Canadians Learn Faster Than Americans?

Apparently, Canadians learn faster than we do when it comes to democracy. I'm not knocking our neighbors to the north by any means, I'm celebrating their independent (and apparently working) minds. I only hope we learn the same lessons in time for '08, in case '06 gets stolen too.

When You're Down...

Call 'em ugly.

That's what John Spencer just did. Now, I don't need to do too much to end John Spencer's bid for Senate and probably his delusions of presidency. He does that well enough himself. What I do feel the need to do is relay to you this man's history in Yonkers where he was once mayor.

As mayor, he hasn't done a decent thing in his entire term. He's been a baby-kisser and a PR schmooze, but did nothing while in office except appoint his friends and family to high paying positions within the city government and get more than one mistress. Sounds like someone we already know, come to think of it.

Hillary might have some issues, but if you plan to run against her, you should at least attack her on the issues. Of course, if you're nothing but a simple Yonkers Republican halfwit, I guess that's about the best you can come up with.

This Just Crosses the Line

The Guardian is reporting today that an unnamed Republican campaign office (presumed to be that of Tan D. Nguyen) has sent out approximately 14,000 Hispanic registered Democratic voters warning them of possible reprisals against them if they vote. Among suggested reprisals are possible jail time and the threat of deportation.

Presently (natually) Nguyen's campaign has not returned calls for comments about this, and I'm sure there's good reason for that. Even other Republicans are chiming in, though not without putting it on the spin cycle first:

Scott Baugh, chairman of the Orange County Republican Party, condemned the letter as ``an obnoxious, grotesque piece of work.''

``Regardless of who did it - Republican or Democrat - if it's a crime, then whoever did it should be prosecuted,'' Baugh said.

So now Democrats are trying to keep their own voters away? I can see where he's headed with this: The Democrats supposedly sent out these letters to disgrace local Republicans. The problem with this theory is that if they did that, they still risk keeping a large portion of their voters away from the polls because they may not know that this threat is invalid, and therefore might be too scared to try to vote.

I'm disgusted. First by the letter, second by the coverup. I hope that there is a voter rebellion across the nation because of incidents like this.

Americans, stand up for your rights and vote these weasels out of office!

Not Safer

Put the pieces together, America. There's a lot of them, so follow closely.

Starting in 1993, the American homeland was first put under attack by Islamic extremists. In the eight years following that, we would suffer several more attacks, mostly by a group come to be known as al Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, who coincidentally was trained, armed, and funded by President Reagan. Fortunately, none of those attacks would fall on American soil again, until one sunny morning in 2001.

We were suddenly and terrifyingly thrust back into reality, with the knowledge that we were not safe, virtually in our own homes. Today, for most of the country, that feeling continues. For anyone who denies that they feel safer, you can ask them about the events from last Wednesday, and how they felt about the headlines they most likely heard first:

"Plane Hits Building in Manhattan"

I know what I thought, and while I don't feel like a sheep who follows the herd (I don't believe that only Bush can save me), I know what I thought. "Oh dear, not again."

Almost immediately, I calmed down a bit, because I got a couple of details, like that it was right off the river, and it was an apartment building, and it was nowhere near midtown. I knew that in all likelihood, it was some poor fool who went off course, with tragic results.

We would come to learn in the hours that followed that it was Cory Lidle of the New York Yankees. Our fears were alleviated, to be replaced with sorrow for the loss of a young man with his life in front of him and many more years of a brilliant career. For me though, it brought one thing to my mind in perfect clarity: We are not safer now than five years ago.

After the first plane hit the World Trade Center, many of us initially thought it was a horrifying accident. That is the thought pattern that we lost that day, and that the Bushies have failed to restore. We immediately are led to fear the worst, and with good reason. 'Homeland Security' is underfunded, national intelligence is anything but, and the war to make us safer has made us far more vulnerable and in a state from which we may never recover.

We're not safer.

Let it Never be Said...

"President Barack Obama" definitely has no ring to it whatsoever. I'd much more closely expect that to be the name of a dictator in some foreign country. That said, there exists a very reasonable possibility that it could well become the name of our next president, and... ::gasp:: one of our most successful and wildly popular presidents of all time.

