McCain picks Palin as VP August 29, 2008Posted by Evil Bender in Barack Obama, John McCain, News and politics, wingnuts.
So it’s Palin, a virutal unknown without much experience. She’s currently being investigated for possible ethics violations, and has been Alaska’s Governor for less than a year.
My take: none of McCain’s obvious picks could work, because they were all either closely tied to the problems with the GOP brand (Mittens), unacceptable to most Republicans (Ridge, Lieberman) or crazy and outclassed by Biden (Pawlenty).
Palin doesn’t have these problems, though I’ll be curious to see how the far-right base responds to a female veep. She also might win over some PUMAs, but there aren’t very many of those, and she’s not suddenly going to make McCain’s massive problems with women go away. And she seems to illustrate how desperate McCain has been to divide the Democratic party (why else go with someone with almost no name recognition or experience?). He’s losing his appeal among independents as he destroys his own brand, and while the Republican base will probably vote for him, they’re certainly not energized. He may believe that his only path to victory is to hope Clinton supporters defect from Obama, and after the Convention, that’s not going to happen.
If Biden was a “safe” and uninspiring pick–as most Progressives seem to think–Palin is, at least, a gutsy pick. But McCain’s selection also reeks of desperation.
So let’s remember that when the talking heads are telling us everything is Doom and Gloom for Obama. He’s got McCain running scared.
Who should progressives vote for in November? August 28, 2008Posted by Evil Bender in News and politics, Progressives.
While I’m busy with the start of the Fall Semester and watching the Democratic National Convention (which has been an inspiring event, so far) I can’t help but notice there’s a lot of bickering on the blogs about Progressives who don’t seem likely to vote for Barack Obama, or who at least have said they don’t know if they’ll vote for him. It’s become particularly heated in discussions on and about one of my favorite progressive blogs, Shakesville (i.e. Liss’s post, Jamelle’s response).
What I’d planned on doing, and undoubtedly the safest course of action, was to remain silent. But I think that would be cowardly at this point, so I’ll make two observations that I hope are clear.
- Progressives, like everyone else, should vote (or not vote) as the dictates of their conscience guide them. Obviously.
- As a progressive, you have four options in November:
- Vote for Obama.
- Vote for McCain.
- Don’t vote for a Presidential candidate.
- Vote for a third party or write in candidate.
So how should progressives vote? That’s up to each of us to decide, of course. But I’d respectfully suggest a fine standard would be to decide which option best helps further progressive causes. I’m open to arguments that it’s option 3 or 4, but I must admit I’m hard pressed to see that point of view.
Obama is not a perfect candidate. None are. (If anyone doubts my honesty, I’ll note that In the past I’ve called him out on behavior I didn’t think was acceptable.) But for all his imperfections, I believe he would be a far, far better President than John McCain. I believe with Obama as President we will make some progress on progressive issues; with McCain as President, we’ll backslide, and probably face decades of super-conservative SCOTUS rulings. Obama will disappoint us repeatedly, but he’ll get some things right. And he’ll get far more right than McCain ever could.
So please, progressives, vote as you will, but ask yourself whether your vote is truly in line with your values.
And for those not planning to vote for Obama–I hope you’ll discuss why in the comments. I’d love to hear from you.
In the Coen Brothers’ fantastic O Brother, Where Art Thou? Governor Pappy is trying to find a campaign strategy:
Junior: “Well people like that reform. Maybe we should get us some.”
Pappy: “I’ll reform you, you soft-headed sonofabitch! How we gonna run reform when we’re the damn incumbent!”
Someone forgot to tell the Republicans that you can’t run reform as the incumbent, though:
Country First: 2008 Republican National Convention to Highlight Service, Reform, Prosperity and Peace
No word on how to highlight service with a service-dodging President, how to run on Prosperity when you’ve let the economy go to shit, and how to run on peace when you lie to start wars. Presumably, they’ll do all these things through the reform.
It appears the Republicans are running on being different from Republicans. Given how terrible there brand is right now, I suppose I can’t blame them.
Bill Donohue losing his edge? August 19, 2008Posted by Evil Bender in bigotry, Religion, wingnuts.
1 comment so far
Over 120 blogs have been credentialed as members of the media for the Democratic National Convention; those who have received credentials are allowed to cover the Convention at the Pepsi Center. While most of them offer legitimate commentary, some do not.
Catholic League president Bill Donohue is protesting two of the blogs:
“The list of credentialed blogs include radical sites like The Daily Kos. Worse are blogs that feature anti-Catholic and obscene material. The two most offensive are Bitch Ph.D. and Towleroad.
