Just when I'm feeling all cynical about the craziness on the campaign trail, a friend sent me this. Niiiice.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Angry McCain 911 call
OK - John McCain did not (as far as I know) call 911 to complain about traffic. But his brother did (read it here)
Really, that's the story. McCain's brother was stuck in traffic outside of DC and called 911 to complain. The 911 operator asked him if he was calling to complain about traffic, and McCain cursed him out and hung up (what a punk move).
But the really interesting thing to me is this comment posted below the article:
Really, that's the story. McCain's brother was stuck in traffic outside of DC and called 911 to complain. The 911 operator asked him if he was calling to complain about traffic, and McCain cursed him out and hung up (what a punk move).
But the really interesting thing to me is this comment posted below the article:
Forget all the crap I'm been spreading about Obama, I've always meant to vote for him, but it was a job. The GOP offered me money to blog pro-McCain, I never thought they would stiff me.Does this mean the McCain campaign is so broke it's not even gonna pay its blog trolls (those who, for money, post incendiary comments negative to the other side)? Wow. This really is gonna be a landslide.
Yet another made up accusation
Can we just get this damn election over already? Between black cameramen at McCain/Palin rallies being called nasty names, to Obama being accused of being a Muslim with a crazy radical pastor (I love that one), to Obama being hung from a tree in effigy, this has already gotten absurd.
Now it's getting dangerous. The latest thing is the return of the big bad scary black man. You better lock up your vulnerable little white girls (especially your fat ugly ones) cause there's nothing that we scary angry black men want to do more than rob them and mutilate them.
In case you don't know what I'm talking about, here's a snippet: (here's the whole story)
and of course you know the description of the attacker (but say it in your head before you read it next, just to see if you can predict what it will be):
Kudos in advance to the Pittsburgh police for knowing this sounds fishy. Kudos to some on the right (Michelle Malkin for one) who said this don't sound right. And to the morons at Fox and the Drudge Report who have been making this a nationwide story - I quote John Stewart - Fuck all y'all.
UPDATE:
She admits (here), under questioning from the Pittsburgh police, that she made it up. Thank you Pittsburgh police.
Now it's getting dangerous. The latest thing is the return of the big bad scary black man. You better lock up your vulnerable little white girls (especially your fat ugly ones) cause there's nothing that we scary angry black men want to do more than rob them and mutilate them.
In case you don't know what I'm talking about, here's a snippet: (here's the whole story)
According to WTAE's news exchange partners at the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Ashley Todd, of College Station, Texas, was using an ATM at Liberty Avenue and Pearl Street just before 9 p.m. Wednesday when a man approached her and put a knife to her throat.
and of course you know the description of the attacker (but say it in your head before you read it next, just to see if you can predict what it will be):
The robber is described as a dark-skinned black man, 6 feet 4 inches tall, 200 pounds with a medium build, short black hair and brown eyes.This shit would be funny if it weren't so damn dangerous. This shit is what gets us lynched. This is the kinda shit that cause police forces to detain anyone who matches "the description." WTF.
Kudos in advance to the Pittsburgh police for knowing this sounds fishy. Kudos to some on the right (Michelle Malkin for one) who said this don't sound right. And to the morons at Fox and the Drudge Report who have been making this a nationwide story - I quote John Stewart - Fuck all y'all.
UPDATE:
She admits (here), under questioning from the Pittsburgh police, that she made it up. Thank you Pittsburgh police.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
We're voting for the n***er
I really don't know how to react to this. I guess it's progress. I guess we need every vote we can get. But damn...
read the whole thing here.
So a canvasser goes to a woman's door in Washington, Pennsylvania. Knocks. Woman answers. Knocker asks who she's planning to vote for. She isn't sure, has to ask her husband who she's voting for. Husband is off in another room watching some game. Canvasser hears him yell back, "We're votin' for the n***er!"
Woman turns back to canvasser, and says brightly and matter of factly: "We're voting for the n***er."
read the whole thing here.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Presidential Debate Preview: McCain Says He'll "Whip" Obama's "You-Know-What"
* I posted this in HufPo in response to a comment that took as its premise that Rev Wright is anti-American. I got tired of ceeding that point because quite frankly, it total crap. *
I don't know much about Ayers. I do know that while Rev Wright did say a bunch of stuff that was provacative, I would ask you this: what is the obligation of a person who loves their country and sees that it is doing wrong in the world and at home? Is it to blindly pledge allegiance to the king (I mean president), or is it his or her obligation (not right mind you) to speak up and demand justice?
You may not like the way he did it. (some times I didn't either). But I challenge you to find me an in context quote or example of where Rev Wright did anything against our country. Also, find me an example of where he preached race hatred. He spoke of differences for sure. But not hatred, not supremacy.
You want to see hatred and treasonous intention, look no further than the Alaska Independence Party, it's former president Vogler, and recent member Todd Palin and a recent speaker at its convention, Sarah Palin. Or ask the "witch" that Palin's pastor drove from her home under threat of violence. Violence, not Christian love and forgiveness, violence.
You want to see crazy things that are against the ideals upon which this country was founded, and against the constitution that our forefathers have built over the last 230 years, look no further than the lunatics that McCain and Palin are pallin' around with right now.
About Video On HuffPost
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Phone Banking to New Mexico
I went into the satellite Obama HQ for Northern California today to do some phone banking. (I had to go to the satellite location because the main location and it's overflow locations were too full of volunteers). They trained me on what to say, gave me a list of 65 people to call in the Albuquerque area, and sent me off armed with my cell phone.
First thing to note is that phone banking is not a bad way to spend a beautiful Saturday afternoon, as long as you get to do it while sitting outside on the patio. Second thing was that very few people were home - or at least very few were answering the phone. The third thing is that New Mexico is not like Oakland - about half the people that I talked to were McCain supporters.
The weird thing was that judging from the names and the voices, I talked to a pretty broad cross section of folks. There were older white voters (judging by voice), Latinos of various age (name and voice) and a few young white folks (again judging purely by voice). I was not able to deduce any patterns about who was supporting whom. I had strong supporters of either candidate meeting all of the above demographic criteria.
The one thing that did stick out though was that the McCain supporters seemed angry and weren't really interested in saying why they were supporting him. The most memorable call was with a woman who seemed to be elderly who almost screamed at me that "I'm voting for McCain because that other guy hates our country!" And then she hung up on me.
I laughed, but really it just makes me sad. How filled with fear and hate do you have to be to believe such drivel. I guess some people really are scared that Obama is going to implement Sharia or something. Maybe he's going to send in the storm troopers to make sure that churches are closed down and everyone has to honor the Friday call to prayer? Maybe they think he's gonna really get even for slavery. Who knows.
Fortunately for my spirit, the next person that I reached rushed me off the phone because she was already an Obama volunteer. And the one after that explained that he didn't have time to volunteer for Obama because he was spending so much time volunteering for the Democratic senate hopeful - Tom Udall.
In any case, I'll be going back next Saturday. And maybe even sometime during the week. Wish me luck.
First thing to note is that phone banking is not a bad way to spend a beautiful Saturday afternoon, as long as you get to do it while sitting outside on the patio. Second thing was that very few people were home - or at least very few were answering the phone. The third thing is that New Mexico is not like Oakland - about half the people that I talked to were McCain supporters.
The weird thing was that judging from the names and the voices, I talked to a pretty broad cross section of folks. There were older white voters (judging by voice), Latinos of various age (name and voice) and a few young white folks (again judging purely by voice). I was not able to deduce any patterns about who was supporting whom. I had strong supporters of either candidate meeting all of the above demographic criteria.
The one thing that did stick out though was that the McCain supporters seemed angry and weren't really interested in saying why they were supporting him. The most memorable call was with a woman who seemed to be elderly who almost screamed at me that "I'm voting for McCain because that other guy hates our country!" And then she hung up on me.
I laughed, but really it just makes me sad. How filled with fear and hate do you have to be to believe such drivel. I guess some people really are scared that Obama is going to implement Sharia or something. Maybe he's going to send in the storm troopers to make sure that churches are closed down and everyone has to honor the Friday call to prayer? Maybe they think he's gonna really get even for slavery. Who knows.
Fortunately for my spirit, the next person that I reached rushed me off the phone because she was already an Obama volunteer. And the one after that explained that he didn't have time to volunteer for Obama because he was spending so much time volunteering for the Democratic senate hopeful - Tom Udall.
In any case, I'll be going back next Saturday. And maybe even sometime during the week. Wish me luck.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Prop 8 Madness
I really don't understand some people. Why on earth would social conservatives think that the government (who they frequently call the keeper of all things bad) should be required, or even allowed, to regulate who gets to marry whom. It's crazy.
So now the Connecticut Supreme Court has legalized same sex marriage there. To which I say it's about time. But check out this little nugget in the dissenting opinion from Justice Peter T. Zarella :
WTF!?! The state regulates procreation? The purpose of marriage is procreation? Did I miss the memo or something. Is that in the constitution? What happened to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
I've actually heard this argument before, from a somewhat nutty Catholic college student (one of my frat brothers, sad to say). He said that people who won't or can't have children shouldn't be allowed to get married. So according to him, senior citizens shouldn't be allowed to marry each other. Individuals that knew they were infertile shouldn't be allowed to marry. In fact, couples who found they were infertile should be allowed (required) to annul their marriages. He told me all this stuff and I was just dumb founded. He said it was his religion. To which I say "that's nice for you, but I'll marry whoever I want for whatever she and I come up with."
But what about other marriages that the majority can be convinced shouldn't be allowed. Should there be a maximum age difference for marrying couples? How about an attractiveness difference? Since the state is regulating procreation (!) then maybe people should be required to meet certain IQ criteria. Or income criteria. The possibilities are endless.
So there's the real argument against Prop 8: a vote for prop 8 is a vote for the government getting to decide who you are allowed to marry. And that's just plain un-American.
So now the Connecticut Supreme Court has legalized same sex marriage there. To which I say it's about time. But check out this little nugget in the dissenting opinion from Justice Peter T. Zarella :
"there is no fundamental right to same sex marriage." "The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry," and "If the state no longer has an interest in the regulation of procreation, then that is a decision for the legislature or the people of the state and not this court."Let me rewrite that in English. The state has an interest in the regulation of procreation, and since the purpose of marriage is procreation, it has an interest in regulating marriage. In other words, since same sex couples cannot procreate (as a couple) they should not be allowed to marry.
WTF!?! The state regulates procreation? The purpose of marriage is procreation? Did I miss the memo or something. Is that in the constitution? What happened to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
I've actually heard this argument before, from a somewhat nutty Catholic college student (one of my frat brothers, sad to say). He said that people who won't or can't have children shouldn't be allowed to get married. So according to him, senior citizens shouldn't be allowed to marry each other. Individuals that knew they were infertile shouldn't be allowed to marry. In fact, couples who found they were infertile should be allowed (required) to annul their marriages. He told me all this stuff and I was just dumb founded. He said it was his religion. To which I say "that's nice for you, but I'll marry whoever I want for whatever she and I come up with."
But what about other marriages that the majority can be convinced shouldn't be allowed. Should there be a maximum age difference for marrying couples? How about an attractiveness difference? Since the state is regulating procreation (!) then maybe people should be required to meet certain IQ criteria. Or income criteria. The possibilities are endless.
So there's the real argument against Prop 8: a vote for prop 8 is a vote for the government getting to decide who you are allowed to marry. And that's just plain un-American.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)