OK, what are you doing? GO OUT THERE AND VOTE!
Hey, are you a dick? Do you want to annoy both Obama and McCain supporters? There is one easy, nondiscriminatory way to do it, and it's with the same question.
How to annoy an Obama supporter:
Go right to him/her and ask : "So, when was it exactly that experience no longer mattered??"
How to annoy a McCain supporter:
Go right to him/her and ask : "So, when was it exactly that experience no longer mattered??"
They will respond with: "Good Question. I agree!"
To which you reply with; "Well, then how do you explain McCain picking Sarah Palin?"
Word of advice: Don't do this to your friends. This is a very charged election and they don;t mind throwing things at you.
As someone born and raised in the devil’s anus known as the
middle-east, I have cultivated a very special
outlook when it comes to politicians: they are all fake, lying,
two-faced, soul sucking cash whores (No offense to actual whores intended, of
course). It doesn’t help of course that the supreme majority of our elections
are rigged, the supreme majority of the political promises that are made are
broken and the supreme majority of those
elected have no interest, what s ever, in actually representing the people that
voted for them. So when you talk to an arab about a political election, it’s
actually pretty common to see them saying “what’s the point? Nothing will
change”. Double goes for any US election, for that matter.
You see, traditionally arabs are more inclined to vote and
identify with republicans: They support traditional family values, no abortion
for women, a government that stays out
of their business and against the spreading of the gay Virus by any means
necessary. This is why the overwhelming majority of arab-americans in 2000, and
the majority of arabs in the arab world, supported the candidacy of George W.
Bush when he was still running for president, and also, because they didn’t
want a Jew “a heartbeat way from the Presidency”. They thought that once Gore
was in Power, the Mossad would assassinate him and the new President Lieberman
would send US armies to occupy arab and muslim land. So….ehhh… they voted for Bush. Nice going there, arab world.
So it is kind of understandable, that after 8 years of Bush
rule, arabs are pretty much confused in regards to who they should support.
Their values are still republican in nature, but they also don’t want to vote
for the Party of Bush. Arabs needed hope. Someone who will rise to the occasion.
Someone who will assuage their anxiety, after 8 years of living in fear that
they might wake up and find the statues of their dictators being torn down, and
democracy getting offered to them on a silver platter. Someone who won’t make
them feel that they might be sent to Gitmo every time they have to go through special screening at passport
control. Someone who will show them that
he is not an enemy of the arab, muslim and tanned people. And God answered
their prayers, and gave them a Black guy with an arab name and a muslim family
background, who talked a good game and who told them- well, kind of hinted
actually- that he will be at their side, and then to prove it, went to AIPAC
and gave the elders of Zion who run it the oratory equivalent of
So as you can imagine, it’s hard to be not cynical about the
whole thing if you are an arab. Sure, McCain would like to return Iran to a
more peaceful stone-like age, but Obama wants to send troops to northern
Pakistan- the only muslim country with Nukes and an unstable enough population
to actually use them- and return us all to the stone age. Arabs do have hopes that Obama
is just saying that to get elected though. That in reality, if he could do it
without America watching, he would give us one of those winks Sarah Palin has
become so famous for, as if to tell us “Just kidding arab world. Just kidding!
And as for the Israel supporting stuff, I am just saying that now. Just wait
till January and we shall see about that.”
And that, in a nutshell, is how arabs are perceiving the two
choices. Their only hope , ironically, is in the belief that Obama is lying to
get elected, and that he is secretly on their side, because McCain has made it to
explicitly clear that he isn’t anywhere near it.
And they say the choice couldn’t be easier.
This post is also posted here!
John McCain has a problem with his supporters: there is a segment that is intent on saying lots of dumb and stupid thing, no matter how much damage it could do to his campaign, in the name of "speaking truth to power". This has happened so frequently that the Maverick from Arizona is no longer taking questions from his audiences in his signature "Town hall meetings" with his supporters. Hell, he is no longer doing the Town hall thing at all anymore:
The town hall format was supposed be the Republican nominee’s favorite campaign forum, highlighting his shoot-from-the-hip style, his broad knowledge on a slew of issues and his irreverent wit. He loved it so much that he challenged Obama to a string of town hall debates.
But with their potential for amplifying unscripted outbursts and attention-diverting disasters, the microphones at high school gymnasiums and basketball arenas across the swing states have gone silent during the final stretch of the presidential campaign. McCain, a man who has prided himself on discussions with the common man, has not entertained a single question from audience members since Oct. 10, when he faced a belligerent crowd in Lakeville, Minn., that at times turned against him.
The disappearance of the town hall format from McCain’s campaign is striking, political observers said, offering a vivid example of how a signature strength became a potential liability and was abandoned. (Obama, too, has done away with the town halls, last taking questions from voters on Sept. 12 in New Hampshire.)