Don't get me wrong, I like Bill Clinton a lot, but I get the feeling that with a sufficient control of the House and Senate, he may become the most effective president as well.

Alas, I get ahead of myself. The man hasn't been elected yet, in fact, he hasn't even announced his official candidacy yet, and both sides of the aisle (for better or worse) are absolutely buzzing about it. He's well liked by politicians around the country and the world, and just as much so the people. There's an inherent sense of honesty and just 'a good guy' mentality that surrounds him.

Barring (true) horrifying charges against him, I know where my vote will be the day he runs.

Defense of Secretary Donald Rumsfeld

Yes, I know... I meant what I said and I said what I meant. Read it, then read the post, you'll get the idea.

Rummy's in trouble again, as Democrats (and a few Republicans) are starting to remember that this whole mess is at least partly (more likely a great deal) his fault. Even through all this, key Republicans are standing by his side and defending the Secretary of Defense. These fine examples of men include Bush himself, Cheney, and Rick Santorum. So are they all, all honorable men.

Normally, the liberal (or even logical) blogosphere is screaming for his head on a silver platter. While this might make a certain amount (or worlds) of sense, I beg to differ. Why, you ask?

If Don is kept on staff and close to heart of the Bushies, you can most certainly note that it will be a blight (one of many) on the Republicans through this critical (like the life signs of an Original Series 'red shirt') election season. If they get rid of him now and adopt an even vaguely more centrist stance (suggesting that they are abandoning 'the course'), if only for the duration of the voting season, it might be just enough to keep waning conservative voters on the 'right' side of the fence and allow the rats to keep control of the House and Congress.

Now, I don't know about you, but this does not sound like a positive option. Therefore, without looking like you like the guy, support Bush in his efforts to keep losers like Don Rumsfeld.

Don't Blame Me!

Hastert's a slippery bastard, isn't he? "No, I didn't know about it... except for those 'overly-friendly' messages... and neither did anyone on my staff... But if they did, they'll be fired."

Forbes.com is reporting now that Hastert has warned his staffers that if they were aware of Mr. Foley's situation and withheld information, they could be fired. I note, however, that he did not mention anything about himself. We can all hope that some staffer will come forward to state that they knew of a coverup, but it won't happen.

Needless to say, it's business as usual for the Republicans. Deny, deny, deny!

And then blame Democrats!

"We're Safe."

"Ah, " said Arthur, "this is obviously some strange usage of the word safe that
I wasn't previously aware of." - Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

The Bushies still maintain that we are safer now with him than we were before September 11th. I beg to differ.

The most recent examples of our new-found safety come in the form of expanding, and now proven, North Korean nuclear arms, and of course the mounting threat from Iran. More established examples come in the form of the presumed still living Osama bin Laden (there is no reliable evidence to suggest otherwise), the failure to keep Afghanistan stable, and the complete collapse of Iraq which continues to approach full civil war on a daily basis.

But we're more stable now.

I honestly ask you, how much of this can we truly stand? Fortunately, even if it's coming off of bogus issues such as the Foley case, the Democrats are slowly continuing to gain support, approaching the feverish level. Oh, and Republicans are losing said support fast. Even if they paint a rosy picture, at this point, that still puts the Republicans losing by just a few points instead of a gap putting the Grand Canyon to shame.

And speaking of shame, don't think I don't think that Mark Foley is a disgusting example of what's horribly wrong with the Republican Party; He is. The Republicans are so out of touch with the American people that they are now trying to become above the laws that they themselves helped to make. Hastert on the other hand is merely guilty of aiding and abetting. There's nothing wrong with that, according to Republicans. It's only a problem with the pages that Mr. Hastert could've helped to keep secure from this pervert if he had the honor within him to speak up and risk political damage.

Between us, I think that it's a very admirable move to sink a member of your own camp when they are guilty of a horrendous crime. Not that I'd vote for him, but at least I'd have less to fault him for. At this point, the only thing voters are left to think is that this is now a problem endemic to the Republican Party, and who, aside from Republicans, are there to suggest they're wrong?

But back to the point... We're not safer now. Americans here at home are not safer from the risk of terrorist attack, regardless of size or scale. American travelers are still at significant risk when leaving our country, even to areas once thought safe, such as Europe. American soldiers are at risk every day they live outside of bases within this country, many of them for a war that is simply not worth dying for, let alone ever being started.

