I know, I know…it adds nothing to the political discourse, it doesn’t even have anything to do with Palin and her personality or opinions, and it makes me look like an immature asshole for re-posting it.

…but, damn it, I got me a good laugh outta that bad boy.

“Wish Obama had Micheal Jackson’s Docter…”

“Someone needs to walk up to Obama, look him straight in the eyes, and bitchslap him right across the face.”

“That what happen’s when you start letting FRIED CHICKEN eating mother f er’s run the country ???”

Now in fairness, a number of the group’s members posted disapproving comments on that last one. But the other two had many “likes” and there were plenty of similarly themed comments posted as replies to much more reasoned posts and links. It was enough to make me post the following on my way out:

“I joined this group to be ironic for April Fool’s Day. After reading some posts, I feel bad for you. A few of you have some very valid and interesting points that could really make the debate more productive…but you seem to be surrounded by crying babies who wouldn’t like Obama or the democrats no matter what they did or didn’t do. Good luck with your little group, kids.”

Someone decided to post a reply saying “it’s april 2nd.” Since I had left the group, I couldn’t reply to her so I sent her a message:

“I joined the group on April Fool’s Day. I removed myself today.

Have a great life.
-Tim”

To which she responded:
“already got one… hope the view is nice with your head up your bum =)”

Really? REALLY?! My head is up my bum? Didn’t I just say that this group had “some very valid and interesting points that could really make the debate more productive?” I know I did, actually, that’s why I just quoted it. Way to pick an argument where there wasn’t one. Well, whatever, that was just one comment it’s not like…what? there are more comments on my post now? aw crap…

“Bye Tim..”
Okay that one’s not bad. This might not be the train wreck I was fearing it would be…

“Tim…looks like a pretty big group to me!! Funny, I was just on the opposite sides page. Looks like they don’t have even half of the people here!! Hmm…I guess the majority of Americans have spoken. Sorry kid. ”
1st of all, a million or so people on the internet is not the majority of Americans. A million people isn’t even the majority of the city of Houston, Texas. Second of all the Jonas brothers fan page has 2 million people so, by your logic, the majority of Americans apparently like teen Disney pop.

“i think you need another B in your last name!”
…I don’t know what that means.

“gosh, now I feel bad that you feel bad… oh wait never mind k bye”
Can’t begrudge that comment. It’s a little defensive, but it’s kinda funny.

“Little group? I believe your “support healthcare” group is approximately 96.7% smaller than ours.”
Naturally because I criticize this group I must be a member of the other group, right? OOPS! I’m not. I did, however, pop over to their page after reading this comment. You know what I found? A lot of people from this group over there trolling that group and saying inflammatory shit just to be dicks. Nice, folks. Way to keep it classy. Why won’t they listen to your ideas? Why can’t we find some middle ground where both sides get SOMETHING they want out of this deal? It’s a mystery.

“I think it’s been mostly the last few days that people on here have gotten very frustrated–especially because of some people coming on here just to try to annoy us.

Most of the time most people on here are far from hateful.”
See? THIS is the person I feel bad for. Probably has some excellent points to make that have nothing to do with bitch slaps or racism. But because her group mates say stupid shit, it gets the opposition to say stupid shit and now it’s just a stupid shit volleyball game where no one wins (Yes, I am quite willing to entertain the idea that the opposition said stupid shit first…the result is the same) But sorry, from the posts I read, most of the people on there are very near to hateful.

“Some people here aren’t old enough to vote. My cat is also a part of this group. Not the farty one, the other one.”
I think this is actually a liberal trying to get a rise out of the conservatives. I’m not sure I get it. Liberals can’t you even TROLL well? Sheesh!

“Since when is being a “kid” a bad thing? Age isn’t always an indicator of intelligence.”
Oh look at that, it worked. This person was trolled. But don’t rope my use of the word “kids” into this.

“See ya Tim ya little bitch!”
This was one of the broad minded scholars trolling on the pro-health care bill group. Do you catch his subtle wit and nuance?

“[name removed]-agreed. even the youngsters, such as myself, have more intelligence than the zombies in the other group =)”
The opposition is always a group of zombies but your group is all ways the free thinkers marching in lockstep with each other…riiiiight.

“he said,”Little group”…..”
Yeah…I did…that was a little dicky. But to be fair, the Jonas Brothers still beat your numbers by a big margin.

“tim- you feel bad for us, eh? you didn’t know that april fools day was yesterday, did you? sorry.”
That’s the same girl who made the first comment…I guess she hadn’t read my e-mail at this point (At least I hope not, or she’s a moron)

“Thanks [name removed], I’m 24 and a college graduate. Yet somehow I don’t believe that age or level of education lable a persons intelligence or life experiences, which sometimes teaches us a lot more than formal education.”
It’s always funny to see a spelling error while someone is boasting about their education. But nitpicking aside, point well taken. While reason is not a substitute for knowledge, it’s not unimportant either.

Well, I guess the biggest April Fool’s joke was on me, cause I wasted a chuck of my life reading all that crap. Well played, haters…well played indeed.

After returning home from the DMV today, I tweeted a simple thought, “DMV=Overhated.”

People love to talk about the DMV like it’s the 7th layer of hell, but really it’s just a little waiting and then they help you out and you’re on your way. Technically, if I had made an appointment, I wouldn’t even have had to have waited (I feel like Grammar Girl would have a field day with that sentence…or an aneurysm).

So I got a response on Facebook from one of my old high school…NO..make that grade school friends (damn, we really go back). He leans more republican, if I had to guess, and he had this to say, “Just think – if the DMV is Government run, how much do you think people are gonna LOVE Obamacare?!”

Now in fairness, “overhated” is not a widely used term (so much so, that I thought I’d made it up). So he probably didn’t realize I was defending the DMV, not complaining about it. So I clarified, “…by “overhated” I mean that people hate on it without just cause. I was just at the DMV and things went just fine…there goes your Obamacare analogy.

However, I shudder to think how bad it would be if a private company like Comcast ran the DMV….ugggh…I just gave myself a fear chill.”

And this is, what I’ve always thought to be the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives…and it’s the one that makes the most sense to me. One side thinks the government is the enemy, the other side thinks corporations are the enemy. I would say there are valid arguments for and against both. Almost as though one answer would not be right 100% of the time. Almost as though the two sides should be striving for compromise on a case by case basis. I wouldn’t want the government in control of the entertainment industry, on the other hand I don’t want the private sector in charge of national defense (“What? We can make more money if we surrender the country to China? Well then…how do you say ‘we surrender’ in Chinese, bitches!”)

On the other hand, could the prison systems benefit by the private sector getting involved? I don’t know…maybe. It’s an interesting conversation. Could more government regulation have prevented this banking mess we’re in? I’m almost sure of it. Again that seems like a constructive debate that we could be having right now.

But no. It’s all Bush is a fascist or Obama is a socialist. People, c’mon…democrats are not trying to ruin this country and neither are republicans. Each just has a different idea about the best way to make it better. We’re not enemies, folks. We’re neighbors and countrymen (and women). There are plenty of people who ARE rooting for America to fail and crumble. Maybe if we quit fighting among ourselves, we can collectively come together and give those assholes a united middle finger of freedom!

It is important to point out that this whole train of thought started because I went to the DMV. God bless America!

“I’m Tim Babb and I approve this message”

There was something I wanted to say on this week’s TANcast but we were having too much fun to get serious…

I want you to know, I don’t dismiss what you say in the health care debate out of hand. You raise valid concerns about tort reform, the debt, etc. I’m willing to acknowledge that the bill that passed isn’t perfect. A constructive debate that improved it would have been a great thing for the past year.

But could you please get someone from your party to publicly denounce shit like this…?

Look, I know that’s not what the movement is about. But we keep seeing more and more racist, homophobic, and small minded behavior…and it pisses me off that no one tries to squash it. I’d just like to hear some republican leaders say, “To all of you who would bring your message of hate to this debate, please go home. We’re trying to make this country better, not worse. Racism isn’t welcome here. Belittling the lower class isn’t welcome here. Our plan for a better America free of government interference does not include bigotry and hate.”

But no one will say that because you can’t chastise those people…they’re your base. But, trust me, guys…they’re not gonna flip sides! You could call them all “shit eating fuck sticks” straight to their faces and they’re still not going to vote for the “communist” democrats. So grow a sack, knock of all the hyperbole about tyranny and socialism, tell the Jr. Klan Members of America to go fuck themselves, and get back to get back to giving an alternative to what we should be doing instead of just telling us what we SHOULDN’T be doing.

Speaking of people who need to grow a sack, liberals…you’re letter is coming soon.

For those of you who aren’t aware, here’s the back story. Mary is pregnant with Jesus. She and her husband, Joseph, are traveling and trying to find a place to stay. I’m not sure why they didn’t head for a hospital since she was due to have the kid any minute…I guess their Obama-care hadn’t kicked in yet do so they were still with Kaiser. And we all know Kaiser’s plan for child birth, “Figure it out yourself fuckhole, it’s $90 a month…you don’t pay us enough to care.”

So Mary and Joseph happen upon an inn. They go ring the bell, or whatever they did to get the innkeeper’s attention in those days and they explain their situation and the innkeeper says, “There’s no room at the inn…you can stay in the barn though.”

Instantly he’s vilified as the bastard who couldn’t help out a pregnant lady. I think someone should come to this dude’s defense. So here are 5 reasons the Innkeeper is not a douchebag.

1. He Had No Idea Who These People Were
OK..if some strange couple who showed up in the middle of the night, are you just gonna let them in with no questions asked? NO!!! That has scam written all over it. I’ve seen waaaaaaaaay to many episodes of CSI, Law & Order, or Criminal Minds that start out just like that.

2. He Wasn’t a Christian
You may be tempted to argue that these aren’t random strangers…it’s friggin’ Mary and Joseph! Well, smart ass, Jesus isn’t born yet (thus the point of this story). The Innkeeper hasn’t even heard of Christianity much less the players in it’s origin story. If Albert Einstein’s parents showed up at your door circa March 13, 1879, would YOU recognize them? Didn’t think so.

3. Timing is Everything
Have you ever tried to get a last minute hotel room? It’s a huge pain in the butt! Of course there’s no room. It’s Christmas eve! Everybody is traveling somewhere to be with family. Jut poor planning on Joe and Mary’s part.

4. He Threw Them A Bone
While he didn’t have a room for them, he let them stay in the stable…or barn…or whatever the “proper” term is. While I’m sure it’s not super fun to have a baby next to stinky cow shit…it’s better than out in the snow. A white Christmas wouldn’t seem so great if you had to give birth outdoors. Do I hear a “thank you” to the innkeeper? No? Douches.

5. The Innkeeper Doesn’t Exist
No, devout believer, I am not saying the Bible isn’t real. I’m not even saying this part of the story was made up. I am actually saying that the word “inn” is a mistranslation.

“The word translated as “inn” is the word kataluma, which is used elsewhere by Luke and translated as “guest chamber” or “upper room” (Luke 22:11; cf. Mark 14:14). When Luke wants to speak of a paid establishment (i.e., an inn), he uses a different Greek word, pandocheion, as in the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:34).” [source]

So basically it wasn’t an inn…it was some dude’s house!

“Hey can me and my preggo wife crash on your couch tonight?”

That makes number 1 even MORE applicable. Look I’m sorry pregnant ladies, but if you show up at my door in the middle of the night, you’re not getting in. Especially since it’s not likely that you’re carrying the savior of mankind in your belly…I believe the Anti-Christ is the next one due to arrive. Go screw yourself, lady! Have your devil baby in the rain!

So unless you actually have the brain of a beauty pageant queen, you know that the question was not at all inappropriate. She really just didn’t want to admit that the lawsuits were about money and fame more than some ethical position. She didn’t have a good answer, so she jumped straight into offended mode.

Well, Miss Prejean, if you’d like to be offended here are 5 questions Larry SHOULD have asked you:

1) If the wind “blew open your top” in these photos…why isn’t your hair blown about as well?

2) Is Sarah Palin your hero because George W. Bush was too intellectual for you?

3) I know you come from a conservative family, but don’t you think your mother is coming closer and closer to changing her views on abortion every time you open your idiot mouth?

4) I refuse to believe you’ve even READ a book much less written one…who really wrote that piece of shit you’re trying to hock on my show like it’s QVC?

5) C’mon…admit it, you’re a lesbian aren’t you? Sarah Palin isn’t your “hero,” she’s who you think about when you diddle yourself on video, am I right?

The following is an open letter to the National Rifle Association, inspired the events of this morning.

Dear Pieces of Shit at the NRA:

I received a call today on behalf of your organization from (703) 656-9940. I’m uncertain whether I spoke to one of your paid staffers, a volunteer, or an agency you contracted, but regardless I am very clear on what the dishonest little turd was trying to accomplish.

Slathering the call with a thin veneer of legitimacy by couching it as a “one-question opinion poll”, your minion tried to drum up some sort of outrage (and presumably monetary support) by asking me whether I agreed with “the outrageous United Nations plan to ban guns in the United States”.

I was about as polite to that stupid cow as I am being to you right now. I have no patience for push polls and no respect for the sort of garbage that would resort to using them.

Let me take a moment here to elucidate you on where I am coming from: I am in favor of sensible gun laws (registration and licensing, manufacturing quality requirements, etc.) and am against bans on handguns, rifles, or any other reasonable personal-use firearm. I am of that feared breed of moderate that can neither be dismissed as an “idiot gun-hating liberal” nor co-opted by reactionary rhetoric. I do not fear the United States government any more or less than I fear its individual citizens.

I am obviously not a member of the National Rifle Association, and even if I had been this morning I certainly would not be this evening. They say you can judge a man by the company he keeps, and I have no interest in aligning myself with fear-mongers and liars.

Your supposed poll was transparent in it’s goals. No honest person interested in an honest answer would ever use a word like “outrageous” in the question. In fact, trying to couch this as research is a direct insult to my intelligence.

Further, your implied claim is insane on its face. I’m not a political scientist, but it only takes a rudimentary understanding of our country to realize that the United States cannot enter into a treaty that violates our Constitution. It is the very foundation of the country is and the basis upon which all subsequent laws are judged.

But this is far worse than just being insulting or idiotic.

You encourage the weak-minded to believe that Clinton, Obama, the UN, or some other bogeyman of the moment is conspiring to take their guns, to followed quickly by the rest of their freedoms and liberties, leading to a descent into totalitarian control and Nazism.

You also spend about half your “charity” budget on raising more funds and paying staffers (including a nice chunk of change for your CEO), so I really have to question your motives.

Either you feed these fears and fantasies to keep the lucre rolling in or else you actually believe the Second Amendment is under constant attack and only you can defend it from the liberal and/or foreign horde waiting in the shadows. The former would mean your dishonesty is born of greed; the latter means it stems from lunacy. In either case, you are a shining example of what is wrong with political discourse in this country.

You probably see this misleading, manipulative behavior as necessary for the greater good and justified by your manifest righteousness. On the contrary, your willingness to engage in these behaviors outs you as despicable people. Anyone who feels that the ends justify whatever actions they take is the enemy of our democracy.

From the “armed-and-dangerously-unbalanced” behavior I’ve seen at demonstrations, town hall meetings, and soccer games in recent months, it seems a certain element of our society has bought in to your message. Contrary to claims, these individuals are clearly carrying and brandishing weapons at these emotionally-charged events because they feel afraid and powerless and they want others to feel afraid, too. This isn’t a patriotic display of their own Second Amendment rights, it is an attempt to abrogate through intimidation the First Amendment rights of anyone who disagrees with them.

You feed them that fear.

I tried to tell your drone exactly how your “poll” was deceptive, but she was having none of it. I wish I could meet her, though, so I could call her “scum” to her face.

On an up note (for me, not you), this was actually my third call from the NRA in the last week and the first that wasn’t dead-air on answer. In case you weren’t aware, telemarketing calls that don’t present a recording or agent within seconds are an FCC violation, so in addition to telling your representative what kind of person she was and venting my spleen in this post I also got to engage in a favorite hobby: report the asshole to the FCC.

They’ll probably never fine you. You do spend a shit-ton on lobbying after all.

You’ll probably never see this letter, and if you do I expect you will dismiss me, being convinced, as I said, of your own righteousness.

On the off chance you made it this far, let me close with a heartfelt…

Fuck You!

Let me start off by saying that if you hate name-calling rants filled with sarcasm and cheap pot shots…this blog is not for you. I’m fairly well informed and I do have a point under all this…but mostly this is my time to say, “Fuck off, right wing douches, you’re dragging us down!” I should probably get around to tearing the left a new one, but they just frustrate me. The right wing simultaneously pisses me of and blows my mind. How can so many smart people hold so many stupid opinions?! It’s like sitting in an honors math class and the kid next to you tells you 2+2=green. Not only that, he thinks your an uninformed boob for thinking it’s 4. (It’s is 4, right?)

I really should limit my time on Facebook, because that’s where I seem to see all thees things that anger me…like the three I saw yesterday.

The first was an article about how people are upset that Barack Obama had the audacity to speak at a school (and the audacity of hope…but that didn’t come into play). A certain douche that I am “friends” with was angry because a “politician” was speaking at the school. I’m sorry, Captain Sore Loser, he’s not just a politician he’s the FUCKING PRESIDENT OF THE GOD DAMNED UNITED STATES!!! He’s not trolling for votes in an election year…he’s encouraging kids to stay in school. How high is your desire to drum up rage against this man that you have to be outraged that he’s sending this message?! It’s not like they were outraged AFTER his speech because he told the kids to go out and get gay-married while preforming abortions and wiping off the coat hanger with pages from the Bible. He said stay in school. Mr T said the same thing…no one seemed to get upset. I pity the fool that gets angry at message from the opposition…even when it’s positive.

The second thing that pissed me off yesterday was this video posted by Mike, one of TANcast’s friends and fans (who didn’t support the video’s point of view, but posted it because it was the first video he’d seen where the argument against gay marriage wasn’t “God says it’s bad.”):

If you don’t watch the video (and I don’t blame you if you don’t) He takes a quote from Elton John out of context. The quote he uses is “If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership.” The part he leaves out is, “The word ‘marriage,’ I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.”

Elton (I call him “Elton” ’cause were super good friends) said he was against the word “marriage” for gay couples, but he still expects his partner? and himself to have all the rights as straight couples. The maker of this video clearly states that gay couples SHOULD not have the same rights as straight and tryed to make it seem like Elton agreed with him.

Furthermore, he asserted that if gay marriage was legalized that the government would require all churches to mary gay couples or lose their tax exempt status. What a fuck basket! No one would “force” churches to marry gay couples. That’s a straw man argument. (Which is appropriate because this douche is grasping at straws here) And on a separate but semi-related point..why SHOULD churches be tax exempt? They love to influence public policy…pay the cover charge like everyone else! Fuck free rides! Fuck people who oppose gay marriage! …and fuck termites! (Not related to this issue but still…fuck ‘em)

The third thing that got my nuts in a vice yesterday started with this status message that I saw going around Facebook, so I posted it as my status:

Tim Babb thinks that no one should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one should go broke because they get sick. If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day! (I can’t wait to hear what certain “friends” of mine will say to this)

The part in parenthesis was mine. I’m so witty….and apparently prescient too. Because a certain “friend” of mine (we’ll call him “Cum Biscut”) did indeed respond (if indirectly) by making his status this:

Cum Biscut believes that no one should die because they are too old to be “sustainable” or too young or unborn to have a voice. And no one should go broke because they get taxed into oblivion paying for other people’s health care. (Thank you Kathy and Debbie)

What a fucktarded response to a rather straight forward message. First of all it completely dodges the points brought up by the original status. Then it brings up the fictitious “death panels” (it doesn’t SAY “death panels” but implying that there is legislation about people being too old to be “sustainable” is a fabrication) lastly it erroneously infers that increased taxes from passing health care reform will somehow be worse than current health care premiums. As someone who has just recently had to purchase health care for himself, I can…with a great deal of confidence tell Cum Biscut to get fucked!!!

The only silver lining was that today Noah showed me this status message and it made me laugh:

No one should die because of zombies if they cannot afford a shotgun, or even just a machete, and no one should be turned into a vampire if they get bit by one–or a werewolf for that matter. If you agree, post this as your status for the rest of the day.

And that’s why I love TANcast…when the world is going to shit, Noah (and Andy) can make me laugh.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Please note the “born … in the United States” part.

In 1898, the Supreme Court ruled that under the terms of that Amendment, two non-citizens who aren’t diplomats or otherwise working on behalf of their home country and who live and work in the US, will give birth to US citizens while on US soil.

Read that again: It says two NON-citizens.

Obama had a natural-born mom, a (legally) resident dad, and a birth on US soil.

Only that last part matters.

PS: Happy Birthday, President Obama. Get some cake, and then get back to fixing health care. And the economy. And that leak in my roof.

Then I noticed this place was hiring when I saw this:

Let’s look closely at this poster. Not only is that woman SUPER happy to be working there, but there is all sorts of strangeness going on…

First off she’s clearly traveling at super speed. She’s run in so fast there’s nothing but a blur behind her. I didn’t know a job at Taco Bell could help you move that fast. I know that after eating one of their bean burritos I move that fast to the bathroom, but that’s another matter.

Then there’s the matter of the headphones and CD floating in the air. Apparently they give you a crazy CD player when you start working at Taco Bell. Which would be really cool…back in 1999…but we use MP3 players these days…more over, I’d rather you were listening to my request to hold the onions than rocking out to Kids Bop 7. (but at least hey throw in ONE roller blade skate…that’s…always useful)

But the best part is the text at the bottom: “Follow America’s Lead.” Is that the best advice in this point in history? Regardless, since when is America leading the way into shitty fast food jobs? And who would want to follow that lead?

Well I putin an application…we’ll see if they call. (Hello discounted Cruchwrap)

I think this is an especially disingenuous claim to make since those who (or whose parents, grandparents, etc. ) were most oppressed are more likely to support Barack Obama than Hillary Clinton, and it is Clinton’s camp that is trying to conflate the Democratic National Committee’s punishment of Florida and Michigan for breaking their rules with slavery, Black Codes, and apartheid.

I know that the day-to-day reality of politics is said to be like making sausage, but here we have a candidate who had no objection to the Democratic National Committee’s decision to strip all of Florida’s delegates from August 2007 until just four days before the Florida primary in January 2008 (when she was polling ahead), and who then held 3 fundraisers two days before the primary despite signing a pledge not to campaign in that state.  Worse, her official change of heart happened 10 days after the Michigan primary, where she was the only major candidate who had not removed her name from the ballot.

I can no longer say “I’m happy with both candidates, despite having a preference,” because Clinton’s win-at-any-cost behavior has made me rethink just how much she is committed to making America better versus committed to being in power.

An oft-misquoted adage goes “The love of money is the root of all (kinds of) evil,” but I think if Paul had thought hard he would have told Timothy that it is really the love of power that leads to these evils.  Money is rarely an end unto itself, and I don’t think the love of comfort (another cause for greed) evokes the same sort of behavior that typifies the power-hungry.

I’ve got a longer post coming on my thoughts on the candidates, but I’ll set all that aside for a moment and focus on what I think the DNC should do this weekend with the mess that is the Florida and Michigan Democratic Party primaries.  Just my 2¢…

I’m going to start by presupposing that Florida and Michigan should be represented at the Democratic Convention, which is an ethical choice on my part based on a firm belief that representative democracy requires participation.

I also believe both states should face consequences for breaking the DNC rules, since at its core the DNC is a private club and has a right to enforce reasonable participation rules on its member states.  Seating all delegates would not only take away the incentive of states to keep to the party rules in future primaries, it would grant a lot of influent to two horribly flawed primaries, compounding the already problematic situation the DNC’s insistance on granting “party leaders” a disproportionately large influence in the outcome of the nomination process.

The DNC itself has said their own rules legally prohibit it seating more than half of the delegates, and I would tend to agree that this should be sufficient punishment.

Moving on to how I think it should be done, I’ll start with Florida, which would have had 185 delegates and 26 superdelegates.  Setting aside my misgivings about how the candidates comported themselves, all of the candidates were on the ballot so we have a relatively straightforward result with Clinton getting 50%, Obama 33%, and Edwards 14% of the vote.  Wikipedia tells me this equates to 105 delegates for Clinton, 67-69 for Obama, and 11-13 for Edwards.