“The town hall format proved to be a little embarrassing for the campaign, and it built a negative picture about what this campaign is all about,” said Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University, adding that the encounters were “too costly.”
Over the past few weeks, McCain has replaced his beloved town halls with large rallies, press statements delivered at factories and in hotel ballrooms, “town square” stump speeches given in the center of small towns, and stops at restaurants and other local landmarks.
Cause straight talk is only allowed one way at McCain rallies, and god knows we don;t need anymore crazy people making McCain look bad. The man does have Sarah Palin as a VP after all.
But McCain is not the only one having problems with his supporters. Obama has his share of people saying stupid shit on his behalf. Take Erica Jong for example, and the crap she said to the itlaian publication Corriere Della Sera.
"The record shows that voting machines in America are rigged."
"My friends Ken Follett and Susan Cheever are extremely worried. Naomi Wolf calls me every day. Yesterday, Jane Fonda sent me an email to tell me that she cried all night and can't cure her ailing back for all the stress that has reduces her to a bundle of nerves."
"My back is also suffering from spasms, so much so that I had to see an acupuncturist and get prescriptions for Valium."
Oh no. Naomi Wolf is worried? Erica had to go to an acupuncturist? Jane Fonda is suffering back pains from stress and sleep-less nights filled with crying from the possibility that McCain might win? Quelle Horrore.
That is not all though. Not only will a McCain Presidency mean that Jane Fonda's back might never heal, it could actually spark a second american civil war. Oh yeah.
"If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it's not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets."
And here we all thought he was pulling out of Iraq. That shrewd Bush. He is so smart, even thought he is "the dumbest President ever"™.
By the way, is anybody else laughing at the image of Dick Cheney leading american soldiers into battle against american citizens in the street? Why didn't she add that he would be wearing a Nazi uniform, a monocle and smoking a cigar when he is leading the SS troops while she is at it? Cause yes, a man who never went into combat and has a bad ticker is the right man to lead soldiers against the citizenry. Honestly Erica, if you are stupid enough to think this is an actual possibility, then you really did need that valium. Can I also recommend Prozac? Just a thought.
And last but not least, there is a Texas man who committed suicide , and the only thing he wrote in his suicide note was for Obama to hep his family. Now that's a believer, don't you think?
This post is also posted here!
If one is following the US presidential election closely- and one should, ye lazy bums- one could get all kinds of interesting information on the candidates from the campaign spokespeople of their contenders. For example, if you listened to the Obama campaign, then you would know that McCain is the product of a rather successful genetic experiment to clone an older, grumpier and more senile version of George W. Bush that is determined to nuke every country on the planet and serve your firstborn cooked a la king to the eating pleasure of CEO’s of Oil companies . On the other hand, if you listen to the McCain campaign, you would be surprised to find out that Barack Obama is an Islamist Theocrat, a socialist nationalist and a Marxist communist, all at the same time. Obama, it seems, has many faces, and all of them hate America.
The most recent McCain campaign meme, however, is focused on a fourth Obama: an Zionist-hating, Palestinian-loving, Kuffeyah-wearing, Israel-is-committing-genocide-against-the-Palestinian-people fifth columnist. Their proof? Well, he apparently has past associations with a Palestinian-American scholar , Rashid Khalidi , the director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia's School of International and Public affairs. What is the big deal about that? Well, he apparently does not like Israel very much, to such degree that he is rumored to have been an un-official advisor to the PLO during the Madrid Peace talks. Now, while I am shocked..shocked I tell ya..that a pleastinian-american scholar might not hold a favorable view of Israel and the Israeli occupation, I am almost speechless that a man who may have adviced the PLO- which the US government negotiates with- during peace talks is allowed to live in America today, let alone poison the minds of the airheaded susceptible C students they let into Columbia. For Shame.
But wait, the McCain campaign says: There is more. There is apparently a videotape, which they haven’t seen and that the LA Times has and refuses to release, of a party honoring Khalidi where Obama speaks, and during which Obama is rumored to have said bad things about Israel. Now, if you ask the McCain campaign how they know what’s on the tape even though they never saw it, they will respond to you that this is not really the issue, and that the real issue is that the LA Times won’t release the tape, and that is because the LA Times wants Obama to be President and knows how damaging this tape really is. The LA Times counters that they can’t release the tape because it belongs to a source for a story they did, whom they promised never to publically release. So, dear reader, being the diligent blogger that I am, I searched for the story and found it, hoping to find the clues that the McCain campaign followed to infer the existence of such a conspiracy, specifically paragraphs on what exactly Obama had said at that event. Here is what I found:
A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.