Worse yet, our former allies within the world are now also at significant risk. I am not saying that foreign lives are more or less valuable than American lives. All lives are equal. Yet day after day, America puts them all at risk.

I vote for change.

This Makes Even More Sense Today...

Well, John the Baptist after torturing a thief,
Looks up at his hero, the Commander in Chief,
Saying tell me great hero, but please make it brief,
Is there a hole for me to get sick in?

The Commander in Chief answers him while chasing a fly,
Saying "Death to all those who would whimper and cry,"
And dropping a barbell he points to the sky,
Saying "The sun's not yellow, it's chicken."
- Bob Dylan, Tombstone Blues

Somehow, this is so terribly relevant to today. I don't know why, but it reminds me of someone...

Even Bush Agrees With Me

From Forbes.com:

Speaking at a Stockton, Calif., elementary school, Bush said he was "disgusted" by the revelations that Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., had sent sexually explicit e-mails to a former House page.

"Families have every right to expect that when they send their children to be a congressional page in Washington, that those children will be safe," Bush said.

Well, we finally agree on something. I guess he's just not disgusted enough to ask Hastert to get the hell out of town though, even though it's become evident, if not concrete, that he knew that inappropriate conversations were taking place between Foley and his pages. First, we heard rumors that even other Republicans had forwarded several 'overly friendly' communications to Hastert and his staff, among others. From Forbes again:

Rep. Thomas Reynolds of New York, head of the House Republican election effort, said he told Hastert months ago about the allegations involving a 16-year-old boy from Louisiana.

Hastert acknowledged that his staff had been made aware of concerns about what they termed "over-friendly" e-mails Foley had sent to the teenager - including one requesting his picture - in the fall of 2005, and that they referred the matter to the House clerk.

But Hastert said those e-mails were not viewed as "sexual in nature" and that he was not aware of "a different set of communications which were sexually explicit ... which Mr. Foley reportedly sent another former page or pages."

Now, we're learning that Foley was previously told to "immediately cease any communication" with the page with whom he had sent 'overly friendly' communications, as well as all other pages. Now, if you're not dense (you're reading this, aren't you?), you can tell as well as I can that they thought this creep was sick enough to ban him from all communication with pages.

What's more, we can also derive that his communications (the ones they admit to knowing of!) were bad enough to generate this reaction from his own party. It's obvious that they were very aware of this problem and like the Catholic Church, simply swept the issue under the rug, putting more children at risk for the sake of an election year and a good face!

Oh, but we're not through yet! Now the Republicans are trying to spin this as though this 'minor' incident was being kept under the rug by the Democrats! You weasel, Boehner (hehe, he said boner...)!

Boehner also suggested that campaign opponents might have made sure the e-mails surfaced close to midterm elections. "If this evidence was withheld for political purposes, one can only speculate as to how many additional children may have been endangered before this information was finally revealed," he wrote.

I ask you the same question, you dirtbag! And you, too, Hastert! Bush, don't think I forgot about you! How dare you sacrifice the safety of American children for your own personal gains! Damn you all! I promise that when we regain control, there will be hell to pay in this country for you and all your enablers.

Absolutely Disgusting...

According to an an ABC story (yes, I know, I didn't go there actually looking for news, this is a forwarded story), Congressman Mark Foley (R. FL) has been actively engaged in explicit sexual conversations with underage kids, seemingly mostly boys.

Mr. Foley has also been a strong advocate for child protection laws on the web, and sponsored several bills introduced to Congress to prevent exactly these types of situations.

Now, the point of this post is not to beat up on Mr. Foley exclusively (though he deserves and undoubtedly will get plenty of that in prison), but more the Republican party as a whole. My issue is that the Republicans have become (more) detached from what they have the gall to tout as American family values.

So far, it seems to me that the only values they've conveyed to Americans is to keep their wives and children away from them, and to vote for representatives that really do hold their values at heart. Whether said representatives are Democrats or independents is up to you, but at this point you can be assured that it isn't Republicans.

Send a real message to your Republican representatives this November, as well as in '08: Vote them out. And tell them you're watching your childrens' online activities too.