Cutting both numbers in half gives Clinton about 52 delegates, Obama about 34 delegates, and Edwards about 6, who I assume would immediately become “free agents” since he released his delegates when he endorsed Obama.  The 26 superdelegates should be assigned by lot to 2 groups of 13, then one group should be chosen at random to be seated at the Convention.  Doing this would avoid the possibility of the superdelegate contingent being manipulated to favor one candidate.  Alternately, all 211 could be given 1/2 vote each.

In Michigan, due to Clinton being the only major candidate on the ballot I think the situation should be handled differently.

Michigan had 128 delegates and 29 superdelegates. Clinton got 55% of the vote and would get 73 delegates, while “Uncommitted” got 40% of the vote and would get 55 delegates.

I have real issues with the validity of this primary. Exit polls that asked Michigan primary voters both “whom did you vote for” and “whom would you have voted for if all candidates were on the ticket” indicated Clinton had the actual support of about 46% of the voters to Obama’s 35% and Edwards’ 12%.  In the months leading up to the primary they seemed to be polling at about 44%, 23%, and 12%, respecively, though even those polls were bound to be affected by Edwards’ and Obama’s withdrawal from the ballot.

I am not a fan of the power superdelegates have in this process as I don’t think moving the actual election results so far away from truly democratic representation is good for the people who make up the party.  It seems to me that seating “Uncommitted” delegates would be little different than increasing the number of superdelegates, so I don’t see this a a valid, fair solution.

I would propose reducing Michigan’s representation to 78 total delegates, but seating ALL of Michigan’s 29 superdelegates (opposed as I am to the idea of them) to symbolically represent the “Uncommitted” vote and to account for the fact that the popular vote was essentially unfair to voters and to candidates other than Hillary Clinton.

Thus would leave 49 other delegates to divvy up, and I believe these should be issues on the basis of the exit poll data, which ought to better reflect the actual will of the voters. If I understand Michigan’s rules, the fact that Edwards failed to get 15% would mean the only recipients of delegates would be Clinton with 28 and Obama with 21.

All told, my breakdown would give Clinton 80 delegates, Obama 55, and Edwards 6, and would add 42 superdelegates to the total.

I think this is a pretty fair way to accomodate the will of Florida and Michigan while still punishing them for breaking the DNC rules and at the same time accounting for the utter mess that was the Michigan primary vote.

Who said this: “Too many good docs are getting out of business. Too many OB/GYN’s aren’t able to practice their, their love with women all across this country.”

As with every quote I’m quizzed on, I passed it through my “If a monkey could talk, would it say ______?” filter.

If the filter returns “No monkey is that stupid,” then I know George W. Bush said it.

If the answer is “Yes, a talking monkey would definitely say that,” then I am forced to guess between “Fox News Anchor”, “Reality TV Star”, “Fox News Correspondent”, “Pop Princess”, and, of course, “Miraculous Talking Monkey”.

In this case I obviously chose Bush.  And I was right.  He said it in a speech in Poplar Bluff, Mo. on September 6, 2004.

I guess the blog title’s meaning is twofold: It was not too hard for me to tell who pulled that nugget out of his butt, and it is not to hard for you, gentle reader, to tell what I think of him.

Please do keep in mind that I am NOT a Democrat and this isn’t partisan bull.  I just hate stupid people being in charge of important things, and I consider America to be pretty important.

Chris Matthews:. You know who’s on the line? Somebody to respond to what you said Edwards yesterday morning — Elizabeth Edwards. She wanted to call in today we said she could. Elizabeth Edwards go on the line you’re on the line with (a Useless Cunt).Elizabeth Edwards: Hello, Chris.

Matthews: You wanna say something directly to the person who’s with me?

Edwards: I’m calling you … in the South when someone does something that displeases us, we wanna ask them politely to stop doing it. Uh – I’d like to ask (the Useless Cunt) — if she wants to debate on issues, on positions — we certainly disagree with nearly everything she said on your show today — but uh it’s quite another matter for these personal attacks that the things she has said over the years not just about John but about other candidates. It lowers our political dialog precisely at the time that we need to raise it. So I want to use the opportunity … to ask her politely stop the personal attacks.

Useless Cunt: OK, so I made a joke — let’s see six months ago — and as you point out they’ve been raising money off of it for six months since then.

Matthews: This is yesterday morning, what you said about him.

Useless Cunt: I didn’t say anything about him actually either time.

Edwards: (Useless Cunt), you know that’s not true. And once more its been going on for sometime.

Useless Cunt: I don’t mind you trying to raise money. I mean it’s better this than giving $50,000 speeches to the poor.

Edwards: I’m asking you.

Useless Cunt: Just to use my name on the Web pages…

Edwards: I’m asking you politely…

Useless Cunt: … but as for a debate with me, um yeah, sure. Yeah, we’ll have a debate.

Edwards: I’m asking you politely to stop personal attacks.

Useless Cunt: How ’bout you stop raising money on the Web page then?

Edwards: It didn’t start it did not…

Useless Cunt: No you don’t have cause I don’t mind.

Edwards: It did not start with that you had a column a number of years ago.

Useless Cunt: OK, great the wife of a presidential candidate is calling in asking me to stop speaking…

Matthews: Let her finish the point…

Useless Cunt: You’re asking me to stop speaking, stop writing columns, stop writing your books.

Matthews: OK, (Useless Cunt). Please.

Useless Cunt: OK.

Edwards: You wrote a column a couple years ago which made fun of the moment of Charlie Dean’s death, and suggested that my husband had a bumper sticker on the back of his car that said ask me about my dead son. This is not legitimate political dialog.

Useless Cunt: That’s now three years ago –

Edwards: It debases political dialog. It drives people away from the process. We can’t have a debate about issues if you’re using this kind of language.

Useless Cunt: Yeah why isn’t John Edwards making this call?

Matthews: Well do you want to respond and we’ll end this conversation?

Edwards: I haven’t talked to John about this call.

Useless Cunt: This is just another attempt for –

Edwards: I’m making this call as a mother. I’m the mother of that boy who died. My children participate — these young people behind you are the age of my children. You’re asking them to participate in a dialog that’s based on hatefulness and ugliness instead of on the issues and I don’t think that’s serving them or this country very well.