“On the home page of Bitch Ph.D. there is a picture of two children: one of them is shown flashing his middle finger. Today’s lead post, which was written August 17, is called ‘Jesus Christ.’ It begins with, ‘I’m a really crappy Catholic who hasn’t been to mass in ages because most parishes around here ‘will’ insist on being aggressively anti-abortion….’ The writer then objects to some children’s toys on the grounds that they are more offensive than desecrating the Eucharist. The toys are actually balloons that have been made to depict Jesus in various poses, including a crucified Christ; one of these images shows Jesus with a penis. Several who commented on this image made patently obscene comments.
“Towleroad describes itself as ‘A Site with Homosexual Tendencies.’ Accordingly, it shows men in jock straps and underwear. It also has a post on Pope Benedict XVI that takes him to task for wearing a cape with ermine. Some of those who commented on this described the pope in a vile and profane way.
Is this really the best he can do? Pictures of men in underwear, complaints about anti-choice policies, and comments on blogs?
This is further proof Donohue needs outrage to live, and when he can’t find it naturally occuring has to manufacture a cheap parody to sustain himself.
Dear Ben Stein: August 7, 2008Posted by Evil Bender in News and politics, wingnuts.
I guess you didn’t think shilling yourself for anti-science in Expelled was bad enough. Now it’s time to mock Paris Hilton’s appearance, imply that she’s working for the Obama camp, and go in for some slut-shaming?
Now, this is perfect. First of all, Paris Hilton was a total nobody party girl in West Hollywood until she and her boyfriend made AND then “someone” SOLD a hard core video of Paris Hilton having sex. So basically, she got her start as a porn star. And she’s being trotted out by the media barons to smear John McCain, as brave and patriotic a man as lives in this nation. This little tramp, who isn’t even close to being pretty, is belittling a man who spent six years in brutal captivity for defending his country.
Paris, get this: in modern day America, we don’t mock people because of things they have done that are unavoidable and not in any way blameworthy. We don’t make fun of blacks for being black. We don’t make fun of women for having breasts. We don’t make fun of old people for being old. This is uncool from any source. It is downright disgusting coming from a porn star — and not a very good porn star at that (yes, I have seen the tape). And we especially don’t like being told how to vote by porn stars. If this is the best the Hollywood pals of Barack Obama can do, maybe John McCain has more of a shot than I thought he did.
Stay classy, you useless fuck.
One more thing: if you’d watched Paris Hilton’s election video as closely as you apparently watched her sex tape, you’d know she didn’t tell anyone “how to vote” or endorse either candidate. You lying sack of shit.
Dear Phill Kline: August 6, 2008Posted by Evil Bender in constiutional issues, News and politics, wingnuts.
add a comment
Rep Tim Walberg (MI-7) votes against continuing Head Start August 1, 2008Posted by Evil Bender in bigotry, constiutional issues, wingnuts.
add a comment
Why would Walberg, alone among 43 members of his committee, vote against continuing the popular Head Start program? Because he’s in favor of using government funds to discriminate, of course:
In other words, say a Baptist or a Catholic church wanted to continue to offer its Head Start program and a Muslim or “a Wiccan from a coven in Ann Arbor” wanted to apply for a job to teach there, now it couldn’t discriminate based on religious grounds anymore, or vice versa.
Dear Rep. Walberg: thank you for admitting that what you want is for private groups to use government money while to descriminate in their hiring practices. It’s so damn honest of you.
But would you be equally upset if a humanist group was being forced to hire Baptists?
Dear Bill O’Reilly: August 1, 2008Posted by Evil Bender in wingnuts.
Yes, I am part of the 1 percent of Americans that paid an astounding 40 percent of all federal income tax in 2006. According to recently released Internal Revenue Service figures, about 50 percent of my fellow Americans paid no federal income tax at all that year. My fellow 1-percenters and I covered for them. But for some it is still not enough.
President Obama and a Democratic Congress will likely dole out entitlements like free health care, child care and cash payments to anyone who falls under a certain income level, no matter their circumstances. That means people who drink gin all day will get some of my hard-earned money. Folks who dropped out of school, who are too lazy to hold a job, who smoke reefers 24/7 all will get some goodies in the mail from Uncle Barack and Aunt Nancy, funded by me and other rich folks.
And now, a reminder of what poor oppressed Bill has had to do to earn all that money:
I hope that Bill and the Republicans bring this up as often as possible. I want them to be clear: they think the richest 1% of Americans are overburdened by taxes.
So now it’s time to ask them: since they’re obviously not really interested in cutting spending (just redirecting it to line their pockets, as the record deficits under Bush prove), who do they think should pay those taxes? Well, it’s obvious, isn’t it? All those lazy people who don’t earn as much as Bill’O does by lying for Bush.
I think we should have an official response to those in the richest 1% who claim they have it too rough: