Weak Sauce About Nothing

Salsa débil sobre nada!

Chaos Motor

Put another blog into the blogroll.  Chaos Motor is some intense political shit that is really well written.  Totally worth checking out if you are as pissed off at the world as I am.


January 9, 2008 Posted by | Blogs/Blags | , , , | 1 Comment

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

Watch this video.

Honestly, does anyone think this is a “real” moment. No one could be pandering more, or making herself to look more like an idiot. Sure, she is a human being with real emotions, but funny how that hasn’t come through until people say they are voting for Obama because he is a force for change, and is “real” person trying to unite a nation. In the words of the mighty Op Ivy, “Ain’t nothing wrong, with another unity song.”

January 7, 2008 Posted by | Politics | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Some more good news for Obama

Looks like Obama is pulling ahead in New Hampshire now.  I say that this is just more evedince of the US waking up and seeing what is going on.  Clinton went ballistic during the debates when Edwards said she was a force for the Status Quo, and the reson she went ballistic, he was right.

Clinton is just more of the same, and that is what the country is sick of at this point.  We aren’t loooking for more of the same, we aren’t looking for someone to come in and start a war with Iran, we aren’t looking for madated health insurance that we can’t afford (like our car insurance), we are looking for peace, and we are looking for afordable health care. 

When Clinton talked about “all” the changes she has made in the past, she had two things to cite.  Is that a force of change, not really.  We want real change, not just BS little things that don’t do much for the working class. 

Keep it up New Hampshire, lets get Obama another win.

January 7, 2008 Posted by | Politics | , , , , | Leave a comment

The Audacity of FUCK YEAH!!

As I’ve been saying for the last couple of weeks Clinton is just more of the same bullshit as Bush.  And thank God the people of Iowa saw right through that.  I’m down with Obama, especially as the first viable African American presidential canidate ever, and because he is “endorsed” by Kusinich.  My hope is that when Obama gets the nod from the democratic party that he will tap Kusinich or Richardson for VP (not likely it would probably be Edwards, Clinton in my opinion is unelectable). 

Anyways back on track, the best part of this is that Clinton came in a solid third place, only one point behind Edwards, but a good 6 behind Obama.  That means that other people are ssing through her bullshit too.  Her blatant poll following is what makes her the most disengenuous presidential canadate that I have seen in my life time and that is saying a lot. 

So with the Barak Obama win in Iowa what is next.  Probably a hard race in New Hampshire.  Clinton has a decent lead in the New Hampshire polls, but she had that in Iowa too, until about a week ago.  Does Obama have the time to gain the lead and win NH too?  At this point who knows, but I’m hoping he does.  What sucks is it is one of those things that I feel totally powerless over, and wish I could help him with (hence this post).

 Wake up New Hampshire!  Look through the smile and see that Clinton is more of the same, and not the right answer for our country, it’s time for real change!

January 4, 2008 Posted by | Politics | , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Iowa Coming Down

So the caucus is about to start, in just a few hours the real nitty gritty of the 2008 election season will be under way.  I have always been really into politics, but for some reason this election season has me really excited.  It isn’t just how I feel about the issues, or what I think about the canidates, it is the potential for this to really change my life.

My wife and I decided that if Hilary Clinton wins, we move to Canada.  Not because she is a woman, not because her husband was dumb, but because it will be more of the same.  Clinton will change nothing if she is elected, other than the face that we have to look at.  And I’m not living thorough another 8 years of that.

So Iowa is the first look at what my future holds, and that excites me.

January 3, 2008 Posted by | Politics | , , , | Leave a comment

Benazir Bhutto

Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated today.  A suicide bomber shot her then detonated himself.  Though it is sad for her friends, family and followers, I have very little pity for her.  As a leader of an opposition party in a country that is currently in a state of martial law she has done nothing but flaunt herself in a way that effectively begs people to try and kill her.

First example, on the eve of her return these preparations were made:

More than 20,000 police have been assigned to protect Bhutto and her entourage as she makes her way from the Karachi airport to the mausoleum of Pakistan’s founder on Thursday. Snipers will occupy rooftops and flyovers, and bomb disposal units have already started sweeping the route. It’s a journey that usually takes less than an hour. Police and party organizers are expecting an ordeal that could last up to eighteen hours, as fans coming as far away as Kashmir, in the country’s northeast, block her passage in an attempt to get a glimpse of their rehabilitated leader. Bhutto, who was greeted by a million-strong crowd when she returned from exile in 1986 to take up her father’s position as party leader, will be riding in a specially designed bulletproof glass container mounted on a trailer. It’s kind of like the pope-mobile, says PPP information secretary Sherry Rehman, “only without a top.”


