favoring Mitt Romney as the "closest to an authentic conservative" among the three GOP candidates. But Romney did not do as well as they had hoped. The question will become "Will they support McCain?" if he ends up being the GOP candidate. My guess is that they would have to, because the alternative is supporting the Democratic candidate.

And speaking of the Dems, even though Hillary Clinton won more of the states, I don't think that she expected Barack Obama to do as well as he did. The Dem races are proving to be VERY interesting, because you have two representatives of the Democrats' traditional "victims" groups going at it against each other. It's historic that we have BOTH a female candidate AND a black candidate doing this well this far into their campaigns. At their last debate, they were very civil towards each other, but I ask, how long can that last? Their campaigns are not about being buddies with each other, but instead about being the candidate for president in the Democratic Party.

The very nature of elections forbids such camaraderie lasting very long. The last I heard, both agreed to more debates before the Texas primary comes up, and maybe in one of those debates, I'll finally get to see the knock-down, drag-out smackdown that I was expecting to see in the last debate. I wanted to see hair pulling, head-butting, knee-to-the-groining, and other dirty handed tactics to be used - in a metaphorical sense, I mean. ;-)

At some point, they're going to have to stop being nice to each other if they really want to win. I can imagine the ethical boondoggle for the Dems on who to support. The question they are desperately trying to answer is: Which victim's group is in the most need of this win, women or blacks? They would actually prefer not to have to make this choice, but circumstances have developed to the contrary - so this will be a true test for the Dems to see where their loyalties lie. One group will walk away with their representative, while the other may likely harbor resentment for a long time to come.

Of course, it's very likely that one will become the VP candidate for the other, and theoretically this should resolve this dilemma - except one of them will have to step aside for the other. So - who's it going to be? Will the black man step aside for the white woman? Of course, we know of the history of blacks being oppressed by whites, but there is also the particular notoriety of the white woman taking advantage of the black man, and then saying that he raped her. There's even a Pulitzer Prize winning novel about such a story. It would seem that Hillary should step aside because of that. Otherwise, Hillary is going to be the reason that Dr. King's dream will be delayed a little longer.

But - women have long been oppressed by men. It wasn't even 100 years ago that women got the right to vote, even though some states - some of them southern states! - allowed blacks to vote way before the 1920's (Granted, those states didn't do this out of the goodness of their hearts - they just wanted their vote. In some instances, blacks didn't have citizenship or full citizenship yet - but doggonit, they were going to get their vote!). And of course, there was all that other ugliness that went with living in a "patriarchal society". After all that, can we honestly ask such a prominent female leader as Hillary Clinton to step aside and allow a MAN to be - ahem - on top of the woman again? When will this gender oppression end?

Of course, as a political observer and amateur historian, I am fascinated by all this. I am very curious as to how all this will play out without bitterness and resentment from the one who does not get the nomination. Who's victim card has the higher value? Stay tuned, true believers! The best is no doubt yet to come!

As for myself, I have also been busy this week. No, I haven't been fundraising, or making phone calls, or scheduling media appearances or otherwise stumping. So what HAVE I been doing, you ask? I've been making a campaign button! It's below! Check it out!



See folks? Now you can have your very own button to show your support for my ultimate grassroots campaign! Wear it proudly!

*** SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT ***

Welcome. I’m pleased to have you all here today. As stated yesterday, I have an important announcement to make at this time.

In recent years including most of the past two decades, we have had an abundance of political candidates not just from the two major parties – the Democrats and the Republicans – but also the smaller parties that few know about. And yet, despite this abundance of candidates, not one has been able to inspire the nation to come together and work as one people.

Instead, we are left with options of voting for “the lesser evil”, or “I’m voting for X because I dislike Y even more”, or simply not voting at all. My fellow Americans, I’m here to tell you that it’s time to stop voting while holding your nose. It’s time to stop voting for either Tweedle-Dee or Tweedle-Dum. It’s time to stop feeling guilty for voting for those who you know to be whores for big money corporations and special interest groups.

It’s time to stop all that and instead vote for a candidate that won’t sell you out. It’s time to vote for a candidate that will fight for you against a government and politicians that have forgotten just who it is that they serve. It’s time to vote for a candidate that won’t be swayed by big money or popular causes, and who instead will do what’s right for America. It’s time to vote for a candidate that you can feel good about for a change.

Thus, it is with the utmost humility that I announce my candidacy for the office of President of the United States of America.