His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world."
Ok… there must be something else…oh yes, here we go
At Khalidi's 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."
One speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."
Obama adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground. But his presence at such events, as he worked to build a political base in Chicago, has led some Palestinian leaders to believe that he might deal differently with the Middle East than either of his opponents for the White House.
Ok, so Obama said that conversations are good and that common ground is better, which is clearly….un-American? I don’t know anymore, man. This election is confusing me. My guess is that they know Obama didn’t say anything personally incriminating at the event, but that the other speakers-as the quote shows- did, so they would like to create a hoopla on how “he was there” when bad things were said about Israel and didn’t do something, unlike John McCain which would’ve pulled out his Hauser and killed them all in the name of Israel’s honor, or something.
So yes, this is the news currently in the US: a focus on how guilt by association is an integral aspect of the decision making process come election day, and that if one really wants to run for political office, one shouldn’t have friends from different political and ideological backgrounds and stick to people who think and act just like him. As for me, I am awaiting the Palestinian resistance name the McCain campaign will give Obama next. Abu Hussein, anyone?
I don't know if you guys have been watching the same McCain campaign that I've been watching, but has it been majorly sucking lately or what? I mean, I refrained from commenting on the last debate, simply because I was so angry that I- a measly blogger from egypt- actually had better answers than McCain on the questions he was being asked, well, that's just not a good indicator is it? And why is he sticking to the mavericky crap? It's nice being called a Maverick, but calling yourself one time and time again? That's like Obama calling himself " the great Hope" time and time again. It's hokey, it's unappealing and it's unbecoming. And now it's a national joke. I counted the amount of people on my friendslist on Facebook who are "feeling mavericky" today, and it's more than 2 dozens. While that says something on their level of creativity, it says volumes on how this talking point is dead. All is not lost, however, and McCain can still turn this thing around, but there are a number of things that he needs to do in order to stop sucking, and here is a couple of them. So, John, if you are reading, pay attention:
1) Start today's debate with the following statement " Ladies and gentlemen, before I start today I would like you all to note something very significant: I have been in the senate for a some time, enough time for me to have what is referred to as a record; My opponent doesn't have a record, primarily because he was in the senate for like a year before deciding to run for President. Now, he knows this, and he knows that his only chance of winning this is to smear my record, so here is what he is going to do: He is going to keep saying Bush-McCain, Bush-McCain, Bush-McCain, in an attempt to link my record to President Bush. Now, Barack Obama knows I am not George Bush. Hell, all of you know I am not George Bush, and you all know how many times I have disagreed with the President in the past 8 years, on a number of issues that I could spend all night listing, but for example: The judges, the torture issue, the surge, campaign finance reform, etc etc. In each one of those issues, I decided to put Country above Party, and take a position that cost me popularity points with my colleagues and the republican base, because I knew it was the right thing to do for my country. Barack Obama has never done that. Never took a risky position on anything, never challenged his party on anything, never really been a leader on anything. So again, he has to smear me, or otherwise he looks bad. Me, while I understand it's politics as usual from him, Can't fathom how the people forget that while I was the democrats favorite republican senator for the past 8 years- so favorited that the democratic nominee in the last election wanted me to be his VP, have now suddenly became the same as Bush. Well, for the record Senator Obama, my name is John McCain, and you shouldn't forget this name because I was serving this country while you were in diapers. And to you, dear audience, please count the amount of times he will try to link me to Bush tonight. I promise you this much: it will make of an amusing drinking game." Now watch as Obama scrambles to find another strategy as you defused his only one.
2) Dude, you are a fiscal conservative republican, which means you are a DICK. Act like one. When you are discussing Obama's so called economic plan, go for the impracticality issue: How you don't know how Obama claims in his budget to increase education spending, reduce taxes on the middle-class, provide universal health care for everybody, make college education affordable for everybody, increase the size of the army and at the same time cut the deficit and balance the budget. Especially now, with the new 700 billion spending bill they just approved. You stress how for you it sounds like he is saying whatever the people want to hear to elect him, and that you are not doing that. You are going to do it the old-fashioned way: not pander to anybody, cut the waste and balance the budget. Just the way you always did it.
3) If they want to talk economy, then talk about how the most important thing to do is to create more american jobs. Pure and simple. that's the only thing that will fix the economy. How do you do it? Well, make it attractive for corporations to expand in america and hire americans, and for people to create new businesses and hire more people, by cutting , if not giving a limited time exemption, of corporate taxes. Tell them that you propose that from now on every new company that opens up and hires americans would get a tax exemption for the next 5 to 7 years, based on the size of the company and the amount of americans and residents they hire. Inform the already existing corporations that if they bring back 50 % or more of the jobs that they have outsources to the US, you will make their corporate taxes the same as Dubai's for the next 5 to 7 years: 4%. This will lower the cost of business in the US, thus encourage more foreign investment, more local investment, and will create more and more jobs, which means more salaries, more savings, more consumption= a functioning economy. Oh, and the tax difference they can probably make up with the Income tax revenues all of those new jobs will create.