So when she gets to Pakistan she spends hours in a crawling motorcade until a bomb goes off.  Her response:

Bhutto also wanted the government to focus on identifying the “sponsors and financers” of the terrorists who carried out the strike on October 19 that left 140 persons dead.

“It is my responsibility to take risks for the country. To save Pakistan, we need to protect democracy,” she said while addressing her second press conference since the attack at her home–Bilawal House. Bhutto said nothing will prevent her from reaching out to the people.   – Access My Library

An admirable sentiment, but holy crap, it doesn’t get much dumber than that.  I understand wanting to be in touch with “your people,” but you can’t single out “your people” from the people that want to assassinate you.  And why give them the extra time to plan.  For example when she first arrived in Pakistan, she was in the motorcade moving through the city for so long (literally hours), moving at a snails pace, that someone could have taken the time to build, strap on and detonate the bomb.  The bomber didn’t need to have a plan, he could have made the plan as he went and not run out to time.  The only thing that stopped the procession was the bomb.

BhuttoSo with that in mind she takes even more risks.  I understand that she wants to be this figure of dissent and vocal opposition.  But there is a smart way and a dumb way to do that.  She takes the dumb way.  Standing on top of cars, walking into throngs of people.  And now, that has gotten her dead.  Honestly it was only a matter of time.  And in a lot of ways she is no different than the suicide bomber.  She is willing to die for her cause and in a lot of ways it almost seemed like she wanted to die for her cause.

So now what remains to be seen is what effect her Martyrdom will have on the political climate of Pakistan.  The place is already a hot bed of political and religious riots.  What I wonder now, is how the Bush administration, who has sunk billions into Pakistan, is going to respond.  My guess is another war.

The part that really gets me in this whole situation is all of the people surrounding these situation that have been killed, just for supporting Bhutto.  In the first bombing when she got to Pakistan, there were 140 other people that died, in the bombing that led to her death today they are reporting that at least another dozen people died.  Seems a little sad that people who just want to support a political cause, have to take the same risks Bhutto did, whether they wanted to or not.



December 27, 2007 Posted by | News, Politics | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Nice one Hilary

Comments were closed on this blog that I lifted this story from, but once again, some evedince that Hilary would be the same thing as Bush but with a bush, savvy.  Hilary sent out pledge cards that said, “I, [blank], pledge to support Hilary Clinton at my precinct caucus on January 14th, 2008.”  Sucks that the caucus is on the 3rd.  What a dope! 

December 24, 2007 Posted by | News, Politics | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Statistical Dead Heat

So Hilary Clinton, and Barak Obama are in a statistical dead heat in both Iowa and New Hampshire.  That makes me happy and nerveous all at the same time.  I just don’t think there will be any change if Clinton is elected.  As a matter of fact I would move somewhere else if she were to be elected.  My wife and I made a pact on moving to Canada, but in light of the recent weather here I think I would be forced to move some where warmer.  But I will move.

Her record indicates that she will provide more of the same.  Strong willed, narrow minded, partisan policies that will cater to her special intrests.  She is all for business, and she seemes to have no problem with war (after all declaring Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization reflects the exact same kind of rhetoric that pushed us into Iraq).  I just can’t get over the idea that she is exactly like the current administration with a slightly better health plan.  What are you going to do different Hilary?

WIth Obama, there are questions about his level of experianace, and the vague nature of his platform.  And I’m kind of agreeing.  It just doesn’t seem like he is solidified as a canadate.  The experiance part I could care less about.  I honestly think it would be a benifit to have someone come in and just be a human doing the job.  But I also wonder if he will fall to the kind of corruption that so many politicians fall into that much quicker because he would be placed in such a large position of power that much faster.  Freaks me out.

So I’m torn, and the one person worth voting for (Dennis Kucinich) is such a long shot that I just don’t think it is going to happen.

December 12, 2007 Posted by | Politics | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Guantanamo Bay

So the Supreme Court is currently debating wether or not the detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba have the right to Habeas Corpus.  You can click on on the link for a specific deffenition, but put sussinctly it is a court order that demans that the police, government, or whoever is detaining you appear in court and tell you why you are being detained.  Currently this is a right that the detainees don’t enjoy.

Why?  The reson is really two fold from what I understand.  The first is that they aren’t citizens of the United States, and therefore they aren’t really subject to rights under our constitution (which you can read in full here, and I highly recomend that you do).  The second is that they are not being detained on American soil, which means that they aren’t subject to the “law of the land,” and therefore have no real rights.

