News: U.S. Death Toll in Iraq

News

Nice thought back on Tiff

I was thinking about an incident in the past that really meant a lot to me. I thought I'd write it down so that memory won't be lost to me in the future.

Tiff and I were in her car and she was driving down the street one night. Tiff was telling me something about a ring that I had bought her a few years previously. As she did this, she took off the ring and had it in her right hand.

I don't recall if we hit a dip or if she just had a moment of clumsiness, but she dropped the ring. It fell into the well around the emergency break.

She pulled over and we looked in the car. We looked under the seats, and on the sides of the seats. No ring.

She started to become very anxious as we theorized that perhaps it fell into the breakwell and out of the car. We walked back and looked for the ring. It was very dark and we didn't find anything.

As we looked she became more and more anxious. When it became apparent that we weren't going to find the ring, she freaked out. She started bawling hysterically. I felt awful for her. I tried to comfort her. i told her it was only a ring---that I'd buy her another, but she was inconsolable. A different ring was not her ring; Not the one I gave her.

After about 30 minutes she was no happier, but had run out of energy. I told her not to worry about it and to go get some sleep. We called it an early night.

The next moring I went out to the area and I looked around for 2 hours for that stupid ring. I didn't find it.

I came home and was getting ready to call Tiff when she called me. She found the ring!

She triuphantly explained that she had pulled out a screw driver and DISASSEMBLED the entire assembly surrounding her parking break and found the ring! She sounded so proud of herself, just beaming through the phone. As we spoke she was in the process of reassembling the car.

I was shocked. Tiff knew NOTHING about cars. She didn't have a manual. And she LOVED her Saturn and was immensely proud of it as it was the first new car she ever bought. Every little trouble went back to the dealership to be looked at.

I couldn't believe she pointed a screwdriver at it, let alone removed parts of the car.

It was so overwhelmingly emotional to me. I would say it was flattering but it was so much more than that. I couldn't believe that something little I gave to someone could have that much meaning to them. I felt so treasured. It was like she told me how deeply she loved me without saying a word.

At that moment I thought we would be together until the day we died.


I don't know how we got from there to not having spoken or seen each other for the last 3 months. How things got so totally broken. Maybe I didn't try hard enough. Maybe I tried too hard. Maybe we just weren't the right age for each other. Maybe we just weren't right for each other. I don't think anyone can REALLY tell you how or why things end. They just do sometimes.

I hope that she will always treasure the ring as a gift from someone who loved her deeply, but I know in my heart it has probably already been put away in a box somewhere never to see the light of day again. And I guess that's OK. It's just how things go.

Jaded view on elections from the 1920's predicts Bush Presidency

"...when a candidate for public office faces the voters he does not face men of sense; he faces a mob of men whose chief distinguishing mark is the fact that they are quite incapable of weighing ideas, or even of comprehending any save the most elemental-men whose whole thinking is done in terms of emotion, and whose dominant emotion is dread of what they cannot understand. So confronted, the candidate must either bark with the pack or be lost.

All the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre-the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum.

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people.

We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."

-----H.L. Mencken writing in the Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920

Turn your back on Bush.

Iran Said To Be Trying to Fit Missiles for Nukes

Iran Update

Iraq: Bush's war reaches logical conclusion

How does pissing muslims off make America safer?

I want to be very clear. I am not faulting the American soldier for this. They are trained that a wounded insurgent is the most dangerous insurgent. He learned about that first hand the day before. This was something else that SHOULD have been anticipated by the Bush administration. If you go into a city with the idea of killing all the insurgents you had to think you wouldn't keep Al-Jazeera from covering it.

Iraq is a giant cluster fuck. The BEST thing that could happen at this point for both countries is if the elections happen in January and anti-American candidates sweep into office, requesting the US leave the country, requesting all US contractors leave the country, cancelling all contracts with US companies, and deprivatizing the oil feilds.

I suspect that since the US puppet might lose the election at this point, the Bush administration will not allow the elections to take place in 2005.

MSNBC - Iran agrees to suspend nuclear program --- temporarily

MSNBC article

What is the deal with all these bad dreams?

I woke up at 4 AM again this morning after another bad dream. I dreamt Tiff had somehow died. I wandered around in my dream being absolutely miserable but somehow not to the point of waking up.

Finally I woke up and I just lay in bed telling myself, "She's OK. Jane dropped of stuff at her work. She's OK." I felt like someone had taken a shotgun and blown out my guts---just totally worthless. I felt so awful I didn't even want to write it out. I just lay there until the sun came up.

Veronica also recommended Church

...And for more than just meeting girls. She thinks it might help me find a few much needed moments of peace.

I'm game. Anyone want to make suggestions which I should attend?

I am looking for a place where I can hear a nice sermon presented that leaves you with a good lesson to think about. A place where people would almost seem embarrassed to volunteer their religion, but live it doing good works for their fellow humans. A place where they recruit through what they do, not what they say. A place where people do not pass judgment on entire groups because they are different (I do not want to listen to someone harp on gay people eroding the fabric of society. I am friends with too many exceptional people who happen to be gay to take that shit without a fight --- and that is pretty much the opposite of finding peace.).

...With precious little singing (---I always get light headed when the congregation starts sucking up all the oxygen).

Any recommendations?

Good advice for a Knuckleheaded Male

A good friend gives you a pat on the head and (when needed) a kick in the butt.

Veronica AIMed me the other day after I posted the blog about missing tiff with two bits of advice to help me in the future:

"1) Keep your head up.

2) Stop calling women whores."

