Word of the Day

"I've coined new words, like 'misunderstanding' and 'Hispanically.'"

—George W. Bush, Radio & Television Correspondents' Dinner, March 29, 2001

Tag

Rules are:

1) link to your tagger and post these rules on your blog.

2) share 7 facts about yourself on your blog, some random, some weird.

3) tag 7 people at the end of your post by leaving their names as well as links to their blogs

4) let them know they are tagged by leaving a comment on their blog.

Well here is 1) creative kerfuffle.

3) & 4) will be a problem b/c I don't have personal contact with seven other bloggers, but I will at least do 2)

Fact 1:

I was pissed that I didn't turn 18 until after the 1990 election and therefore couldn't vote against Jesse Helms.

Fact 2:

Beets make me want to vomit.

Fact 3:

I regularly imagine horrible, awful things happening to my loved ones in a weird attempt to prepare myself should something bad really happen.

Fact 4:

Although my job is an editor, sometimes I don't think I know anything about grammar.

Fact 5:

I wish I had been more reckless and wild in college.

Fact 6:

I really like to drink milk. In fact, when I spent a semester in England, my roommate would take me to the Safeway to buy me milk when I was grumpy and it always made me feel better.

Fact 7:

I believe in God, but I am just not that into the whole Jesus thing.

Quote of the day

"Reading is the basics for all learning."

said by George W. Bush on March 28, 2000 in Reston, Virginia

And people, feel free to like comment and stuff, even us liberal feminists like to feel the love now and then . . .

The Evil Empire Strikes Back

Here's another one for the file on why Wal-Mart is evil. The Wall Street Journal reported last fall that Deborah Shank, a former Wal-Mart stocker was involved in a car accident where she was hit by a semi about 8 years ago now. She ended up permanently brain damaged and in a wheel chair, requiring nursing home care. The trucking company gave her an accident settlement. After attorney's fees, she was left with $417,000 in a trust fund to pay for her ongoing care.

Meanwhile, there was a clause in her Wal-Mart healthcare plan that gave them the right to recoup any money they paid in medical expenses if someone gets a settlement from those injuries. So Wal-Mart sued Shank for $470,000.

Now her expenses are being paid by Medicaid and Social Security (i.e. you and I). Meanwhile the woman has lost her 18-year-old son in Iraq, shortly after he arrived there and due to her brain damage she doesn't always remember that he has died. Her husband divorced her in the hopes that she might be eligible for more money for her care as a single woman. She is not aware of this fact.

Apparently, many companies have a clause in their plans that allows them to pull this kind of stunt, but up until recently it has not often been used. Also, a recent Supreme Court ruling has made it easier for companies to actually proceed with these kinds of cases and get results.

Here is just another way that rising healthcare costs are hurting Americans—not just Shank and her family, but every taxpayer who is now having to bear the burden of the cost of her care so Wal-Mart (who made BILLIONS in profit last year) can put another hundred thousand in their pocket. Nice.

MSNBC's Keith Olberman highlighted this in his Worst Person of the Day segment last night. 

O-boring

Maybe he was off his game. Maybe it was because DESPITE HAVING A TICKET MY FRIEND AND I WEREN'T ABLE TO ACTUALLY GET INTO THE AUDITORIUM. (I apologize for the yelling, but dang if that didn't piss me off, you know how many seats the place has, don't give out several hundred more tickets than you have seats for.) Maybe it was because I had to stand on concrete for two hours and watch it on a giant monitor. Maybe it was because I had to eat canned soup at my desk for lunch to go to the thing in the first place.

Whatever the reason, I personally thought the Obama rally in my little neck of the wood's was not the charismatic, life-altering experience I thought it would be.

Don't get me wrong, he is a good speaker, but it wasn't the rock star event that people build it up to be. This is my second political rally (I know, I am still a bit of a newbie). The first was John Edwards back during the 2004 election. It was outside, so nobody telling me I couldn't get in and I was standing on the ground, but admittedly in some pretty high heels (not the best planning moment I must admit). All things being even, however, that rally was thrilling. I got charged up.