4) I wish you never were for the bailout, because that would've been your issue. You could've exposed how much of a corrupt facade it was, and how if the issue was really liquidity, they could've just lent the financial corporations the money with the mortgages as collateral, instead of straight up taking the bad mortgages off of their hands, thus creating a huge opportunity for corruption and waste. But alas, you caved in, like they all did in the senate, but there is still something you can do about it: attack the earmarking they did in the house. You know, the 200 million they gave to rum manufacturers, the 120 million they gave to Nascar, the 2 million they gave to bow and arrow manufacturers. ATTACK THAT. Attack the republicans who asked for them. If you are truly against earmarks, you should totally own this issue, especially that the version you voted for didn't have all of this pork attached to it. And guess which party's majority voted for it: yes, the democrats. You can't lose with that one.
5) Stop with the Maverick crap. For real. Remind the voters of who you are supposed to be: You are a veteran of war and politics, and the one man steady enough to hold this country through those troubling times, instead of untested Orators who make people feel good but offer no substance. But have someone zap you every time you saw that maverick word. Seriously.
Why do I bother? He is going to lose this debate anyway. Obama just wants it more and it shows. And if he ends up winning it, well, good on him anyway, because he fought harder and committed less mistakes. Although I do have to say that american elections have this fantastic effect of taking two candidates that you liked at the beginning of the race and makes you really fuckin hate them near the end of it. Oh well. One month left to go.
Here is the Tina Fey impression of the debate (which saddens me to say was rather spot on) and Bill Maher's reaction to it, where he showed the amount of eye-winkage she put in there (He put in 4, I counted 5. She did give a wink to that 3rd grade class that was watching, or something, right?). There is also that piece by George Saunders, which made me fall on the floor from laughing, using her folksy speak. Hey, I like her, but damn she is easy to make fun off.
Okay, I just finished watching the debate, which meant that I had to stay up till 3 am my time just to see the damn thing start. But now that it's over, I figured I should have something posted up on it before I pass out.
Now, before this thing started, I have to say that I had pretty low expectations all around: Palin was dreadful in most of her interviews, and Biden, well, Biden was being Biden. So It's fair to say that like most of you, I placed the bar pretty low for this debate. So low that I wasn't actually looking for who answers best, but more like who will screw up the most. And I was also kinda dreading Ifill being partisan, because I didn't want anyone making excuses for Sarah if she does fumble it. Now, that being said, here are my reactions:
- "Can I call you joe?". Yep, she sure came with her charm on.
- They both start strong, him more slow and authoritative, and her more chipper and energetic. While I liked her answers, the speed in which she gave them were signs of either someone very nervous or someone who is regurgitating memorized talking points.
- She supports the bailout, he supports the bailout, both of them are for the greatest scam in the histroy of the American public. Boooo..
- Okay, here we go, He starts saying Bush, she starts saying Maverick. This is gonna be a long night.
- The corruption and greed on wall street got said way too many times.
- "I am not gonna answer the question way you or the moderator want me to answer"? For real?
- She knows policy positions, she is calling Biden on Obam's positions, and the things Biden said about Obama. Biden deflects it all and attacks McCain. Palin is not attacking Obama that much. Biden doing the VP's job, she ain't.
- Is it just me, or does it seem like Biden is enjoying himself too much every time she attacks him?
- Good points on using her record in Alaska. I wouldn't have expected Alaskan experience to be used as an example in Darfur, but hey, she sold it, and gave proof that she does know there is a world outside of America.
- She seemed to try to convey that she is bringing something to the ticket as well. She is selling herself to the public while trying to debate Biden at the same time. The double-sided efforts started wearing her down after a bit.
- Okay, I have to say this. She is hot. A total MILF. I like looking at her speak. I even like hearing her talk. She has really good body language and sound inflection. Stylistically she is good. But to be honest I found myself not listening to some of her answers. I don't know if it's because she rambles on very quickly and is all over the place, or it's because she is distractingly eye-pleasing.
- Oh, wow, she really was sucking Israel's dick with that answer, and Biden was like"Hoe, no you didn't" and immediately started sucking on Israel's Balls as well. It was beautiful how they competed for the "who loves Israel the most "prize, which was completely unnecessary for either one of them to do, because Palin just wrote an essay in love of Israel and Biden is AIPAC #1 guy. But I am sure it made Florida's Jews happy, and they are an important group to keep happy. Ask Sarah Silverman, she 'll tell you.