D'Oh!!! The second one bugs the hell out of me because it hits on a tone which has been in some of my posts that I didn't like. I don't consider all/most women whores (I would say there are far more guys who fit that description than women) but I can see where a female reader might get that impression. Since I have started this blog I have written 3 posts in which I have to some degree or another called at least some girls whores. I didn't set out to do that at all when I started this blog.

It bothers me immensely that a woman who reads my posts might (justifiably) feel that I hate women or think of them as lesser people than men or that I think that they can't do the same jobs as men.

Or that they are all whores.

I don't feel that way. I admire the hell out of the women in my family. My oldest sister Jane is a graduate of Stanford University. She has 6 children who are all brilliant in no small part due to the amount of thought and effort that she put into making sure they have the widest set of experiences possible. Her eldest, my niece Angie, just finished her freshman year at Stanford and her oldest boy is likely going to an Ivy League school when he graduates. Jane (and her husband Tim) are 2 of the best parents I have ever seen. They have it down to an art form. They have instilled personal responsibility into their kids' minds without crushing their souls. I hope I can one day be half as good of a parent as either of them.

My younger sister Gail decided when she was in high school that she didn't want my parents to spend a cent sending her to college. So she worked her ass off in high school to get good grades. When she graduated she could have gone to an elite school: An Ivy, Stanford, Rice, Duke, etc. She had the grades and the extra curricular accomplishments to gain admission. My parents were more than willing to pay for her to go to one of those schools. But Gail had made up her mind. She got an academic scholarship and worked odd job (DJ at a strip club at one point! --- That lasted for about a day, lol!) to pay all of her bills. She even bought herself a brand new car while in college. She earned a masters in college and did it all on her own. I have two heroes. My Dad and my sister Gail. Gail amazes me. It isn't that she is a goddess to me, more that she is an idomitable Titan.

My niece Angie is cut from the same cloth. I am going to be a little vague as to why, but I have a deep admiration of her courage to stand up for her convictions. It strikes me that she will sacrifice just about anything for what she believes in. I hope she avoids the conceit of martyrs and always remembers to judge whether certain sacrifices truely need to be made or whether the commitments made provide the optimum benefit the world and society, but I have faith and confidence in her and I believe her head is on straight. I would not be suprised if Angie is a politician one day who helps brings about global change to end famine in Africa or bring peace to the middle east! (Yeah, I know that's a lot. :P) She has the brilliance, charisma, work ethic, and the unquestionable dedication to others to accomplish things other people cannot.

This isn't to say that the other women I know who are not related to me are not fantasic too! I am blessed with a lot of incredible friends. Veronica is a brilliant writer with a mind so sharp you can cut your head on her words. She is a fiercely passionate crusader for real values in government. She doesn't care whether her politicians go to a Christian Church or can recite biblical verse from memory; She wants them to strive to live up to the kind of values ("Thou shalt not kill"? "Love thy neighbor"?) that we ALL agree on.

Lisa, the lovely Mrs. L, is as sweet as sugar. She is one of those people who finds a way to be cheerful and upbeat darned near all of the time. She is a soothing tonic to anyone to whom she speaks.

There are a ton more women I know who are also truely amazing; Each of them far better than me at some things --- if not most things. And I know there are a ton more amazing women out there who I don't know!

What I am trying to say, is that while sadly there are people who hate women and think they are incompetent, I am not one of those.

I write this blog to help me straighten out my thoughts. In years passed, I painted as an emotional release, now I blog. Sometimes those thoughts are not as tactful as I might want them to be. Sometimes I don't realize until days later why I said something the way I did or why I said it in the first place.

What I have realized in the last few days is that I feel pretty betrayed by a woman I love(d) after 5+ years of dating her and am very uncomfortable with the dating scene. That did/does affect my writing.

I am sorry if any female readers read my blog and felt an undercurrent of hate/anger/distrust bubbling under the surface. I hope my writing makes people think --- not think "Why do people hate us for no reason?" or "Man, that Tobi is a dick!"

You visitors are my guests. A good host welcomes his guests and treats them with kindness and warmth. I have been a poor host.

I am deeply sorry.



Thank you Veronica for the kick in the butt.


"A pat on the head and a kick in the butt is better than a pat on the butt and a kick in the head."

Sorry Everybody: Half of America apologizes to the world for 4 more years of Bush

A site for everyone who feels bad about what we have done to the rest of the world.

I have to put up mine. I'll link it when I do.

Tim Ryan goes pretzel on Bush Administration about the draft.

Wow! This is strong...

The Onion (fake news): Nation's Poor Win Election For Nation's Rich

A friend of mine sent me this from the Onion, a fake online newspaper. It sums up my Republican Tool fear.

Journal: I woke up with a knot in my stomach again

NOTE: This is more of a Journal entry. You are welcome to read it, but it is mostly an emotional dump.

After 2 hours of lying in bed, it is no longer a knot, now it just feels like nails jammed in there. Got to write about it to try to get the bile out.

I do after 2 hours realize where this all comes from.

Yesterday, I had my sister drop off some stuff that Tiff gave me at Tiff's place of employment. I didn't want to see Tiff and I didn't want to make tiff uncomfortable by having her ex show up at her place of employment.

I put some bowls that she gave me and a twisted wire figure she made (a punk) in a bag to go back to her.

Then I went over to my sister's house and watched the daily show. John Stewart interviewed a writer who interviewed a lot of college age girls. The writer was shocked by the casualness of their sexual encounters. He talked about them writing about their "hookups" in the journals they let him read. He was shocked by how often the girl didn't even have a name for the guy they slept with. The journals had a breif description then a rating of how good he was in bed.

All in all, that was a cocktail for today's 4 AM wakeup call.