Maybe I am just more jaded now. Maybe I just wasn't that into it yesterday. Maybe my heart is just two sizes too small. Maybe it is because I haven't made up my mind yet between Obama and Clinton. But I do know this, unlike those yah-whoo's that CNN has been polling who say that if their democrat doesn't get the nod, they are voting for McCain—Seriously? Are you freakin' insane? If you are a true democrat I just don't see how you can think that McCain is better than the other democrat, oh well—I will vote for whichever democrat with pride, and joy in my heart.

CNN's poll showed that currently 41% of Obama supporters would be upset if Clinton got the nod. While if the reverse happens, 51% of Clinton supporters would be upset. Continuing this theme, 19% of Obama supporters said they would vote for McCain if Clinton gets the nod; 28% of Clinton supporters would go to McCain if Obama gets the nod.

UNFUCKING BELIEVABLE. Again I have to yell. After almost eight years of the Bush nightmare what kind of person could logically want to continue that with a McCain White House? Because that is what the dude is pledging, to basically continue Bush's policies.

Listen people if your democrat doesn't get the nomination, be upset, fine. Go out have a couple of drinks, cry in your beer, rail at the stupidity of your fellow Americans. And the next morning, look in the mirror and suck it up for the greater good. Because whichever it is that gets the democratic nomination, Clinton or Obama, he or she is going to be miles ahead of McCain in terms of better serving this country.

We only have 299 left until Bush is outta here. Let's not screw this up people.

DEM Smackdown

In this corner we have the former governor of New Mexico, former U.S. Representative, lawyer, Roman Catholic, and possessor of a MAGNIFICENT beard, William Blaine Richardson III.

And in this corner, the former presidential campaign strategist, host of CNN's now-defunct Crossfire, lover of GOP dames, the Rajun' Cajun, James Carville.

Now, why you may ask are these two men going at it? Aren't democrats supposed to be lovers, not fighters?

Richardson endorsed Obama earlier this week rather than Clinton, even though Bill

Clinton appointed him to two senior positions in his presidential cabinet. Coupled with the fact that Richardson is one of the party's more prominent Hispanics, a group that both Clinton and Obama are courting ferociously, and let's just say you might have some hurt feelings coming from the Clinton camp.

But how does 'ole Carville figure into this exactly? He is a friend of the Clinton's and the NY Times does describe him as an "advisor" to their camp (whatever that means—can I consider Clinton and Stacy from TLC's What Not to Wear as my advisors, because god knows I try to adhere to their advice to avoid a tapered pant leg.)

Carville said it was an "act of betrayal," as well as this (in reference to Holy Week):

Mr. Richardson's endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic.

Methinks Carville's media star needed a bit of a polish?

Richardson for his part credited Obama's recent speech about race for solidifying his decision. 

In other news of testiness on the Clinton front, first daughter Chelsea gave the succinct smackdown to a questioner on the campus of Butler University. The person asked about did Monica Lewinsky hurt her mother's credibility. Chelsea's reply, "I do not think that is any of your business."

The Letdown

For those of you who don't know, Matt Taibbi is a caustic, rather funny, take no prisoners political writer/reporter for Rolling Stone (he also moonlights on Bill Maher's HBO show, Real Time.

In the March 20, 2008 issue of RS, Taibbi takes on Hillary Clinton. The gist of his piece is that she is a ground-breaking politician, who through her own errors has martyred herself.

The part that struck me the most is excerpted below:

Every woman who was ever denied a promotion for spending too much time with her children or who had to deal with whispers of being a "bitch" or an "ice queen" when in fact she was just being a boss—they all couldn't help but see themselves in Hillary, a "substance" candidate dying on the cross of "likability."

But Hillary Clinton let them down, because presidential politics is not the corporate world, and her martyrdom was both inaccurate and imperfect. If there was any glass ceiling in this race for a promotion, it was the one erected by Hillary herself—you could even quantify it numerically, in the nearly 3-1 lead in superdelegates that Hillary, by virtue of her status as the pre-2008 anointed candidate of the Democratic Party apparatchiks, had wrapped up before the first votes were even cast.

He goes on to say that what really happened to Clinton is that she represents something old and she got taken down by the newer model. It is hard, as a woman, to not pin all your personal baggage on to Clinton in the way that Taibbi is referencing. She does represent, to a certain extent, the good girl that did everything right, worked hard and knew her stuff and still got rejected for the top gig. Many, many women identify with that in one shape or form. (Not that I do, no not at all. Not one little, bitty bit.)