- Is she getting angry? Her answers seem to be testier by the moment. Why is she getting angry?
- Palin is not winning this, but is not losing this either. She is holding her own, while Biden is clearly in his element.
- You and NATO Kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, Biden? For real? Anybody listening to this?
- Did she actually manage to turn Joe's attempt on reaching out to gay voters into having it on record that they both agree on their opposition for gay marriage? Did that just happen?
- Oh boy, the word Maverick again. How many times she said it so far? 25? I should've started a drinking game.
- Yay for Local politics pandering: Palin talks about coming from a small town and being one of the middle-class people, and Biden of course starts talking about his roots as well. One day I would like to see a candidate being like "You know, being raised in the upper east side of manhattan, I was surrounded by a lot of normal people who cleaned my house, and they thought me all about regular folk". Maybe in 2040? The Trump-Hilton Ticket anyone?
- "Say it ain't so, Joe". Folksy and cute. Does this translate to folksy voters? Cause the gradschool graduate democrat-voting americans I was watching this with looked like they were getting an aneurysm whenever she did something like that. Or winked. They would twitch when she winks.
- Holy shit. On the one issue she was supposed to own- having and raising a family- she was upstaged by Biden , who talked about how wife's death and how hard it was to raise his kids as a single father, and then he chocked back a tear. Holy crap. Sarah, you better start crying or talking about your special-needs child or something. He just got the sympathy vote.
- Did she just attack the media? She must be really confident that she did well in this debate if she actually goes out and says that she is gratrful to talk to the people without the media filter. Yeah, that Katie Couric sure is a manipulator, and like, a filterer. Yeah, a filterer. It's a word. Look it up!
- Hmm, pretty standard closing statements. We will fight for you. blah blah. snooz.
Okay, now to the verdict, substance wise Biden won, but Palin held her own- i.e. didn't commit any major blunders, was actually using big words correctly and even had a couple of good answers there. Style wise Palin won: she seemed more relate able, more common american woman and definitely a Washington outsider. She officially does better in debates or behind podiums than in interviews. Biden looked commanding, but there is something about him that never says "Leader". She has buckets more Charisma than he does, but since she is not the main name on the ticket, I am not sure that counts. On the bright side she just stopped hurting the ticket. Now if she can only give a couple of good press interviews, she just might be able to turn this whole thing around. But so far Obama/Biden are the stronger ticket. They are performing better. It's still anyone's race though.
You just never know.
Godot Basha offers the counter argument!
Ok, now we know why they have been hiding her from the press all this time.
She doesn't have her own solution to the crisis and doesn't even know the record of her running mate.
People, if McCain wins, it will be a good idea to keep him frozen and preserved every time he goes to sleep and pray very hard that nothing happens to him through his term. Maybe the McCain people should call the Mubarak people: Those fuckers know how to preserve a really old President.
Get her someone who knows economics, quick. I know that Biden is an idiot, but he ain't ignorant, and that's her problem right now!
Tactically, it's smart. It breaks the Obama momentum, and takes the leadership initiative on the issue. But let's face it. It's a gimmick. McCain will debate, but he will come back, appearing to work for the country, and will change the format of the debate at the last minute to the economy instead of foreign policy, throwing a wrench in Obama's preparation for the debate. Plus, if they work something out, McCain gets credit, they don;t work something out, McCain will lambast Obama for not coming with him and making it work. It's cynical, dirty and politics at its best.
There has been a nasty rumor going on that during Palin's tenure as mayor of Wassila, female rape victims were required to pay for their own rape kits. It was supposed to be another example on how Palin was really a man and hated women and wanted them all to stay home barefoot and pregnant.
Imagine my surprise when you find out that this is not true.
In reality, and had any journalist in the MSM outlets bothered to do their job instead of working for the Obama campaign 24/7, there was a state law forbidding charging victims of rape for their rape kits since 2000. As for where it all came from, the chief of Police( chief of police, not Palin) in Wasilla wanted to have the Insurance companies(Insurance companies, not the victims) to pay for them, with the intention of billing it ultimately to the rapists eventually. However, there isn;t a single piece of record that shows that a single victim's insurance was ever billed for it. If this practice still seems creepy or exclusive to macho,
rough-and-tumble Alaska, well, it happens to be the practice in other
states, too, like North Carolina (until recently) and … Illinois.
And can you guess who co-sponsored that bill in Illinois?
Can you say Barack Obama?
Have a nice day!
She was supposed to talk to the anti A.J. rally, but they canceled her
because Hillary was attending. Here are her remarks regardless:
I am honored to be with you and with leaders from across this great
country — leaders from different faiths and political parties united in
a single voice of outrage.
Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York — to the heart
of what he calls the Great Satan — and speak freely in this, a country
whose demise he has called for.
Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of
the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer
world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's
intentions and to call for action to thwart him.
He must be stopped.
The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us.
Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of
being an agent in a "Final Solution" — the elimination of the Jewish
people. He has called Israel a "stinking corpse" that is "on its way to
annihilation." Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman
— not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles
capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is
nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten
and kill innocent people around the world.
The Iranian government wants nuclear weapons. The International
Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is running at least 3,800
centrifuges and that its uranium enrichment capacity is rapidly
improving. According to news reports, U.S. intelligence agencies
believe the Iranians may have enough nuclear material to produce a bomb
within a year.
The world has condemned these activities. The United Nations
Security Council has demanded that Iran suspend its illegal nuclear
enrichment activities. It has levied three rounds of sanctions. How has
Ahmadinejad responded? With the declaration that the "Iranian nation
would not retreat one iota" from its nuclear program.
So, what should we do about this growing threat? First, we must succeed in Iraq.
If we fail there, it will jeopardize the democracy the Iraqis have
worked so hard to build, and empower the extremists in neighboring
Iran. Iran has armed and trained terrorists who have killed our
soldiers in Iraq, and it is Iran that would benefit from an American
defeat in Iraq.
If we retreat without leaving a stable Iraq, Iran's nuclear
ambitions will be bolstered. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons — they
could share them tomorrow with the terrorists they finance, arm, and
train today. Iranian nuclear weapons would set off a dangerous regional
nuclear arms race that would make all of us less safe.
But Iran is not only a regional threat; it threatens the entire
world. It is the no. 1 state sponsor of terrorism. It sponsors the
world's most vicious terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah. Together,
Iran and its terrorists are responsible for the deaths of Americans in
Lebanon in the 1980s, in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, and in Iraq today.
They have murdered Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, and other Muslims
who have resisted Iran's desire to dominate the region. They have
persecuted countless people simply because they are Jewish.
Iran is responsible for attacks not only on Israelis, but on Jews
living as far away as Argentina. Anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial are
part of Iran's official ideology and murder is part of its official
policy. Not even Iranian citizens are safe from their government's
threat to those who want to live, work, and worship in peace.
Politically-motivated abductions, torture, death by stoning, flogging,
and amputations are just some of its state-sanctioned punishments.
It is said that the measure of a country is the treatment of its
most vulnerable citizens. By that standard, the Iranian government is
both oppressive and barbaric. Under Ahmadinejad's rule, Iranian women
are some of the most vulnerable citizens.
If an Iranian woman shows too much hair in public, she risks being beaten or killed.
If she walks down a public street in clothing that violates the state dress code, she could be arrested.
But in the face of this harsh regime, the Iranian women have shown
courage. Despite threats to their lives and their families, Iranian
women have sought better treatment through the "One Million Signatures
Campaign Demanding Changes to Discriminatory Laws." The authorities
have reacted with predictable barbarism. Last year, women's rights
activist Delaram Ali was sentenced to 20 lashes and 10 months in prison
for committing the crime of "propaganda against the system." After
international protests, the judiciary reduced her sentence to "only" 10
lashes and 36 months in prison and then temporarily suspended her
sentence. She still faces the threat of imprisonment.
Earlier this year, Senator Clinton said that "Iran is seeking
nuclear weapons, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is in the
forefront of that" effort. Senator Clinton argued that part of our
response must include stronger sanctions, including the designation of
the IRGC as a terrorist organization. John McCain and I could not agree
Senator Clinton understands the nature of this threat and what we
must do to confront it. This is an issue that should unite all
Americans. Iran should not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.
Period. And in a single voice, we must be loud enough for the whole
world to hear: Stop Iran!
Only by working together, across national, religious, and political
differences, can we alter this regime's dangerous behavior. Iran has
many vulnerabilities, including a regime weakened by sanctions and a
population eager to embrace opportunities with the West. We must
increase economic pressure to change Iran's behavior.
Tomorrow, Ahmadinejad will come to New York. On our soil, he will
exercise the right of freedom of speech — a right he denies his own
people. He will share his hateful agenda with the world. Our task is to
focus the world on what can be done to stop him.
We must rally the world to press for truly tough sanctions at the
U.N. or with our allies if Iran's allies continue to block action in
the U.N. We must start with restrictions on Iran's refined petroleum
We must reduce our dependency on foreign oil to weaken Iran's economic influence.
We must target the regime's assets abroad; bank accounts, investments, and trading partners.
President Ahmadinejad should be held accountable for inciting genocide, a crime under international law.
We must sanction Iran's Central Bank and the Revolutionary Guard Corps — which no one should doubt is a terrorist organization.