[Applause from the crowd]

Matthews: Thank you very much Elizabeth Edwards. (Turning to the Useless Cunt) Do you want to — you have all the time in the world to respond.

Useless Cunt: I think we heard all we need to hear. The wife of a presidential candidate is asking me to stop speaking. No.

Hears what she wants to hear, smears whom she wants to smear, spews hate and lies and hate, talks or yells over the top of anyone who calls her on it, claims that she is being a strong woman or that she is under attack to justify it all.

She’s not a strong woman, she is a worthless, hateful, spiteful, bullying, insufferable, useless cunt.

You may share some political views with her, and I won’t fault anyone for that (hell, even Hitler may have had one or two good ideas rattling around his otherwise empty head), but I tell you now: anyone who still values the Useless Cunt’s opinions and input into our Democratic Dialog is my sworn enemy. If you appreciate this sort of vile behavior and believe it makes us better as a people, as a nation, and as a Republic (and here is my Fascism showing) then you are not good for the rest of us, and your downfall will be to our overall betterment.

To all the people who decided that CA Prop 69 was a good idea (even those close to my heart), I’d just like to take a moment to reiterate what I said about trusting people with your personal information.

As a quick review, this was the proposition, now passed, which will change mandatory DNA collection in the state. California previously required that DNA be collected from convicted violent felons and cataloged for matching against other past and future crimes. Now the collections rules apply to all convicted felons, all convicted sex offenders and arsonists (including those convicted of attempting to commit of either crime) regardless of class of crime, and all adults arrested for or charged with either a sex offense, murder, or voluntary manslaughter or the attempt of one of those 3 crimes. Starting in 2009 the law will also require collection from any adult charged or arrested for any felony. The rules are retroactive, too, so anyone currenly in jail, on parole, or on probation for any felony, sex offense (attempted or committed), or arson (attempted or committed) will have to submit to DNA collection and cataloging. There is no provision requiring the government to remove your DNA if you are acquitted, charges are dropped, or you are released without being charged.

This will help cast a wider net to catch violent offenders, right? This will never be misused by the government, right? DNA evidence and collection and storage are all 100% error-proof, right?

Leaving all those issues aside, I actually came to argue about the safety of the data in the system so have a look at the following news blurb:

A sophisticated computer hacker had access to servers at wireless giant T-Mobile for at least a year, which he used to monitor US Secret Service email, obtain customers’ passwords and Social Security numbers, and download candid photos taken by Sidekick users, including Hollywood celebrities, SecurityFocus has learned.

Twenty-one year-old Nicolas Jacobsen was quietly charged with the intrusions last October, after a Secret Service informant helped investigators link him to sensitive agency documents that were circulating in underground IRC chat rooms. The informant also produced evidence that Jacobsen was behind an offer to provide T-Mobile customers’ personal information to identity thieves through an Internet bulletin board, according to court records.

This is just the latest in a long history of computer intrusions, public, private, and government. Yes, Virginia, government systems get hacked, too. Now we get to run the risk of being arrested without cause and having information about out DNA stuck in a database with felons and other poor suckers, and since there is no such thing as 100% perfect security all this exceedingly personal information could be compromised by nefarious characters not employed by the state.

In a worst-case situation I can get a new Social Security Number. Where can I get new DNA?

Put bluntly, not only does it now look like Saddam (a.k.a. “The Fucker with the Shoe-Polish Mustache”) had dismantled his nuclear arm development, but the Bush administration knew their “proof” was a laughable lie.

I offer the following with half-assed apologies to the NY Times for ripping off about a full page of its 15-page story. I wouldn’t if I was sure the original story would still be in the same place in a few months, but a lot of media sites seem to break their links or dump their old content on a regular basis.

On a side note, the Times needs to stop requiring a blood sample from people before it lets them read its content. Want to track readers? Use cookies.

You can use BugMeNot to get a login if you want to read the original on the Times’ site.

Anyways, the story starts like this:

How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms Intelligence
By DAVID BARSTOW, WILLIAM J. BROAD and JEFF GERTHPublished: October 3, 2004

In 2002, at a crucial juncture on the path to war, senior members of the Bush administration gave a series of speeches and interviews in which they asserted that Saddam Hussein was rebuilding his nuclear weapons program. Speaking to a group of Wyoming Republicans in September, Vice President Dick Cheney said the United States now had “irrefutable evidence” – thousands of tubes made of high-strength aluminum, tubes that the Bush administration said were destined for clandestine Iraqi uranium centrifuges, before some were seized at the behest of the United States.

Those tubes became a critical exhibit in the administration’s brief against Iraq. As the only physical evidence the United States could brandish of Mr. Hussein’s revived nuclear ambitions, they gave credibility to the apocalyptic imagery invoked by President Bush and his advisers. The tubes were “only really suited for nuclear weapons programs,” Condoleezza Rice, the president’s national security adviser, explained on CNN on Sept. 8, 2002. “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”

But almost a year before, Ms. Rice’s staff had been told that the government’s foremost nuclear experts seriously doubted that the tubes were for nuclear weapons, according to four officials at the Central Intelligence Agency and two senior administration officials, all of whom spoke on condition of anonymity. The experts, at the Energy Department, believed the tubes were likely intended for small artillery rockets.

The White House, though, embraced the disputed theory that the tubes were for nuclear centrifuges, an idea first championed in April 2001 by a junior analyst at the C.I.A. Senior nuclear scientists considered that notion implausible, yet in the months after 9/11, as the administration built a case for confronting Iraq, the centrifuge theory gained currency as it rose to the top of the government.

Senior administration officials repeatedly failed to fully disclose the contrary views of America’s leading nuclear scientists, an examination by The New York Times has found. They sometimes overstated even the most dire intelligence assessments of the tubes, yet minimized or rejected the strong doubts of nuclear experts. They worried privately that the nuclear case was weak, but expressed sober certitude in public.

One result was a largely one-sided presentation to the public that did not convey the depth of evidence and argument against the administration’s most tangible proof of a revived nuclear weapons program in Iraq.

Today, 18 months after the invasion of Iraq, investigators there have found no evidence of hidden centrifuges or a revived nuclear weapons program. The absence of unconventional weapons in Iraq is now widely seen as evidence of a profound intelligence failure, of an intelligence community blinded by “group think,” false assumptions and unreliable human sources.