There will always be something shinier and newer and more exciting out there, waiting to unseat the old guard. It happens in business, in life and in politics everyday. I guess it all comes down to whether or not you think change is good.

In Tomorrow's Post

We learn:

• Why Rolling Stone's Matt Taibi thinks Clinton let herself and all women down
  
• How Bill Richardson betrayed the Clinton's and what James Carville, the Rajun' Cajun had to say about it
• What it is like to actually experience the Obama-nation firsthand.

Won't you join me?

Breakin' It Down III

In today's lesson (courtesy, once again of Newsweek), we learn that the Dems would rate education as their #2 spending priority, while McCain gives that honor to border security. Hold tight to your chalupas kiddies. (For the earlier lessons, check here and here.)

Obama: The next JFK puts $75 billion on the line for his educational dreams. Not only does Obama want to give a refundable $4,000 tax credit on tuition (I assume this is for college), but he wants Pell Grants to keep up with inflation—imagine that! He also has funds set aside to create universal access to preschool ($10 billion goes to this). The final main point, setting up 40,000 scholarships for teachers and grants for drop-out prevention.

Clinton: Clinton outspends Obama, pledging $88 billion for her education plan. She ditches No Child (since it already ditched the children, why not?). Also for the K-12 set, she wants to bring in new teachers and principals (your principal is your PAL!) and expand after-school programs. For those going beyond 12th grade, she wants to give a $3,500 college tax credit, give some moola to community colleges and increase AmeriCorps scholarships and Pell Grants.

McCain: For McCain, his top two area of spending focuses on border security. As the sponsor of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (look Ma—it's comprehensive!) he has already put $18.5 billion on this area through 2012. On top of that, McCain wants to throw another $5 billion on the pile to construct a high-tech border fence along our southern border. Grand total?(Since McCain isn't keen on education, I will do the math for you.) $23.5 billion.

Well, that about does it. For the final installment, we will take a gander at the three candidates energy plans, believe it or not this makes the #3 spot for all of them. Woohoo!

YESS!!!!!

I'M GOING TO AN OBAMA RALLY TOMORROW!!!!!!!!!!!!

(I might be excited.)

Thanks to the noble Wes for sharing his spare ticket. I totally owe you.

Three Strikes

Yesterday the news broke that Obama's passport file was breached three times by the State Department since the first of the year. Of course this is all due to the lack of oversight and no-warrants-required system that our government has created in recent years.

Maybe some of you think it is no big deal, but when the Department of Justice acknowledges (as it did two weeks ago) that the FBI has for years been abusing the national security letters part of the Patriot Act that is bad. The national security letters allows the FBI to look at whatever personal info they want about Americans without a warrant or any oversight. This means that without being accused of anything, Americans have been having their personal information riffled through. Nice. The Washington Post has more details here.

Then, of course, there is the recent interview that Dick Cheney gave to ABC's Martha Raddatz. Cheney made a statement that the surge has been a success (duh, of course he WOULD say that) and then Raddatz asked him how that squared with a recent poll that showed two-thirds of Americans think the fight in Iraq isn't worth it. As you probably all know by now 'ole Dickie-boy's response was "So." Nice. You can read or view the interview for yourself here. 

Finally, there is McCain's recent gaffe in a press conference in the Middle East where he stated that Iran was training and harboring Al Qaeda terrorists. His sidekick Joe Lieberman quickly stepped forward to correct him, and McCain restated his remark, but I am not sure I am buying that he didn't mean what he first said. This hasn't gotten much coverage because many of the media just seems to trust the idea that McCain knows what he is talking about when it comes to foreign policy. (For more on that, visit Glenn Greenwald's blog on Salon.com.) This is the man after all who sang, "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran."  Then Thursday, McCain's national security spokesman said this:

"There is ample documentation that Iran has provided many different forms of support to Sunni extremists, including Al Qaeda as well as Shi'ia extremists in Iraq. It would require a willing suspension of disbelief to deny Iran supports Al Qaeda in Iraq."

There is a lot we don't know about Iran. But one thing seems clear, that if the Bush administration doesn't get its chance to go after Iran, something it has seemingly hungered after for years, then McCain (if elected president) may just carry on that dream.