Because the Democrats and Republicans aren’t about to let what they regard as “some yahoo off of the street” to participate in their debates, I will instead rely on the wonderful modern technology of the Internet to get the word out of my candidacy. I will use my blog to state my positions on issues so that you know exactly what I stand for. In other words, you won’t be getting pretty words and flowery phrases that you hear from the other candidates.

Now understand that I am on a shoestring budget – and I had to get a loan for the string. However, this should not be seen as a minus, but a plus. How so? It is through such financial struggles that I am able to understand your financial struggles. When I say that I know what you’re going through, it’s because I am going through it as well. Do you think that Mitt Romney or Hillary Clinton truly know what you’re going through? Do you think that Barack Obama or John McCain understand what it means to just scrape by? They don’t but I do, because I’m one of you.

Also, compared to the amount of publicity that the major candidates can get, I am limited to this one source of my blog. However, this should not be seen as a minus, but a plus. How so? It is through such voicelessness that I am able to understand your voicelessness when you cry out in anger and frustration when the big shots and big boys raise your taxes or impose the will of the big money corporations and special interest groups on you. I feel your frustration, because I go through it as well. They don’t hear you, and they don’t hear me. We are voices crying out in the wilderness. They don’t hear you, but I do, because I’m one of you.

I don’t have fancy clothes. I have only one car, and I bought it used. I have one house, and it’s an older one. My total assets are nowhere near six digits. However, that should not be seen as a minus, but a plus. How so? This means that I can relate to you when it comes to being grateful for what I have instead of lamenting what I don’t have. The big boys and fat cats that make up most politicians have much, much more than you or I will ever have, but still they want even more. So how can such people relate to you or me? They can’t, but I can, because I’m one of you.

When it comes to big social gatherings or parties, I feel as out of place as one of the Three Stooges at a high-society function. I wouldn’t know which fork to use or what glass is for what. I’d rather have a soda instead of wine, and I’d rather have chicken fried steak with green beans than veal and pâté. However, this should not be seen as a minus, but a plus. How so? Because it means that I can relate to you when it comes to these large social functions that most of us wouldn’t get invited to. If we tried to go anyway, we’d most likely be kicked out at best, or arrested at worst. How can the big boy politicians relate to us and how we feel in such gatherings? But I know how it feels to be left out, because I’m one of you.

I don’t have a fancy suit. I bought my dress shoes at a department store, and on sale. Most of my wardrobe is t-shirts and jeans. The big boys go to faraway places to “recharge”; I take 15 minute “power naps” during my lunch hour. The big boys go to high-dollar doctors for their treatments; I go to doctors that are on my HMO. They can raise millions of dollars by calling their high-dollar connections; I’ll be surprised if my fund-raising reaches 4 digits. I’m in this fight with about the same as you have. Working apart, we might as well be fleas to the big boys, but working together, we can wag the dog.

You can vote for Mitt, Barack, John, or Hillary, but none of them are going to relate to you as well as I do, because they are not one of you. But I am. I don’t have a lot to help my campaign – in fact; all I basically have is you. But if enough of us work together, you will be all that I need. Vote for me in ’08, and you’ll be voting for one of your own. And if, by some miracle, I am elected, I will never forget who got me there. I promise you that.

Over the course of this month, I will give you my take on the issues, and during the rest of the campaign season, I will follow what the other candidates are saying, so that I can give you my side as well. Or rather, OUR side.

Thank you, and God bless.

John P. Araujo

WATCH THIS SPACE! SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT COMING TOMORROW!

WATCH THIS SPACE! SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT COMING TOMORROW!

Videos of intelligent animals and such

Since "No Goofy Stuff" month is over, it's time to get back to goofy stuff! First, some videos:





Now on to other news: I watched the Democratic debates between the last two candidates of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, hoping that there would be kicking, screaming, slapping, hair-pulling, and fisticuffs - all metaphorically speaking, of course. But nope, it didn't happen. Instead, they were downright civil with each other. Man, what a letdown. Not only that, I don't think the questioners pressed them enough. I hope the next debate between them does better than this one. What a letdown!

In the meantime, the Super Bowl is coming tomorrow. Yawn. Let's see: the Patriots will win - pretty much that's it. Like most of the country, I'll be tuning in mainly for the commercials.

Of more interest is Tuesday, or as it is known in the politcial world, Super Tuesday, because a lot of primaries are going on at the same time on that day, and we'll have a better feel for which candidate is going to be nominated for their respective parties.

More goofy stuff to come later in the month, folks!