(For those of you who don't know the Tiff story, here it is in a nutshell. Tiff is 10 years younger than me. She came into my shop and I was instantly taken with her. We became friends. I felt I was too old to date her so I tried setting her up with a friend of mine her age who was "Johhny Depp-cool", but he kept standing her up. Eventually, I felt really bad about it and asked her out myself. We dated for 5 years. She broke up with me once during that time, but we got back together.

Over the last few years, we were having sexual troubles. She had slowly become a cold fish in bed. I hoped she would get back to where she was for the first few years we were dating, but I secretly feared I had fallen in love with another sexual abuse survivor. Tiff had gained about 60 lbs while I was dating her (She drinks cokes like a fish drinks water.) and the weight mad her feel uncomfortable about her appearance and her sexual appeal. Which made her not want to have sex. (This is the point in the narrative where all the guys say, "Dump her ass".) Which made her feel like she was a failure as a girlfriend. Regardless of how much I told her I loved her and how attractive she ALWAYS was to me (truth).

Anyway we had talked about moving in together last year around this time and had almost done it, but I backed out at the last second. I had always wanted her to live by herself first (which she hadn't done) and then at that point choose to live with me. But in spite of that I was prepared to move in with her. Then I started to worry about my (apparently only marginally bad) credit preventing her from getting one of the apartments she wanted. Then my brother had offered to help me get a house, and I decided that it would be a lot better for our relationship if I had something substantial (a house) that I could bring in --- that I could provide for her. So at the last minute I announced that I was trying for that. I think in retrospect she took that as a failure to committ to her.

Anyway the relationship was on the rocks after that, although I didn't realize it. She dropped a lot of hints that she wasn't sure where thing were with us. She frequently talked about how much better her relationship was with her stepdad. (He used to terrorize her and make her cry when she was a kid. He was not a fan of me, frequently saying throughout the 5 years that we dated that I was a loser. I didn't much care about his opnions, but I despised him for hurting her so much when she was younger.)

I wanted to have sex pretty frequently; she didn't at all. It came to a head in February when she had one of her rare sexual moments and we went to bed and she was just lying there. I felt bad. I felt like I had badgered her to do something she didn't want to do. So I told her no and walked away from sex (only time in my life).

I thought that things might get better from there. We seemed to communicate a little better oddly. Her birthday was coming up and she asked me to take a week off and spend it with her. I went over the night before our vacation was to start and we sat out at the jacuzzi. She started dropping hints about again. I had had enough of it so I gently steer the conversation to have her say what she meant. And she said she wasn't sure how she felt about me and wanted to break up to spend some time thinking things through. Needless to say, I was pissed, but I tried to be supportive.

She wanted me to sleep in her bed that night, but I was bitter. Why would I want to go from having a girlfriend/future wife to a piece of ass? What was the point of sleeping in the bed? Did she want to feel better about ripping out my heart? Did she want to have sex to make her feel better? To make me feel better? A consolation prize? I would probably want to have sex with her if I slept in the same bed with her---would it just be more of the same passionless sex? Fuck all that. I slept on the couch.

So ANYWAY...As I mentioned before, she had broken up with me before and we had gotten back together. I fully expect it to happen again. She didn't committ to me one way or another in the months that followed, but that was pretty much the same thing that happened last time. The only real difference was she was going out a lot more. Going drinking. I didn't know what to make of it as both of her biological parents have had trouble with alcohol, but I gave her her space as it wasn't my place. Then for one whole week in August(?) she didn't call me. This was odd as we talked daily. I needed to know. I called her and asked if I was an ex-boyfriend or a potential future husband. She responded "I don't see a future with you". 20 profanity-less seconds later, the call was done and we haven't spoken since.

I will never understand falling out of love with someone. I never have. I guess it is a chick thing.

So you are all up to date...and now back to our regularly scheduled program...)

I realized something this morning. Despite all of my protests to the contrary, Tiff WAS differrent from my previous ex-girlfriends and my response to this relationship failing is a little different. I may be focusing very hard on getting over her, but it sure isn't easy. I am expending energy to do this.

I trusted her. For 5 years I trusted her and could count on her. Tiff is not a ho.

I think the knot in my stomach comes from 1) missing her and 2) the final symbolic cutting of ties with her 3)my questions about my dating future.

I was invited out by a friend to go clubbing with him on friday to get women. I don't want to go. My friend made a convincing arguement. "You ain't going to meet anybody sitting at home."

My sister laid out my feelings pretty accurately. "Tobi, club girls are not what you want. Frankly they are diseased."

I suspect because my parents are older and were raised in the British empire my family and I are a ton more conservative than most about promiscuity.

Logically, i realize that not all women who go to clubs are looking to have sex, but frankly, I suspect most wouldn't pass on the chance to fuck a hot guy. That just seems to be how things are today. That's how younger women think. They have that habit. They are like "dudes". That is nothing I want to be involved with.

I want to have kids one day soon. I don't want to date or marry a whore. A lot of marriages (but not all) fail because one person cheats on the other. I want someone who is into me and me alone and wants to build a lasting family. I want to get married once. I don't have time for whores.

So how do you meet nice women? Maybe I could go to church again and try to meet someone. God looks out for me --- maybe he'd set me up.

Looking at churches as dating meccas for non-slutty girls:

My sister is Catholic. Sometimes I envy that. Catholics value marriage and work at it. I don't know if that makes them more faithful to their spouses than protestants. I don't know if they stay in unhappy marriages and that is the only difference (no good). But the numbers don't lie; they do take the institution of marriage more seriously.

Could I stand being married to a Catholic? I doubt it. I want my kids to be able to chose whether or not they want to be a part of organized religion. I doubt a Catholic mom would be on board with that.

Biblebelt protestants seem just as fussy as the Catholics, only they don't appear to live with any of the morality they hear about in their weekly church socials. Add in the pressure to get married and the divorce rate and I have to wonder what the attraction is to marrying a protestant.

Could I marry a Buddist? I did have a great time last time I went to a Buddist temple. But would a Buddist be anymore interested in letting her kids choose their own way? And frankly, I don't know a thing about Buddist morality --- although they have all seem very warm and welcoming.

Sometimes I regret that I was not born in a society that arranged marriages. Until you have seen an arranged marriage in action you should not mock it. I have been around a few and those people took it very seriously. Fucking up your marriage was disrepecting your families. I have a lot of respect for that. Those guys fell in love after the marriage BECAUSE they treated each other with the respect that they felt for their family. They had the kind of marriage that people should ASPIRE to---marriages based on trust and respect.

Honestly, I know the answer. People are the same everywhere. There is no good way to minimalize your dating fuckups by pulling from a religious cross-section. I should know that. I had a youth group leader who went on a cruise and got knocked up!

A portion of our society is very lucky---like my older sister Jane. They meet someone who is serious about doing whatever it takes to have a great marriage. Then there is everyone else.

Hopefully, one day I'll find someone who shares that level of respect and commitment who I love who loves me and wants me to be the father of her kids.

Well I can't say I am all too proud of this as a work of writing, but all the bile is out. Maybe I can still squeeze in a couple hours of sleep before work.

Fuck the South...a Northeasterner's morality focused ass-whipping of the Bush states

One of my brothers sent me this as an email. It is truly a exceptionally entertaining rant. It turns out that the author(?) has this up on a website called www.fuckthesouth.com. I am not really sure why the midwest is spared, but... what the hey! You Go, Yankee!

"Fuck the South

Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves - yeah, those are states we want to keep.

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier. Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real you are you Johnny-come-lately Oooooh I've been a state for almost a hundred years dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it's a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, "It's your money, not the government's money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go on, guess. That's right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It's too easy, asshole, they're blue states. It's not your money, assholes, it's fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let's talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It's fucking Massachusetts, the fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that's right, the state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think that's just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst, the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.

But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you? Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority. Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning, hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North, assholes.

Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing, federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou, hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.

And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time. Fuck off."

Joke sent to me

One night GW Bush is tossing restlessly in his White House bed. He awakens to see George Washington standing beside him. Bush looks up and asks, "George, what's the best thing I can do to help the country?" "Set an honest and honorable example, just as I did," Washington advises, then fades away.

The next night, Bush is astir again, when he sees the ghost of Thomas Jefferson moving silently around the bedroom. Bush calls out: "Tom, please! What is the best thing I could do to help the country?" "Respect the Constitution, as I did," Jefferson advises, and then dims from sight.

The third night sleep still evades Bush. He sees the ghost of FDR hovering over his bed. Bush lowers his voice and asks, "Franklin, What is the best thing I could do to help the country?" In that golden voice of his, FDR replies, "Help the less fortunate, just as I did," and then he disappears.

Bush still isn't sleeping well the fourth night. He tosses and turns, and suddenly another figure moves out of the shadows. It's the ghost of Abraham Lincoln. "Abe," Bush pleads, "what's the best thing I can do right now to help the country?" Lincoln pauses, then replies, "Go see a play."

Wow...This is a weird site even to me..."The Passion of the Anti-Christ"

I think this speaks for itself...


"Who or WHAT will be the Antichrist?

Will it be a Clone Of Christ?, the next POPE?, or a Fallen Angel/Alien?"

In poor taste (you are warned)

I freely admit that this is in immensely poor taste. If you are easily offended, please do not read it.

If you love offensive stuff, read on!

I came upon some friends of mine who were bitter about another 4 years of Bush. One of my friends made the comment that although she would never in any way harm someone or help lead to someone being harmed, she said she wouldn't cry if Bush was somehow done in.

Which lead someone (not me) to pose the question, what kind of Bush death would you hope to read about in the paper?

It was truly a ridiculous scene as bizarre death headlines came out of the woodwork. I personally volunteered

"A pretzel's revenge:
Cheney declares salty snack 'Weapon of Mass Destruction',
promises to root out terrorist organization 'Frito Lay'".


Some of the funnier ones were more to the point:

"Anthrax claims only Moral American",

"Nuclear Annihilation of Bush Ranch",

and

"Europe cheers Sniper"



It did make me daydream about how different it would be if Cheney had to assume the role of President. He definitely would be a lot more mellow about gay rights at least---probably also about abortion. He seems entirely consumed by Iraq and there are only so many things one can be fanatical about in a day...


Perhaps to illustrate to The White House that you really can't have a "mandate" if you had a 47% approval rating as an incumbent president a month before the election, almost lost the electoral vote, and nearly half of the country hates your guts I'll send pretzels to the White House.

I do want to make a point that if I do, it will not be a murder attempt. I will not trick up any pretzels, and I ask that if any of you also send pretzels, that you don't either. Someone may actually eat them --- a guard, a postal employee, the homeless --- but it almost certainly won't be President Bush.




....He probably has his own food tester.

More 9/11 profiteering in 2008?

My dear friend James Lain reminded me that I did not mention the man who has an excellent shot at being the republican front runner in the 2008 primary, Mayor Guliani.

Quite honestly he has always hit me as a marble mouthed New Yorker, the kind of guy who really isn't electable outside of New York. In addition, mayor of a city to President of the US is too big of a jump IMO. He seems more of a VP candidate type---someone who cannot pull a national vote, but can deliver a very attractive chunk of the electorate.

But James made a very compelling arguement. Assuming the cities remain liberal and the country remains conservative---a safe assumption, IMO---most of the country is already set.

Dem states:
WASH, ORE, CAL, MN, WISC, MICH, IL, PA, NY, ME, NH, MA, CT, NJ, DEL, Maryland, DC, HAWAII = 245 electorals

Undecided states I think would tend to lean Dem
NM, OH, VT, RI, = 32 electorals

Undecided states I think would tend to lean Rep
NV, CO, IA, = 21 electorals

Republican states
AZ, UT, ID, MT, WY, ND, SD, NEBRASKA, KS, OK, TX, LA, MS, AL, GA, SC,NC, TN, VA, WV, KY, TN, IN, AR, MO = 233 electorals

Here is my logic. Bush speaks Spanish, has been well known in the SW for the last decade, and without debate has been very good to Mexican Americans. I think he profited from a bump in the SW that most republicans just won't get. New Mexico was still only Republican by a slight margin. which tells me it probably would lean Dem without Bush in the race. Nevada and Colorado are not as heavily Hispanic, so I have left them leaning conservative with the rest of the midwest. Arizona is richer than NM and IMO more religious --- it seems more like Utah (more conservative) than it's neighbors to the east and west. Iowa has a a school in the Big 12 and one in the Big 10. Politically the state is similarly divided. I put it leaning conservative because it does not have as many large cities as some of the other Big 10 states and does not border Canada (not so exposed to foreign and progressive ideas). Indiana I have as conservative as they have gone heavily that way the last two races. Ohio, I would put leaning Dem, but I will freely admit I might be wrong there. My gut feeling is that the Kerry group dropped the ball in Ohio. Vermont and Rhode Island have gone both ways in the last two elections, but they are in areas bombarded by liberal thought from nearby metro areas. Florida has gone to Bush twice by suprisingly narrow margins considering his brother Jeb is the governor. Considering all the disaster relief that a President gives to Florida on a fairly regular basis, I think there would likely be an advantage there for an incumbent. I don't think they get that bounce if a Bush is not running.

So I am saying that in a vacuum, the Dems would win most elections 277 to 254 (until the votes are redistributed next). Sadly they don't happen in a vacuum.

Now supposing Guliani is in the race. The conservative states go conservative, so 233. Guliani pulls NY +31, so 264. The idea that Guliani couldn't steal ONE of the following states: MA, NJ, PA, or Ohio to win the election just seems to be asking too much.

I think Hillary would not win NY vs. Guliani and would get routed nationally in that matchup (although perhaps I am not giving her enough credit as she is by all accounts a very talented lawyer and presumably would fare well in a debate). Could Obama stave off more Guliani Northeastern wins, carry some of the neighboring states, AND overcome the racial hurdle of being the first black American presidential candidate. That’s a lot to ask, even of Illinois’ Superman.

I think you would have to totally rethink your strategy as a Democrat to beat that. You would have to run a classic "Southern Democrat" from Georgia or Florida (or possibly even Texas) to have a chance to beat that. A polished national-class politician with George Bush's religious sensibilities and a liberal political view would be a good choice vs. Guliani.

I don't see that person in Texas; Maybe they exist in Georgia. That kind of candidate could take Georgia, Florida, and maybe a couple other southern states and possibly prevent a Guliani sweep.

Frankly though, Liberals’ best shot is Guliani pulling a Howard Dean in the primaries. I think this would happen. Like Dean and Kerry, Guliani has never run for president and McCain has. Guliani will have weaknesses in the fact that he is just a former city mayor. McCain was a legit presidential contender in 2000 and has not lost any luster. John McCain is very personable, effective, and knowledgeable of Presidential scale politics. If Guliani is just too NY for Southerners and Midwesterners, McCain could very well pull the Republican nomination.

That isn't to say that McCain is not a candidate who could win the overall election just as dominantly. This is all about how he would win and what he would be as a President. Frankly, I might vote for McCain if he were the Republican candidate in 2008. I would vote for him vs. Hillary, and I probably would vote for him vs. Obama (too early to tell). I think McCain is not the kind of candidate a liberal would reject out of hat as being extreme. In some regards, he is like a Reagan or Clinton in that he would pull moderates very well.

I think he is the kind of candidate America needs. A responsible candidate who doesn't run on 9/11 and isn't part of the divisive culture that has Americans at each other's throats.

Classify McCain as "tolerably Republican".

Guliani is just too much of a partisan Republican shill for my tastes. My experiences with him lately include him going way overboard on The Daily Show trying to convince America that Bush dominated the first debate (come on now, how disingenuous can you get?) and this political ad where he is trying to convince Alaskans to vote Republican to "protect America".

By doing this ad and other appearances where he says basically, “I am the guy who was the mayor of NY when it was bombed. You should vote Republican to keep America safe,” he has lost all credibility with me. Agreeing to do this amounts to taking the step from responsible and respected mayor of NY to scummy political profiteer. IMO. Building a national career off of the ashes of 9/11 is in my opinion no different than what McCarthy did in the 1950's building a career off the fear of communist attacks in America.

votes in general

Just when I was celebrating no major new voting irregularities, this comes up.

I wonder what would happen if Bush's lead in Ohio turns out to be from a series of computer glitches? Oy Vey!

Secondly, how does a precinct say Bush got 4258 votes when only 638 people TOTAL voted in that district? How does that not raise a flag to the election officials running the show?

Why can't we just put a thumb print and magnetic tape on every driver's license/state id card. Then have each voter come in, we scan the magnetic tape on their ID into a national database in Washington that tracks them. Then they get a ballot that they thumbprint. The thumbprints have to match up for the ballot to be submitted to the election official. Everyone can vote and there is a nice paper trail.

A tally of ballots would be kept both locally and at the national DB. Most fraud/errors would be caught when each precinct reported.

I am also out on denying people the right to vote because they are felons. From a practicality standpoint, the policy is simply far too ripe for abuse. From a moral standpoint, we allow felons a chance to defend themselves in court, it seems voting is in that same vein of rights which should not be denied.

It may be an unpopular stance, but I question whether we should be denying incarcerated citizens the right to vote for the same reasons. I don't think it is a practice that would stand up to a supreme court challenge. (I personally think that every American should have a right to vote on all policies in America that affect them. Certainly elected officials have a big effect on policies towards incarcerated citizens, but I am touching another subject---the role of prisons---a future topic for some other day.)

If felons could vote, it would eliminate the loophole that disenfranchised thousands of African Americans in Florida in 2000. Far better to allow people --- who maybe don't deserve it --- the right to a single vote each, than to deny people who do their right to vote.

These changes would do a lot to eliminate "provisional ballots". I am opposed to the issueing of provisional ballots. While from a practicallity standpoint I can understand wanting to assign voters to a specific precinct, I do not think they should be denied or given a provisional if they don't vote in that precinct. Everyone should have a right to vote without their vote getting unfairly ignored.

What exactly are "provisional ballots"? Here are excepts from two articles and the links to the articles that talk about provisional ballots. An important thing to understand is that in many cases these votes are not counted, further bringing the idea of a fair and accurate election into question.

"Local election officials will verify whether the special ballots, designed for those whose eligibility is questioned at the polls, were cast by properly registered voters in the precinct where they live.
Required in all states for the first time this year, provisional ballots are used when voters believe they are properly registered but their names do not appear on voter rolls at polling places.
The ballots were the focus of an intense legal battle even before Election Day, as Democrats unsuccessfully sought rulings that would have allowed the ballots to be counted if they were cast in the proper county but wrong precinct.

Some states, including Ohio, allow 10 days or more for verification of provisional ballots."

"Almost half the states allowed provisional voting for the first time in this election following the passage of the Help America Vote Act. The federal law requires that voters whose names don't show up on voter-registration lists on Election Day be given a backup ballot, which will be counted if the local canvassing board determines that the voter's omission from the rolls was an error.

Under HAVA, all provisional ballots must be examined. But local voting jurisdictions have wide discretion in deciding which ones will be counted. One precinct may reject 20 percent of its provisional ballots while another may reject twice as many.

And different states have instituted different policies relating to where those provisional ballots may be cast. A string of court decisions in recent weeks upheld the right of individual states, including Ohio and Florida, to reject provisional ballots cast outside the voters' home precincts."

The election is over

My Last Post pretty much sums up my feelings, so there isn't MUCH left to be said on how I feel about the results. But there always is some. :)

I am somewhat content that we are not overwhelmed with thoughts of voter fraud after the election, like many people (myself included) thought we would be. That at least saves us from more "reforms".

I have been told by the people I know who in their 20's who voted for Bush that they felt that he has not been a great president and that they acknowledge the points I made in the previous post, but they didn't know what they would get with Kerry. They felt that Kerry needed to layout his plans in the debate. They felt it was not enough to say look on my website for my plans. They did acknowledge that Kerry did more of that than Bush, but they felt Bush didn't have to as they knew what he offerred.

I have read some articles that state that Kerry lost the electoral votes (and consequently the election) because the Unions did not deliver their membership. There is probably a lot to that. The CNN exit polls suggest that Kerry only won the Union vote in ohio 58% to 42% (vs. 61% to 38% national poll totals). 34% of the polled voters in Ohio belonged to a union. The election boiled down to 136K more votes for Bush than Kerry in Ohio. If Ohio union members had matched the national average, Bush would have only had a 6017 vote lead with 155K provisional ballots to count. Kerry probably would have ultimately won the electoral vote and due to our crappy electoral vote system, would have stolen the election.

But I don't want to do anything more than acknowledge the arguement.

Kerry ran a good race. The Republicans did a better job of mobilizing their voters. They won the popular vote by a good margin. The idea that a winning candidate loses the popular vote is just not a defendable democratic concept in this day and age. Today's American doesn't see the need for the electoral college as constituted.

I personally thought Kerry was probably in trouble a few days before the election and that was kinda confirmed for me as soon as I saw the CNN exit poll (around 7:30 PM if I remember correctly) which showed Bush with a couple percent lead and an approval rating with polled voters in the low 50's. A month ago his approval rate was 47%. 50% is the hurdle incumbents have to overcome to be re-elected.

So I knew at that point it would probably still be an uphill battle.

But if you looked at the projections you could see a winning Kerry strategy: win the northest and the pacific coast. That would give an electoral majority. I also thought that Florida had a chance of going for Kerry, but with all the allegations of fraud in Florida prior to the elections, If I were advising the campaign I wouldn't have counted on Florida.

Ultimately from a campaign management standpoint that is one of the few (risky---IMO) tactical decisions that didn't pan out for the Kerry camp. They committed heavily to winning Florida. Bush had to have Florida to have a chance to win. Kerry had to have either Ohio or Florida to have a chance to win. By going for the slam dunk (florida) instead of the layup (ohio) they lost the electoral vote.

Does this mean the Democratic Party has to dramatically evolve to have a shot at future elections? I don't think so. A lot of people have suggested that changes have to happen to make the Democratic Party viable. I disagree. The reality is the gameplan of the northeast and the pacific coast almost got Kerry into the white house and those states are likely to be receptive to Democrats in the future.

I think 2008 will probably be Jeb Bush or John McCain vs. Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. I hope that McCain would be the Republican candidate, because I think he seems a good candidate, but the Bushs and their friends have a lot of money. I think Hillary Clinton is the favorite for the Democratic nomination, but I think she would have a tough time winning. Too liberal in a more moderate/conservative country. Frankly, I think she might get blindsided by Obama, who already has a reputation as a golden-tongued, natural-born politician. A more dynamic Bill Clinton --- without the warts. A liberal, black Reagan. His star is on the rise and I could see him catch fire during the primaries.

Is America ready to vote for a black candidate?

The Dems might not win the presidency until 2012, but the party can still rebound strongly.

Economically the US is in trouble. The only way Bush seems to know to spur on the economy is to cut taxes. Anyone who has ever played Sim City 2000 knows governments can't borrow money forever ---eventually you have to pay your bills. Once that point is reached, the moderate electorate will swing Dem.

The growth of the Mexican population is promising for future of the Democratic Party, but they sure better woo them again. The religious right is making major inroads there.

Sadly, Roe vs. Wade is almost defintely gone and a draft is likely to come. There will be a depressing number of teenage deaths. I worry about my nephews. I hope they are not drafted and dragged to the middle east to fight for corporate greed. I love them so much. It weighs heavily on my mind.

Bin Ladin beats me to the punch: George Bush bankrupting America?

I had planned on making one final appeal to voters leaning towards voting for Bush based on the financial implications it would have towards our country. I was going to ask you if you would re-elect Jimmy Carter. In the 1970's the US had out of control inflation with a stagnant economy. Gas prices were out of control. Critics argued that he had the country in very difficult financial waters.

Today George Bush has our military overextended and we are pumping money into an extended effort to enforce democracy on people who aren't all that keen on being what we want them to be. He delayed turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people because he wanted to privatize the Iraqi oil fields first. In delaying, Iraq's military and police disbanded as they weren't being paid creating voids we have had to fill. This decision CREATED the hideously expensive quagmire we find ourselves in today. (Don't take my word for it---take the words of General Garner, the general initally in charge in Iraq.) They have cut taxes to a point where our debt is growing. He saw a projected budget surplus and used it to buy votes (Come on, a "rebate" check?). Now because that money wasn't used for Social securtity, Social Security is about to jump on the American worker's back like a 300 lb. gorilla. Gas prices are out of control. Critics today argue that Bush has the country in very difficult financial waters.

I was prepared to draw the obvious compairisons between the Bush and Carter regimes and ask would you have given Carter a second term, but then Osama Bin Ladin brings the issue to the forefront pretty clearly. And makes my parallel a less interesting take.

That Fucker.

Anyway, consider this excerpt from the coverage, "In reality, spending in the war against terror and other factors have resulted in an expected $377 billion shortfall for 2003 - the highest deficit since World War II accounting for inflation. The total U.S. national debt is near the $7.4 trillion statutory limit. "

OK, let that sink in.

We are nowhere near leaving Iraq. At the end of the year we will have spent 200 billion dollars on Iraq. How many more years of this are we looking at? The BBC reports that the Bush government sees Iraq as our PERMANENT outpost in the middle East. Make no doubt about it, we will have heavy presence there for the next 4 years if they stay in office.

(This analysis doesn't even deal with the people costs. There are too few soldiers in Iraq. This makes them constantly vulnerable to attack. They know it isn't an optimal situation. They tell their loved ones and the media. American kids are not rushing out to join up and fight this stupid war. General Wesley Clark said that on our current course we will probably have to institute a draft just to MAINTAIN our presence in Iraq, let alone fight other conflicts that arise.)

Now add in the fact that Iran, which was actually somewhat sympathetic and (comparitively) friendly towards the US after September 11th, (That would be before George Bush called them part of "The Axis of Evil".) is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons and has the missles to deliver those weapons against Isreal AND --- at least based on their statements --- appears willing to use them.

Is there any way we stay out of that war with the tactless Bush Administration in office? Hell no.

How much more is that going to cost financially?

The average American doesn't realize that we only a couple of years away from a major financial crush already! Over the next 30 years, the number of Americans over 65 years will more than double as the baby boom generation retires. Our population has not grown to match that. In very simple terms, about 3 workers used to pay for 1 retiree's social security. Now 2 workers will have to do it. If the money that was used for the rebate check was instead applied to Social Security, the interest off that money would cover a LOT of that increased burden. The costs could be spread out over years and would not be nearly as significant. By the Bush administration giving away the "projected" budgetary surplus a few years ago in the form of a government rebate check rather than responsibly applying it to Social Security, Social Security is approaching insolvency---meaning for retirees to get paid, we have to match that money from our paychecks.

"At the beginning of the twentieth century, the average American lifespan was 46 years; now it is 77 years. A 1928 government study forecast that the 'natural' lifespan would ultimately rise to the unbelievable level of 65 years. When Social Security was enacted, this estimate was used as the basis for setting the federal retirement age at 65. Lawmakers assumed Social Security would be economical because most people would die without ever receiving a benefit check. Instead, today Americans average an extra decade of life beyond what experts thought would be the biological maximum."

Suggestions have been made that perhaps the dollar value of social security checks should be cut in half to not overburden the economy.

Senior citizens are a huge voting block and vote religiously. They WILL get their money. So that too will be lumped on the backs of the American economy.

You can take the approach that the Bush Administration took in the first term and continue to cut taxes, but eventually you reach a point where the interest on the National Debt takes on a life of its own. (If any of you have ever had out of control crdit card debt, you know what I am talking about.) Eventually it becomes very difficult for the government to get the loans to make the neccessary corrections that are needed fom time to time to spur on the economy or defend our borders. Take a look at Germany after World War I to look at how a country with issues getting reasonable loans will struggle.

The Bush Administration may not realize it, but they are fucking with the integrity of America as a superpower long term and possibly as a viable institution (Interest takes on a life of its own...Although admittedly that is just me looking at the worst case scenario as a businessman, I am not an governmental economist).

Do not think that America cannot fall into deep financial difficulties because we are the world's superpower. The world has changed. Russia has fallen into the background. The European Community is thriving. Will they replace America as the world's superpower? Will they dictate the world's policies?

When Bin Ladin compairs the US to Russia, he is right to do so. A country can only overextend itself to a point before major unpleasant corrections have to be made.

...

Quite simply, we cannot afford to occupy a hostile country the size of Iraq while "fighting the global war on terror"...by ourselves. While I agree that keeping a couple of bases in Iraq near the Iranian border is wise, our day to day enforcement of democracy in Iraq is too freaking expensive and severely limits our ability to defend ourselves.

"Bin Laden boasted in his first appearance in more than a year that for every $1 al-Qaida has spent on terrorist strikes, it has cost the United States $1 million in economic fallout and military spending, including emergency funding for Iraq and Afghanistan."

This kind of spending is what the future amounts to under Bush. What you see is what you get. Where he is taking the country is very predictable if you look at what he has done in the last 4 years.

Don't be a pawn of extremists in the religous right. Republicans in this election are not the conservatives. Don't be a Republican Tool.

More Republican Fraud - Bogus Fliers Circulating To Keep Voters Away From Polls

nbc5i.com- Bogus Fliers Circulating To Keep Voters Away From Polls

The opposite of a "Liberal Democrat"

Since Bush Sr. the term "liberal" has been a dirty word in America. It isn't taken to mean open-minded or tolerant anymore, but rather unrealistic and irresponsible.

And certainly, the more socialist branches of the Democratic party might be a little of both.

However it has become vogue that every time a Republican starts to loose an arguement they resort to calling their opponent "liberal".

Ideally, we would as a society should look down upon politicians who resort to namecalling over reasoned debate, but the facts are a portion of our society (5%? 30%? 50%?) is poorly educated without a real desire to consider issues. They are (and I mean this with no malice) sheep. Their big goal each election is to not look like a sucker.

That frankly is something the extremists in the Republican party have used over the last 20 years to allow their fringe agenda to root.

I think there is a need for a leveling of that playing feild to eliminate this imbalance and force those citizens who don't want to look like a sucker to do their homework. A term needs to be coined for people who support the republican angenda at their own expense.

I nominate:

"Republican Tool"

"Republican" rather than "conservative", because it is truly difficult to criticise someone for being conservative and the current group running the Republican party are far more radical, in their desire to forcefully impose their views on others, than conservative.

The word "tool" has two meanings which apply that can either be slightly offensive or very offensive.

tool
n.
1) Something used in the performance of an operation; an instrument.
2) A person used to carry out the designs of another; a dupe.

Republican Tools vote Republican because they gravitate to the principles the Republican Party espoused under Reagan. Lower taxes. A strong military. A belief that the government should not be anyone's sugar. daddy.

These people generally glaze over the details, otherwise they would recognize that today's Republican Party is not Reagan's Republicans. Beyond even that, they would realize that both parties take turns spending government money. When the Democrats are in power the money is (perhaps lavishly) spent on "feel good" projects and on the poor and middle class. In the current Bush regime money is spent lavishly on corporate payouts. John McCain called one of the bills recently passed by the Republican majorities in Congress and President Bush "No lobbyist left behind". Even some Republicans think their spending is out of control.

The facts are one of the two parties will ALWAYS be spending more government money than you prefer on things you probably wish they weren't. Government money will always be spent. Whether it is for funding public schools, buying votes (tax rebate checks), or buying campaing contributions (pork barrel payouts), count on the money being spent. So it is up to you. On what do you want the money spent?

Not acknowledging this fact and stating that one is voting for the Republicans to "control wasteful spending" is the first sign of the Republican Tool.



If you make less than 40K, you have no reason to vote Republican.

If in addition, you have medical bills that exceed $5K a year, you have even less of a reason to vote Republican.

If you beleive in religious freedom and the seperation of church and state, you have no reason to vote for these Republicans.

If you have kids who attend public school, you are voting against their success when you vote Republican. Rich Republicans' kids go to private schools. They don't want your kids to compete on a level playing feild with their kids. Public Schools will continue to fall behind with each voucher issued. You are endorsing people who are cheating your kids out of a fair shot at succeeding.

If you are black and you vote for this group of Republicans, you are voting for a group that in 2000 illegally disinfranchised thousands of black voters and is currently still illegally denying black people (many the same people for the same trumped up reasons!) their right to vote in the state of Florida. (Click here to see the BBC News expose'.)

If you are a believe in fair elections as the basis of all legitimacy in American government and you vote for this group of Republicans, you are voting for people who have committed election fraud tearing up Democratic voters' registration forms in Nevada and disinfranchising COLLEGE STUDENTS (KIDS!) who registered as Democrats by monkeying with their registration forms. (Again, click here to see the BBC News expose'.)



If any of these apply to you and you vote Republican in this election, you are probably a Republican Tool.


I have a friend who I like a great deal. He is very clever and very well educated. In spite of that, he has gone out of his way to fabricate reasons to reach the conclusion he should vote for the Bush Republicans, because he likes "Republican values". He makes about 32K a year. His wife has some issues that lead them to having to pay over $11K in medical bills out of pocket last year. His insurance covers LESS this year. And he is voting Republican.

Man, If you are reading this, I love you, but you are a Republican Tool.