Just something to think about if you are on the fence about who to vote for—the Democrats or the Republicans. Frankly to me, it looks like three strikes against the current and incumbent Republicans in just this last week. Imagine what they could do with four more years . . .

Political Science for Dummies

DEMOCRATIC
You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. You feel guilty for being successful. Barbara Streisand sings for you.
 
 
REPUBLICAN
You have two cows. Your neighbor has none. So?
 
 
SOCIALIST
You have two cows. The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor. You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.
 
 
COMMUNIST
You have two cows. The government seizes both and provides you with milk. You wait in line for hours to get it. It is expensive and sour.

In Remembrance

Today, in 2003, the United States began the war in Iraq. Since that date, almost 4,000 American men and women have been killed, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens.

No matter what your feelings are about the war, take a moment today to honor these men and women and their families who have to carry on without them.

For a list of the names of the dead, visit the Military Times.

Spay or Neuter

Please remember to have your pets politicians spayed or neutered.

Really people? Can't any of these people keep it in their pants? New York's newest governor, David Paterson has come out saying that he (and his wife) both had extramarital affairs during a rough patch in the marriage back in the late nineties, early aughts. I get that he feels like he has to be upfront about this or risk "exposure" later for it. That is sad enough, but I guess I am just dismayed that yet again, a politician has shown a lack of moral fiber. (Why can't there be a moral fiber cereal that is good for your soul and not just your colon? They invent everything else, why not this?)

Perhaps sadder still is the fact that while yes, this man broke his marriage vows and cheated (as did his wife) they moved past it and have continued in their marriage. That is admirable, I have to admit. Although now of course they have to relive that pain of betrayal all over again.

Athough I am looking forward to the day that we get to see the role reversal that Sam Bee parodied on The Daily Show (The Shame Parade) last week. Ah, now that is a feminist manifesto!

Jimminy crickets—I know I am going to come off like a conservative here folks (although the GOP isn't exactly the best when it comes to keeping true to the spouse), but can't we just try to pay attention to that whole idea that you are supposed to be true to your husband or wife? God knows I like to be flirted with as much as the next girl, but there is a line you don't cross and trust me, you know when you are on the verge of squidging that little toe across that line, much less throwing your naked bum over it.

There, moral lesson over. Go back to your normally scheduled debauchery.

The Green Post

Happy St. Patrick's Day Ya'll!

Well, now that I have that out of my system . . . In case you weren't properly enjoying your Monday I have two tidbits of news that will be sure to bring a spring to your step!

First, Clinton and Obama have agreed to another debate on April 16, in Philadelphia prior to the Pennsylvania primary. Oh joy! Oh rapture! Whatever will they talk about? Probably what they have been talking about for the previous 20 debates. I really don't know if I have the energy for another debate. Speaking of which, Obama has agreed to another possible debate, three days later in my home state of North Carolina. See, and you thought our primary wouldn't matter! Shame on you.

Second, does it send a shiver down anyone else's spine to know that Dick Cheney (and family) along with Republican nominee John McCain and two of his lap dogs, SC senator Lindsey Graham and Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman have been kicking up their heels together in Iraq?

And what did Darth Evil have to say about the past five years in Iraq? "If you look back on those five years it has been a difficult, challenging but nonetheless successful endeavor . . . and it has been well worth the effort."

Wonder if the almost 4,000 U.S. dead and the estimated 600,000 Iraqi dead (definitely more now, since the linked article is six months old) feel the same way as ole Dick?

The "Ism" Post

Today dear readers we are going to discuss "Isms." "Isms" you ask? Yes, those fun concepts such as sexism and racism and chauvinism. If you have been paying any attention to the news this week you will have noticed we have had a lot of fodder for all of the aforementioned "Isms."

(On a side note, "Isms" are the reason I decided to not get my PhD—after my MFA, I just couldn't take five more years of pretentious intellectuals who couldn't compose a sentence without at least two words ending in an "Ism." Yet here we are with a whole post about the dang things. Go figure.)

