| Obama's speech |
[Mar. 20th, 2008|11:05 am] |
The snippets of Obama's race speech getting played on the news and/or Daily Show are amazing enough, but it's over half an hour of brutally honest discussion of race in America. Wow.
|
|
|
| There is no line Bush has not crossed, nor will not cross, to keep one political party in power |
[Nov. 2nd, 2006|08:39 am] |
So now John Kerry has apologized to the troops; apologized for the Republicans' deliberate distortions.
Thus the President will now begin the apologies he owes our troops, right?
This President must apologize to the troops — for having suggested, six weeks ago, that the chaos in Iraq, the death and the carnage, the slaughtered Iraqi civilians and the dead American service personnel, will, to history, quote "look like just a comma."
This President must apologize to the troops — because the intelligence he claims led us into Iraq proved to be undeniably and irredeemably wrong.
This President must apologize to the troops — for having laughed about the failure of that intelligence, at a banquet, while our troops were in harm's way.
This President must apologize to the troops — because the streets of Iraq were not strewn with flowers and its residents did not greet them as liberators.
This President must apologize to the troops — because his administration ran out of "plan" after barely two months.
This President must apologize to the troops — for getting 2,815 of them killed.
This President must apologize to the troops — for getting this country into a war without a clue.
And Mr. Bush owes us an apology… for this destructive and omnivorous presidency.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/11/01/olbermanns-special-comment-there-is-no-line-this-president-has-not-crossed-nor-will-not-cross-to-keep-one-political-party-in-power/
Sweeping and horrifying. Well worth watching the whole thing. |
|
|
| Electronic machines must go |
[Sep. 28th, 2006|09:41 am] |
Imagine you're in a bar and guy bets you 10:1 you can't guess if a number he's thinking is even or odd. So you take the bet. "Even!" you say. "Sorry, I was thinking of 7", he says, and takes your dollar. And you just have to take his word for it.
That's what voting maches are. There is no ballot. No proof. No way to recount. We have to accept that what the machine says at the end of the election is how people voted. There is no recourse. No audit trail. Nothing.
Voting machines remove the power of the ballot from the electorate.
And if you're OK with this game of "I hope that the black box tallies people correctly," then you need to trust that the machines are secure. And they're not: http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ |
|
|
| Thanks for the ad, Mr. Common-Sense Conservative |
[Sep. 18th, 2006|04:17 pm] |
It's always nice to have advertising for the boneheads to let you know who you definitely don't want to vote for. In the mail today I got a flyer for a local Republican, sponsored by http://www.ilgop.org:
David McSweeney believes that we should fully support our troops until the mission is completed.
No matter if you agreed with the way we got into Iraq, McSweeney believes that we must guarantee our soldiers have the weapons and material they need to get the job done.
McSweeney also fully supports efforts to enhance our intelligence capability to stop terrorists in the future.
Let's pick this apart!
-
"No matter if you agreed with the way we got into Iraq, McSweeney believes": So it doesn't matter what constituents might think. It's about what he thinks.
-
"fully support our troops": Pulling out the unarguable "support our troops" in place of the more accurate "leave them in harm's way". There's no arguing that the #1 way to support the troops is to bring them home. It might not be the best politically, but if you're going to talk about just the troops, bringing them home is #1.
- "until the mission is completed": What mission is that exactly?
- "weapons and material": I think he means "weapons and materiel"
- "enhance our intelligence capability": MORE SPYING! Let's pass a law that requires all my email to have cc: rumsfeld@whitehouse.gov, how 'bout?
|
|
|
| The al Qaeda under the bed |
[Aug. 23rd, 2006|08:10 pm] |
"Why have they not been sniping at people in shopping centers, collapsing tunnels, poisoning the food supply, cutting electrical lines, derailing trains, blowing up oil pipelines, causing massive traffic jams, or exploiting the countless other vulnerabilities that, according to security experts, could so easily be exploited?"
...
"[A] common explanation is that al Qaeda is craftily biding its time. But what for? The 9/11 attacks took only about two years to prepare. The carefully coordinated, very destructive, and politically productive terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 were conceived, planned from scratch, and then executed all within six months..."
...
"The massive and expensive homeland security apparatus erected since 9/11 may be persecuting some, spying on many, inconveniencing most, and taxing all to defend the United States against an enemy that scarcely exists."
"Is There Still A Terrorist Threat?" |
|
|