Yet the tale of the tubes, pieced together through records and interviews with senior intelligence officers, nuclear experts, administration officials and Congressional investigators, reveals a different failure.

Far from “group think,” American nuclear and intelligence experts argued bitterly over the tubes. A “holy war” is how one Congressional investigator described it. But if the opinions of the nuclear experts were seemingly disregarded at every turn, an overwhelming momentum gathered behind the C.I.A. assessment. It was a momentum built on a pattern of haste, secrecy, ambiguity, bureaucratic maneuver and a persistent failure in the Bush administration and among both Republicans and Democrats in Congress to ask hard questions.

Precisely how knowledge of the intelligence dispute traveled through the upper reaches of the administration is unclear. Ms. Rice knew about the debate before her Sept. 2002 CNN appearance, but only learned of the alternative rocket theory of the tubes soon afterward, according to two senior administration officials. President Bush learned of the debate at roughly the same time, a senior administration official said.

Last week, when asked about the tubes, administration officials said they relied on repeated assurances by George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, that the tubes were in fact for centrifuges. They also noted that the intelligence community, including the Energy Department, largely agreed that Mr. Hussein had revived his nuclear program.

“These judgments sometimes require members of the intelligence community to make tough assessments about competing interpretations of facts,” said Sean McCormack, a spokesman for the president.

Just in case anyone wonders how I will be voting, consider that the Bush administration:

• enriches the wealthy at the expense of the working middle class.
• empowers corporations at the expense of consumers.
• destroys fair use and the public domain by granting essentially perpetual corporate copyrights.
• enables media consolidation of unprecedented scale.
• feeds the fear of the masses to justify the erosion of civil liberties and personal rights.
• uses the Secret Service to silence peaceful protest.
• used unconfirmed intelligence from a dubious source to push for the invasion of a sovereign nation (a belligerent dictatorship, to be sure) over the protests of every international body.

Now, to every “Ditto Head” out there ready to dismiss me as some bleeding-heart liberal I want to say I am a conservative (or more specifically, a libertarian). I am predominantly moderate (leaning right of center) but with some liberal, some anarchist, and some fascist tendencies depending on the specific subject.

Feel free to take issue with any of the bullet points above, but come equipped with counter-proofs or at least a convincing argument regarding the irrelevance of the subject since I can back every one of my assertions with hard facts. Conjecture and rhetoric will be mocked tirelessly.

Please note that I’m not a Democrat. People seem to treat this as an either/or distinction. For my thoughts on what this sort of assumption says about them, see my “people are stupid” post.

The two largest parties are out to keep their hands on the reins and little more, but the smaller political parties tend to be fringe (including the Libertarian Party, which is anarchist) or interested in limited issues (though despite the name, doesn’t as much apply to the Greens). I don’t feel that any party will properly represent my wishes at this point so I am not a member of any of them.

I sit on some weird intersection of Libertarian, Socialist, Fascist, and Conservative ideologies on the political spectrum, and where I land on any issue depends on the exact matter at hand, so maybe I really am a party of one.

That said, few things scare me more right now than the consolidation and deregulation of big media and the content providers (cable, data, etc.) and especially the growing trend to vertical control of the message and the media. The AOL/Time-Warner giant would have been more troubling to me except that the new AOL masters turned out to be clueless in “old media” issues and the company kinda imploded. Comcast’s continued expansion in the cable market coupled with its desire to gobble up Disney is more of a threat, in my opinion.

The government is no help, either. In an odd bit of actually practicing what they preach, the current administration is trying to pull way back from government controls on local media monopoly and media ownership rules in general. The supposedly “small government”-loving Republicans which have actually historically grown the government at almost the same rate as the Democrats are pushing for less government oversight of media ownership. I guess it is just too bad for the rest of us poor schlubs that the free press is one of the only true defenders of the First Amendment.

If that sounds like a paranoid rant, go read this article. Seriously. It is long, but I will wait for you to get back.

Funny thing that Michael Powell (head of the FCC) is acting like Janet Jackson’s nipple is a sign of an impending moral apocalypse, harbinger of the end of family values. Hell, they have boobs on TV in Europe all the time and honestly I don’t know how favorably our values compare to theirs. Is 2 seconds of nipple really that bad when erectile dysfunction, genital herpes, and hemorrhoids and considered suitable for family-hour advertisements?

Large companies like Clear Channel in an all-out grab for control over our “news and views” sources and an administration happy to oblige them. An assault on free speech couched as “protecting the children”. I’m not blowing this out of proportion: this is the powerful seeking more power. If you ever wanted to distract the public, “protecting our youth” is the sound bite to use. Hardly an original trick, though…

Moving on, I have a hard time trusting any administration that within days of taking office decided to virtually pardon one of the most abusive monopolies in recent times: Microsoft. They were FOUND GUILTY, folks, but the Department of Justice let them off with a stern “bad Microsoft” as soon as Bush took office. Note that their behavior since has not indicated much change in their modus operandi. This is the company that has been dictating prices and killing any hope of competition in the PC operating system space for years through ILLEGAL exclusionary contracts with manufacturers. That is my money and yours which has been building up their billions in cash stockpiles, essentially a tax they have levied on every computer made since 1995. This is the company that decided to try to take over the Internet by pushing everyone else out of the client space.

“Bad Microsoft”, indeed. Bad Bush administration for letting them get away with it.

This is not me being anti-corporate. I am no such thing. This is me being anti-people-fucking-me (girlfriends excepted).

At this point we have “media consolidation scares me” which ties in to the FCC assault on free speech and “Microsoft got away with murder(ing Netscape et al.)” as my two big complaints. Both are based upon my unwillingness to watch the powerful try to take further control of my life. Lets add a third, one of the only things that scares me more than media consolidation: loss of my rights.

John Ashcroft (US Attorney General, head of the DoJ) and Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense) seem to be the only two people in America who read George Orwell’s 1984, smacked their foreheads, and yelled “Of course!” If you have never payed any attention to the “Total Information Awareness” project the Defense Department has been working on, go do some research.