First, there is Mr. Spitzer and the early post about his dalliances, Fuck Gate. If you can get beyond the obviousness of his breaking the law and cheating on his wife, you still have to "swallow" (so to speak  . . . teehee, Creative Kerfuffle, that's for you!) the fact that Spitzer was Mr. Law and Order. I mean this was a dude that didn't believe in shades of grey and yet here he is swimming in a vat of Sherwin William's Meditative. Anyway, once you digest all of that information then you get to the "Ism"—and this time I think it is chauvinism. Yes, this man broke the law after not just vowing to uphold it but threatening to hunt it down and hog tie those who break it. However what I think sticks in my craw more is that this man has three daughters. And these girls will now forever know that there dad thought it was acceptable to not only cheat on their mother, but do so with a prostitute. Wow! Does anyone else see some therapy and major relationship issues ahead for these poor girls?

Moving on we come to sexism vs. racism with this week's comments from former vice presidential-nominee, Geraldine Ferrarro. I think this quote from her remarks sums it up best:

"Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?"

No Ms. Ferrarro, they aren't attacking you because you are white or even because you are a woman. They are attacking you because you opened your mouth and inserted not just your foot but your whole ass.

Maybe there is so truth to the idea that Obama has gotten a bit of a pass from the media and whomever because he is young and charismatic and maybe, just maybe, because he is non-Caucasian. That doesn't negate the fact that he is a smart, qualified man. And I think that Ms. Ferrarro was, in fact, trying to negate those facts. Obama remarked that it was ridiculous for anyone to say that being an African-American man running for president put him at an advantage is correct. I don't think it puts him at an advantage, it might possibly mean that in most cases people hesitate to attack him as vigorously so as to appear without racism, but I don't think it does anything else for him.

The whole thing makes me sad. While Ferrarro may have gotten a bum deal when she was named the vp candidate, I would have hoped that bitterness might have cooled in the ensuing 20 years. I guess it hasn't.

I think Keith Olbermann had a valid point the other night when he made his special comment about the Ferrarro issue.  He addressed Hillary Clinton's response to Ferrarro's comments. He believes Clinton missed an opportunity to truly denounce the comments and distance herself from it. Heck, Obama's camp fired Samantha Power for calling Clinton a "monster" but Ferrarro says Obama has gotten a break because he is a black man and yes she stepped down, but she was far from truly apologetic about it.

No Clinton just disagrees with the remarks and says the remarks were regrettable. What is regrettable is that our country continues to make a person's skin color or sex an issue.

Can't we all just grow up?

Fuck Gate

As The Daily Show so elegantly called it, is not something I am ignoring. I have plenty of condemnation for Mr. Spitzer, but I have been too busy to go there. I will soon I promise.

Also, not surprisingly, Obama took Mississippi yesterday.

Breakin' It Down II

In an earlier post (Breakin' It Down) I referenced a recent Newsweek that discussed how the candidates would spend our money if they were elected. Today the health care edition (otherwise known as where the most money is going):

Obama: His plan lets small biz and regular joes purchase a plan that is similar to the health care that Congress gets. Yeah for the little guys! And as he and Clinton have gone round and round over in the debates, he mandates coverage for kids. Expanding Medicaid and SCHIP, as well as subsidies, would cover those who can't afford his plan's rates. During his first term he would put $240 billion toward this.

Clinton: She would exceed Obama's spending, putting $400 billion towards health care in her first four years. To cover all Americans, Clinton wants to use tax credits help keep premiums for a family at a fixed percentage of their incomes. She would also expand Medicaid and SCHIP.

McCain: Apparently health care is not one of McCain's big areas of focus. Rather than detail anything he would do, Newsweek looks at the area he would spend the most cash on—defense. Shocking! Currently the Congressional Budget Office says that we are spending $10 billion a month in Iraq for combat operations. To keep that going for four more years (Mac has pledged to keep our troops there for 100 years if necessary), comes in at $550 billion.

So . . . billions to make sure America is healthier or billions to continue to fight a war we aren't winning, in a country that doesn't want us there. That is some interesting math.

A Cautionary Tale

Slammed today, but just this quick note of caution:

If you are ever making caramel, which is basically just heating sugar until it melts and becomes caramel—don't lick the spoon from the pot. Caramel, aka hot sugar, can really burn the shit out of your lip.

And people will think you have herpes if you have a blister on your lip.

Breakin' It Down

Oh goodie. Last week's Newsweek ran a lovely page on the ways that the presidential candidates have pledged to spend our money should they be elected El Presidente! How exciting to look at someone else's budget rather than my own.