So I get that.  Seems like simple and logical arguments, and I can see how the govenment would draw those conclusions especially considering the hard on that they have to keep there people imprisioned (which they can do indeffinitly without informing the detainees as to why they are being imprissioned).  And a part of me understands that they are “terrorists” and dangerous to the world, and all of that crap.  But here is my problem, these are people, no matter who they are or who they associated with, they are still human beings, and the last time I checked our country beleived that “all men are created equal.”

Shoudl it really matter if the detainees are American citiznes, or if they are on American soil.  Should it really matter if they are “terrorists.”  We give a child rapist the right of Habeas Corpus, mass murderers, drug dealers, even Sadam Hussain was informed of why he was being brought to trial, and being imprisioned, and ultimately executed.  So why shouldn’t these detainees receve the basic knowledge of why they are being detained.  Only 10 of them have even been charged with a crime.  Some of them for 6 years.  Imagine living in prison for six years without even knowing why you are there. 

So what the hell, are people deserving of equality, or is this particular segment of humanity so profoundly evil that we can’t even tell them why they are in jail.  I say fuck that, how hard is it to tell them, “You are here for associating with an Al Qaeda operative.”  Wait a second they did that with Murat Kurnaz.  Kurnaz was detained for associating with a known “suicide bomer,” as in someone who had blown themselves up as a terrorist.  Kurnaz, found a way to retain a lawer, and when that lawyer finally got case into a court where the government had to relinquish the evedince that they were holding Kurnaz on a little research revealed that the “suicide bomber” was alive and well, and no where near a terrorist.

Sure this is one example in the 400 plus people that are in, or have been in Guantanamo, but no one is even looking at any of these people to make sure there aren’t other people in the facility that are suffering for no reason like Kurnaz did for four years.  Four years of his life gone, because he associated with someone that was a “suicide boming terrorist,” but wasn’t.  In my book that is pretty shitty, and as a country that is quick to talk about their “moral authority,” we sure are lacking in morality.  Maybe it is time to actually take a stand for morality and put an end to this travisty of justice.

December 6, 2007 Posted by | News, Politics | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fuck, “Respectful Disagreement,” and “Great Admiration.”

Ok, listened to the NPR/Iowa Public Radio Democratic Debate, and I have to say that as far as the two parties (a flawed system at best) go, the Dem’s are on the best track.  But honestly will it be any different with anyone in office come 2008.  Listening to a lot of the comment coming out of some of the canidates, I just can’t help but think that it would just be “business as usual.”

For example when asked about how people will be discussed after they have left office, Clinton said she will leave a doctrine of bringing back America’s “Leadership and moral authority.”  Just because we are a wealthy nation, it doesn’t mean that we have any right to some kind of “moral authority.”  Is this concept really any different than Bush talking to Jesus.  While we as a nation (or at least a majority of a nation) are telling the world about our moral high ground we have the one of the highest rates of gun related death in the world, we have 35.5 million people in “food insecure homes,” oh yeah, and we are still fighting an unjustified war in Iraq.

And amidst all of this they talk about the finer points of how to deal with Iran, the clout of China, and these issues that are important and need to be dealt with.  But honestly at this point, that isn’t what I’m interested in.  What I’m interested in is this.  I work full time in the same job that my father worked full time in when I was a kid.  When I was a kid he could aford to work, go to school and support my mom, on the same ammount of pay (adjusted for inflation of course).  Right now, with food stamps, LEAP, aid with daycare, and health insurance, I work full time, and my wife works part time while she goes to school, and we struggle from week to week to not have the power turned off, or to get evicted from our house.  Meanwhile the upper 1% of America’s wealthy own roughly 1/3 of America’s assets, and earn over 20% of America’s personal income.  So where is the trickle down, the wealthy are getting richer, and so should we according to Regan.  But we aren’t the divide is getting larger.  The purchasing power of my income slowly dwindles.  So which of these politicians is going to bring something up.

Basically the only people that bring it up are Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich.  Both of whom are such longshots that it is stupid.  Why is it that when people hear them talk it resounds with them, but we just assume that they are unelectable.  A sad state that we are in where the people that are really speaking for the people are considered crazy, or just plain to “radical.”

Finally I want to say one thing no the terms, “Respectful Disagreement,” and “Greatly Admire.”  Pull off the gloves already.  Gravel and Kucinich have done it, why can Obama and Edwards.  If you disagree, don’t do it “respectfully” take them to task.  Let them know why they are wrong, so we don’t get the feeling that no matter who we vote for, we will be getting the same person.

December 5, 2007 Posted by | Politics | , , , , , | Leave a comment