Together, we can stop Iran's nuclear program.
Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse:
Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a
request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the
United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to
test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise.
You know you will soon be getting these in the mail:
I need to ask you to support an urgent secret business relationship
with a transfer of funds of great magnitude.
I am Ministry of the Treasury of the Republic of America. My country
has had crisis that has caused the need for large transfer of funds of
800 billion dollars US. If you would assist me in this transfer, it
would be most profitable to you.
I am working with Mr. Phil Gram, lobbyist for UBS, who will be my
replacement as Ministry of the Treasury in January. As a Senator, you
may know him as the leader of the American banking deregulation
movement in the 1990s. This transactin is 100% safe.
This is a matter of great urgency. We need a blank check. We need
the funds as quickly as possible. We cannot directly transfer these
funds in the names of our close friends because we are constantly
under surveillance. My family lawyer advised me that I should look for
a reliable and trustworthy person who will act as a next of kin so the
funds can be transferred.
Please reply with all of your bank account, IRA and college fund
account numbers and those of your children and grandchildren to
email@example.com so that we may transfer your commission
for this transaction. After I receive that information, I will
respond with detailed information about safeguards that will be used
to protect the funds.
Minister of Treasury Paulson
Ok, seriously now, y'all have to stop this Bailout from ever happening. This is the most ridiculous shit I've ever seen in my life. Let's review this for a second:
1) You have a consumer-based economy that relies totally on consumer's wealth, which means that it relies on home-ownership wealth, because that's where the american people have their wealth concentrated, in their homes.
2) You have a stagnating economy where everyone told you that the only safe bet is investing and flipping houses, and that one can make millions doing just that without much effort really. So many people start buying houses they can;t afford thinking that they will be able to flip them to other people and make a quick buck in the process, and they are aided in that with banks making mortgage taking very easy.
3) You have banks and lending institutions that wanted to raise their revenues, but no serious economic or manufacturing expansion was being sought out by the industry leaders (with industry moving to India and China and all) and thus no business loans, so they start focusing on giving out personal loans and mortgages. Realizing that there are so many real eligible homeowners out there, they start to give out mortgage loans to people they know can't afford it, hoping that most will eventually be able to afford them and that this will somehow diversify the risk and give them some method of hedging against any economic crisis that may occur if the bubble bursts. But just in case they can;t do that, they will lump a couple of those mortgages together, call them "financial instruments" or "derivatives", and then will sell them to Insurance companies, making the cash now, but with the gurantee that they will collect the money for them and cover the loans that fail to keep making payments. They figured, hey, how many of those could exist anyway? And then they took that money and gave it out as more bad loans, because, what's the worse that could happen?
4) The Insurance companies realize that they have a lot of money, and they need to invest it in order to be able to pay the insurance premiums for those customers who died, houses burned, whatever. So they take the cash they collect from their customers and decide that they need to invest it in something profitable, long-term and secure. Where to invest, where to invest? Oh boy, I know, the housing markets. And those Banks are offering to sell us those financial instruments comprised of hundreds of mortgages on a discount, and will promise to cover the loans if the customers failed to pay up. That sounds like a great deal, and a very secure one at that. And no, we won't check to see if those mortgages are good or bad, after all, the banks must've did their homework on this. They just don't dole out money to anybody who asks. Right?
5) And so far we have the making of the housing bubble: People who want to make a quick buck start buying houses they can't afford and sell them to other people for profit, who in turn buy them on mortgages they really can't afford, and take them and try to sell them to other people for profit, who in turn buy them on mortgages they really really really can't afford take them and try to sell them for profit, until that is no longer possible because the price has hit a ceiling and no one is willing to pay that much for that house anymore. So those plucky home investors find themselves facing one of two choices: 1) Either face foreclosure on the house, and thus lose whatever money you made on it, and the bank ends up with a piece of property that no one wants to buy at its current price anyway, and the investors's credit rating gets fucked and possibly affects all his other loans and mortgages, or 2) they sell the house at a loss, take a second mortgage on their own home, which they they really can't afford now, so they start getting behind on their payments, face foreclosure, lose their own house to the bank and become homeless. And when that happens, they will look at you with sad eyes and say "I don't know how this happened. They told me that house prices always go up".
6) And now the banks are freaking out, because they now have lots of overvalued property- thanks to all those bad loans- and little cash, so they start going after those who have been paying their mortgages on time and up their rates, cause, hey, we gotta make our money back one way or another. So those who have been financially responsible start getting fucked, many of them unable to make those payments now either, so they also lose their houses, and the bank ends up with more property no one wants to buy, and thus faces bankruptcy and possible shut down.