Combined with the so-called Patriot Act legislation that keeps being snuck through in pieces this is the be-all, end-all Big Brother scenario. The 9/11 attacks signaled open season on basic rights to privacy. Legislation is already in place giving the FBI and police the rights to demand all sorts of financial information about any citizen without so much as a warrant, and this doesn’t just mean your bank records.

I guess we just get to sit in the dark and trust that our DoJ, FBI, and DoD masters are using all this info for the greater good to fight terrorism and protect puppies and safeguard our youth and all the rest. Fuck oversight: they need this to fight al Qaeda! We all know police forces never abuse their power, right Mr. Hoover?

Hey! Why not ask that Jose Padilla guy? He was held without access to a lawyer as an “enemy combatant”, even though he is a US citizen and was arrested on US soil. If the government is right he was plotting to detonate a “dirty bomb” for al Qaeda which would make him an evil, wretched bastard who deserves to be fucked up the ass by Hitler, using a razor-studded dildo, in Hell for all eternity.

IF the government is right…

Even if they are right about him, though, as an American citizen he is guaranteed due process by the Constitution of the United States of America.  Even traitors, murderers, terrorists, and hippies deserve a fair trial.

Big media limiting our access to information, big corporations running roughshod over competition and consumers alike, and most importantly the shredding of rights to privacy, against unreasonable search, and to free speech. What is not to love?

It’s like 9/11 was the government’s carte blanche to throw the Constitution out, and since we all felt scared and vulnerable we have been letting them. Now general apathy is threatening to let this vat of shit-cement solidify around us.

Leading this charge against our rights and freedoms and liberties, supposedly endowed upon us by our Creator: George W. Bush and the so-called neoconservative movement.  They have hijacked the Republican party and are trying to take our freedom, our money, our very peace-of-mind.  I didn’t leave the party; they stole it from me.

I guess I’ll vote for Kerry, since Nader doesn’t seem to stand much of a chance.

I am sick and tired of people from the rest of the US bashing California over things like earthquakes or LA “culture” or electing Ahh-nod as the Governator when you get stupid shit like this coming out of the South:

Georgia House bans genital piercings for women
The Associated Press – ATLANTA

Genital piercings for women were banned by the Georgia House Wednesday as lawmakers considered a bill outlining punishments for female genital mutilation.

The bill would make such mutilation punishable by two to 20 years in prison. It makes no exception for people who give consent to have the procedure performed on their daughters out of religious or cultural custom.

An amendment adopted without objection added “piercing” to the list of things that may not be done to female genitals. Even adult women would not be allowed to get the procedure. The bill eventually passed 160-0, with no debate.

Amendment sponsor Rep. Bill Heath, R-Bremen, was slack-jawed when told after the vote that some adults seek the piercings.

“What? I’ve never seen such a thing,” Heath said. “I, uh, I wouldn’t approve of anyone doing it. I don’t think that’s an appropriate thing to be doing.”

The ban applies only to women, not men. The bill has already been approved by the Senate but now must return to that chamber because of the piercing amendment. Both chambers of the Legislature must agree on a single version of a bill before it can go to the governor for final approval.

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Adopted without objection. It boggles the mind.

By the way, note how I included the copyright notice that explicitly denied me the permission to do what I did? The AP is welcome to request I take that down, but my main issue is fighting link-rot. I did provide full attribution, after all.

I’m not saying this from some sense of superiority, nor did I just have some upsetting experience with a stupid person. This is a fairly deep-seated belief I base on twenty-something years of observing the human experience.

Politicians say “Our schools are failing.” and like sheep people line up to agree. The same politicians push through an agenda that may or may not help but is based on zero study of the matter, zero knowledge of education or child psychology, and zero consideration for the potential to further damage the system. What do we wind up with? Schools that now have to squeeze facts into their students heads by rote so the children can pass the “standards-based” tests. Schools cutting back on creative arts so they can focus on cramming in more “important” dates from the social studies texts so they don’t lose funding. Renewed calls for a voucher system so that richer people can send public education funds along with their children to private schools which are unencumbered by these “standards”. They strive to hog-tie public education and then claim that parents should be able to take public funding to the private institutions which magically seem to be more effective. Never mind that private schools can pick their students. The public, like braying asses, line up to cheer them on.

Lets take politics in general as a further example of the mindset. People join political parties and then tend to vote along their party lines as if Democrats and Republicans are locked in some “us vs. them” game. The separation between these parties is actually about as great as that between medium gray and medium gray. There is an “us vs. them” game going on, but the “them” is the politicians in power who strive to maintain the status quo and thus their grasp on the reins and it’s the rest of “us” they are striving to satiate with sound bites and pounding fists and righteous indignation, and people lap it all up without a thought.

I am religious, but I encounter people who have never considered their own faith in more than a passing way. We have cults because people hurt and crave structure they can’t provide for themselves, but that is not at issue for me (at least not in this context). I’m talking about relatively whole people who are just plain afraid to examine the tenets of their religion or the history of their church with a clear eye. No offense to the Mormons, but I did throw a quick glance your direction when I wrote that. Still, I’ve met people at my own church who share my beliefs who do so blindly.

People are a billion screaming little voices all insisting on their own way, each feeling entitled to pursue whatever petty or profound impulse drives them this second. The guy who jumps into the merge lane during gridlock so he can squeeze himself back in to traffic 300 feet further forward in the same traffic jam. The lady who insists on exercising her God-given right to provide her own running commentary at the movie theater. Everyone who has ever voted on a ballot measure based on a TV commercial.

We’ve all been selfish, but I’m talking about the “I’m more important than everyone else” mentality that seems so pervasive.

We’ve all done stupid things (I’ve done my share AND your share), but I’m talking about the unwillingness to learn from the stupid things and/or the inability to see them for being stupid.

We’ve all been impulsive, but I’m talking about the downright worship of impulse.

We’ve all been mislead, but I’m talking about the blind acceptance of any bullshit that is spoon-fed with a smile.

Individuals may be very smart and/or clever, but I say it again: People are stupid; as a mass, as a group, as a sum total.

My advice to you all is don’t be stupid. Examine before you believe. Remember there are other people out there and that you are not more special than they. Be aware that people in powerful positions may in fact have an agenda.

Whatever you do, don’t just sit around cursing the darkness like I do. That is also stupid. Light a candle and show some of the cattle the folly of their ways.