There is a fair bit of info here so I will spread it out and that way all you little political junkies will have something to look forward to this week. Aren't I a benevolent blogger?

Today, let's take a gander at Newsweek's overview of each candidate. 

The overview on Obama: Newsweek says that Obama's plan takes its cues from Rubinomics, the policies created by Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin. I got no problem with a repeat of the prosperity of the 90s, particularly since this time I won't be a perpetual student and might have a chance of benefiting from all the largesse. Basically Obama's plan would let Bush's income tax cuts for high earners fall by the wayside (sounds fine by me) and it would give the middle class some tax cuts. Next he would up spending on health care, move some of the Iraqi war funding over to fix some of our domestic mess and possibly try to help Social Security by lifting the cap on payroll taxes. 

Now for Senator Clinton: Again, like Obama, Clinton would let Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy expire. Also like Obama she would fix it so hedge-fund managers don't have lower tax rates than their administrative assistants. The money she gets from that increase in tax income (and don't start crying for the hedge-fund suits people!) would go to pay down the deficit and five other big issues she holds near and dear: universal health care; education reform; new savings programs; green energy programs; and housing aid.

Finally we come to Senator McCain. Ole Mac has changed his views a bit on Bush's tax cuts for the richies. At first he was against then, but now that he needs their money for his campaign he thinks they are A-O.K. So McCain is now saying he wants to extend the reduced rates that currently would expire in 2010. This means the income, capital gains, and dividends and estates; and it also means we would lose about $3.6 trillion in revenue over a 10 year period of time. Meanwhile he also wants to increase spending on defense and reduce the deficit. Mac—you got some 'splaining to do! Or maybe he has just found the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow? St. Patty's is around the corner, maybe the leprechauns are getting slack?

More on this throughout the week. Also, heads up—the Southern Baptist Convention has decided that climate change might exist!!! Be still my heart. All this means is that they have figured out how to make a buck off this.

Oh yeah—Obama took the blue ribbon in the Wyoming caucus. Or whatever prize they give out there to the winner.

Perchance to Dream

Dreams are strange things.

Today we are going to take a detour down the metaphysical highway. Check out this site: 

www.idreamofhillaryidreamofbarack.com/about.

Thanks to "Chad Boulet" for the link. And if you are at all interested in the American Idol juggernaut, he does a nifty job of reviewing it at his blog, Idol Savant listed in my links.

Scared Little Girls

I received a chain email this morning from a friend (who shall remain nameless because she is a good person who apparently just takes things at face value and doesn't really deserve my or your condemnation) that kind of set me off.

The email told the basic scare story of how we (especially women) are NEVER safe. This story detailed a supposed true event at a mall where a woman was almost abducted after a nicely dressed stranger helped her fix a flat. The stranger was of course a male.

Just in case you aren't aware, there is a Web site—snopes.com—whose purpose is to clarify or debunk urban myths of this nature. So next time you get an email about syringes in phone booths or whatever, go there and check it out.

My friend's email pissed me off for two reasons. One, that despite my friend's niceness, someone would be so unaware as to blindly send this sort of thing on as fact or as a "just in case." Still waiting on that check from Microsoft, aren't we?

Secondly, I just can't freakin' stand that people continue to push this idea that women are never safe. Damn it! If you want to get technical, probably none of us are ever safe. Regardless of your belief in predestination, we can't know what is going to happen to us or when. Yes one shouldn't go down a dark alley in a bad neighborhood at night alone. DUH—that goes for men, women and Chuck Norris. But I refuse to walk around feeling like I have the word victim tattooed on my forehead because I have boobs.

I am a strong, capable woman and I can take care of myself. I am not stupid or unaware or naive. Something tells me I am not the only female possessing these qualities in the United States, much less the world. So, please, my fellow females—don't fall for this bullshit. There isn't a boogey man around every corner waiting to get you. And men, don't be thinking that women are just one flat tire away from falling apart, abduction or disaster. Give us some credit.

And for any of you that forward emails like the one I received without first verifying the information? FOR SHAME!

A Whole New Ballgame

"You see, the country has mood swings."

"Mood swings? Nineteen post-graduate degrees in mathematics, and your best explanation for going from a 63 to a 46 percent approval rating in five weeks is mood swings?"

"Well, I could explain it better, but I'd need charts, and graphs, and an easel."