7) And now the insurance companies start to freak out because the banks are unable to collect the mortgage payments, and are unable to cover the price of the house and are entering the arena of going concern- i.e. they might just get bankrupt and shut down. So they start going through their books to see how many such bad mortgages they have bought in those financial instruments anyway, and low and behold, it's in the billions. They better start calling other financial institutions for help, quick. Wait, everyone did this? Fuck, I guess it's time to ask the government for help. They have money up the ass anyway.
8) The executive branch of the government realizes that the people paying their campaign contributions are about to go bankrupt, and shut down. So they freak out. They also freak out more when they are told that when this will happen, those companies will bring down the stock market, which will bring down the whole world economy, unemployment will rise and everyone will suffer. So those companies, regardless of their reckless behavior, need to get bailed out immediately. How much of a bailout you say? 700 billion dollars? That sounds about right to me. Send it to congress!
9) The nice people in congress are divided over the Bailout: Should they give it to the companies that were irresponsible in their lending, buying bad mortgages and not really checking them? Or should they bail out the people who knowingly took out mortgages they can't afford in order to make some quick profit and never saw this logical end coming? The question of the day becomes "Which irresponsible group should we help out?" , instead of "Why are we helping those irresponsible people anyway?" or "Ain't 700 billion dollars just a tad too much money to spend on failing irresponsible financial institutions, especially that this is the taxpayer's money we are talking about here?"
10) And finally, there is you, the good ole responsible working American, who didn't try to make a quick buck and who took only mortgages he/she could afford. Suddenly you find that the rates on your mortgage went up for no reason, so your house is in jeopardy, followed by an announcement by your bank that it is going bankrupt, and those savings you've put in there? Ehh, might not be there anymore dude. Oh, and the part of your savings you've put in the stock market or let those financial institutions invest for you in their mutual funds (part of which, naturally is invested in the housing market), well, that's going to shit as well. But don;t worry, the government will take the money you gave them, and give it to all of those people instead of spending it on government programs- such as education or road maintenance, or medicare- like they told you they would. And if they can;t afford to make such a payment, they will issue bonds to other countries which you later on will have to pay anyway. Don't you just feel blessed to live in the greatest country in the world now?
People, wake up. Fuck the financial institutions, let them fail. Fuck those people who gambled with your future, let them be homeless. And fuck the government that wants to bail them with YOUR MONEY, it's your money anyway, and having it used to reward stupidity and recklessness is surefire way to waste it. There is no averting this economic crisis, it's here to stay and it will be a while before it goes away. Deal with it, and move on, because all of this bailout talk is nothing but a short-term solution to a long-term problem. Just do nothing, and let the market correct itself.
Trust me, you will be better off, in the long run, that way!
Palin defends McCain on the Economic crisis quote, and helps explain what he meant. Now, Hero, I know you ain't the economics guy, but when Barracuda – she who never took a single economic theory class- defends you, maybe it's time you get yourself an adderal prescription and some books. Just saying!
Bush is assuring world leaders that his efforts of instituting corporate socialism is under way, and that the 700 billion dollars he is doling out of tax-payers money to help failing financial institution will be spent regardless, because, like, what's 700 billion dollars in the big scheme of things anyway?
There is a short-selling ban at the moment for a number of companies and it includes GM and GE, in order to stop regular people from abusing the current economic situation to make money, stating that such abuse is usually reserved to his friends only. Come on people, it's a market correction and thus we are all fucked, let's all make money here.
And finally, Obama seems to be gaining in the polls thanks to the economic crisis, which I guess is supposed to make his supporters happy. Good on you Obama, you get the presidency of a debt-laden government and a failed economy. You sure you still want this?
…..after pulling out of Georgia and Alaska, and instead moving them to Minnesota (which he should have easily) and Wisconsin. By doing that he is closing down 11 offices in that state alone. The reason why I am bringing this up is due to that previous post I wrote about Obama running out of money. He is out-raising McCain all right, but he also has a much bigger on the ground operation than he probably needs, and it's costing him lots of money. For a lack of a better term, the overhead is killing him. Add to that fact that people will be less likely to donate now to him due to the current economic crisis, and you find that McCain's decision to just go with Federal funds to be an interestingly smart choice, in hindsight of course!
Oh well, one month to go.
She is a fifth rate comedian who used to be something in the 80's and needs some publicity and money. So she went off and insulted Palin, calling her a turncoat Bitch and hoped she gets gang-raped by black brothers in New York. Cause that's what other women wish on women who disagree with them: Rape!
But I digress, she needs the work, people. And that's why she urges people to send the video to everybody. And she did say that the rape thing is part of "a larger nuanced argument". Cause there is a lot of nuance into wishing women to get raped.
God I love US politics and the freaks it unleashes!