You get a gold star if you can id what movie that dialogue comes from. Those lines seem especially apropos this morning after yesterday's wins for Team Clinton. While the actual delegate count is still a bit up in the air (Clinton won the Texas primary, but the Texas caucus is still undecided according to CNN—can someone explain THAT shit to me?), winning Texas and Ohio is a big deal and it keeps Clinton in the game for another inning.

Man I am FEELING the sports analogies this morning . . . 

Frankly I am excited. I don't want to have a decision yet between Clinton and Obama. (Hell, I can't make up my own mind yet.) While the GOP may try and play this prolonged nomination process for the left as only helping there side because the Dems are spending their money fighting each other and not the Republicans, I don't buy it. I think it is kick ass that we have such a close campaign and that the Democratic party is blessed to have two such talented candidates to choose from. Whichever person ends up clinching the nomination, the party wins as does the country.

Maybe it is just my venti skinny mocha talking, but dang I am pumped about the results this morning. Obama shouldn't be taking anything for granted. ("America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've got to want it bad, because it's gonna put up a fight.") And Clinton shouldn't be counted out.

Oh yeah, McCain cinched the Republican nomination. Yawn.

Up next—Wyoming caucuses for the Democrats on Saturday and Mississippi votes on the 11th. Then we sit tight until April 22 when the Pennsylvania primary takes place. This is another biggie and if Clinton pulls that one out then the delegate race gets even tighter.

Theatre of the Absurd

While we all wait on pins and needles to see the results from Ohio and Texas, let me share this tidbit of amusement with you.

Just when I thought Fox News couldn't get more ridiculous, scary or backward, we have this exchange from Sunday's episode of Fox & Friends (with friends like these . . .). 

Basically what happens is the female anchor explains that the women anchors at Fox like to be "feminine" and that is why they lean towards skirts and not pantsuits. Alrighty then. Anyway, the whole thing is an embarrassment and is probably something they stole from a script for some 1950s wise-cracking movie staring Rock Hudson and Doris Day.

Stewart 08

Well since that isn't going to happen, just an FYI that Hillary Clinton will be Jon Stewart's guest on tonight's episode of The Daily Show.

Enjoy.

Tex Mess

Tomorrow is the big day for Clinton. Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont vote. Of course Ohio and Texas are the biggies. Her lead in Ohio is slim and apparently Clinton and Obama are neck and neck in Texas. 

It's anyone's guess what will happen when the polls close tomorrow evening, but even if Obama's streak isn't broken, I don't see Clinton throwing in the towel just yet. And of course she may surprise us all and pull the two states out, which would change the whole picture and give her campaign new life.

I was at church yesterday ("Yes, Annelle, I pray! Well I do. There I said it, I hope you're satisfied.") and the scripture the sermon was based on was John 9: 1-41. It is the story of a blind man that Jesus gives sight to and how every one gets stuck on who gave the man sight and not that the man can now see. At least that is my interpretation, you biblical scholars can argue with me on that.

The minister discussed how the people in the story had lost sight of what was important. I think that is something we are all guilty of in a variety of fashions—one being this election. (See you knew I would work it back around to politics and away from religion pretty quickly.)

For instance, 60 minutes had an election piece on last night with Steve Kroft where he was talking to voters in Ohio. At one house there were a couple of good 'ole boys sitting on the sofa. One pipes up that he is probably voting for Obama but he has somethings he wasn't clear about. (Let me preface this by saying the Kroft said that some voters in south Ohio were less than enthusiastic about voting for a black or a woman.) The voter's areas of doubt? That Obama doesn't know the National Anthem, he wouldn't use the Bible and that he is a Muslim.

None of this is true of course and Kroft told the guy that. But dang if that doesn't put fear in my heart that the propaganda of the right or whomever still has that strong of an effect on how people think.

But here I am getting distracted from the big picture. Even if all of these things were true—that Obama didn't want to use the Bible, that he was a Muslim that he didn't know the National Anthem—what difference would it make in his ability to govern this country?

We shouldn't be voting for someone because the are a certain color or they aren't. We shouldn't be voting for someone because they are male, not female. We shouldn't even be voting for someone because they come from the party we have always voted for. We should be voting for the person that will help fix our country.

Because if we don't, then we aren't focused on what's important.