Political Frenzy

Well the RNC has finally concluded and the general election campaign has ‘begun.’

I noticed a few things from the convention.

1. More handmade signs from the crowd
2. I was more bored than when watching the DNC
3. Former rivals of John McCain were saying good things about him! I say this in a sarcastic tone because after Obama picked Biden as his VP nominee McCain made commercials with Biden saying bad things about Obama. I do believe Mitt Romney had some choice words for McCain during their debates. But he was singing like a canary in the Twin Cities. (I’m mocking this because it is something that happens in EVERY political race, but McCain seemed to want us to think only Biden said bad things of Obama.
4. Sarah Palin established herself as an attacker. I found it odd that a women who has less than two years of political experience attacking a US Senator, and former State Senator, but who am I to judge? I say things about candidates and I am not an elected official.

Honestly I was annoyed by Palin’s speech because instead of introducing herself to us (which is what a candidate should do when NOBODY KNOWS HER), she chose to spend her time not just attacking Obama, but mocking him. It was tasteless. I wanted to hear more about what she has done and what her plans for the country are. I don’t want to hear cheap shots at a proven and tested candidate from a woman who most people think shouldn’t have been anywhere near this race. Palin can say what she wants about Obama, but he has been chosen by millions of voters to be there candidate. One man choose her, and it is time to prove to everybody why. It is tasteless for someone who is still trying to get our respect to mock someone like Barack Obama, who has earned it. Because if that is all she is going to do she will just be a flash in the pan.

It was also interesting how the Republicans have starting using the word REFORM all the time now. They might have caught on that we don’t like what is going on in our government! Imagine that!

If they can reform Washington, it’s about time they told us how they will do it. I’m listening!

From what I saw before I fell asleep McCain’s speech was good. He needs to take some risky moves by saying the word reform, which will rattle his base but it will also get him more votes. And the hecklers, or whatever they were trying to do in the middle of his speech to get attention, come on! What are you thinking, let the man speak!

I liked the video about McCain. The man is a hero. But do we really need his wife telling us about adopting a child from Mother Teresa’s arms then tell us about it again 5 minutes later in a video?

I feel asleep during a lot of it, were President Bush or Vice President Cheney there? Because if I supported someone’s decisions 90% of the time that would mean that person is a great politician and I would want him to come and tell everybody how great I would be as his job.

Youth and experience is bad Mr. McCain?

In response to Barack Obama’s (late night) announcement that Joe Biden will be his running mate, John McCain was quick to attack.

An ad (which had to be put together weeks ago) showed quotes from Biden during the debates earlier this year in which he criticized Obama’s experience.

A McCain spokesman went on TV saying that because Obama picked the experienced Biden it is a ‘concession speech’ by Obama because it shows that he has no experience.

Do you really want to go there McCain?

First of all whoever McCain picks there will be similar, if not more harsh, videos of this new candidate criticizing McCain during the primary. This is politics folks, you attack your opponent and when they beat you, you tell everyone how great they are…it’s weird I know.

Does everyone remember the exchanges between McCain and Romney during the debates? If you don’t you sure will see the clips (immediately) if he chooses Romney as his running mate.

Now to the ‘concession speech’ remark…McCain you need to get some smarter help! This idiot is saying that because Obama chose a man who is very experienced it means that Obama himself is not experienced. If that is so,then why did McCain support the Bush-Cheney ticket?

By McCain’s logic Obama should have picked a retarded person, because that would mean that Obama is so smart he doesn’t need advice.

Also does this mean that because McCain will be picking a younger man that he is too old?

McCain, what does it imply when you have dumb campaign staff say stupid things on TV?

The floodgates are open, nice job McCain.

http://www.politicalfrenzy.com/obamas-1am-text/

President Bush feels the rumble…Wednesday in a press conference he discussed Russian President Vladamir Putin’s new friendship with Iran. President Bush went onto say that Iran would be raising the risks of “World War II.” Wait…isn’t that what I said on Tuesday??

According to the most recent Zogby Poll, President Bush’s approval rating is at an all time low, a sickening 24%. The talk of invading Iran while our troops are stuck in quagmires all over Iraq may have something to do with this number! Not to mention that fact that there are countless presidential candidates talking about how they would make the country better. When this is going on it seems to discredit the current president, even though he did the same thing when he was campaigning.

W. is not alone, in the same Zogby Poll the approval rating of Congress is at an all time low of 11%! Eleven percent? Yea, I had to spell it out. That is just stupid! Congressional approval ratings have been low since the beginning of polling, but eleven percent?

If we as voters do not trust the people we elect then why do we ALWAYS elect the same type of candidates?

Go look up the definition of insanity…exactly.

Sources:
John Whitesides, Reuters
Brian Knowlton, The New York Times

Before President Bush’s speech announcing the troop surge last January I remember watching it in anticipation of the announcement of a new shift in the direction of the quagmire in Iraq. I left it wondering what 30,000 troops could possibly accomplish.

Tomorrow President Bush will deliver a prime time speech announcing that he may reduce our troop level in Iraq by 30,000 next summer, if certain benchmarks are met.

Man does this look bad…. Or does it?

This can be taken either way. On one side it can show that there has been success with the surge and the additional troops are no longer needed, on the other side it can show that the surge did nothing and the president will finally begin to withdrawal troops.

Let’s be honest here, I wish more than you that it did, but the troop surge did not work, it was not large enough. For the amount of sectarian violence happening in Iraq, 30,000 troops was a drop in the pan.

I’m no general but to me it feels like our troops have a lack of objective. They are playing defense, trying not to die. This is no way to fight a war. Think about it, what is their goal right now? To make the Iraq government strong enough to stand on it’s own. This is a great goal, and one that needs to be achieved. However it can’t be achieved without reasonable troop strength.

I can hear you from here, “130,000 troops are not enough?!!!” No it isn’t. Why? What are our troops accomplishing right now? They are defending themselves, thats pretty much it. In your mind what constitutes a successful day in Iraq when you watch the evening news? If nobody dies? That is no way to be at war.

If a group of your friends are outnumbered 4 to 1 and getting pummeled, are you going to go help them, or are you just going to sit back and hope the enemy just stops attacking?

There is strength in numbers.

Most lefties are crying for a complete withdrawal of troops. This would only lead to more hell in Iraq. By pulling out we would leave nothing but unorganized chaos behind us, with more and more people dying everyday. This new plan seems a bit of an ‘out’ by the president and will not change a thing. A new direction is needed…

As my sister once told me, “either crap or get off the pot.”

In this week’s presidential polls a familiar yet-unfamiliar face has taken up the number three position in the democratic race: Al Gore.

First in the poll is Hillary Clinton with (an I hope we don’t really vote like this) 35%, second is Senator Obama with 23%, and Al Gore who hasn’t even mentioned that he would be willing to run for president pulled in the third spot with 10%. John Edwards is next with 6%.

The only way Al Gore will not be elected president is if he doesn’t run.

All of these candidates are running full scale campaigns and the name Gore is beating nearly all of them. For a person to consistently pull in such high poll numbers without even being a candidate is incredible. And I’m not talking a Fred Thompson “I’m not a candidate,” because clear Mr. Thompson IS a candidate. Al Gore is NOT a candidate.

Gore is waiting for everyone else to attack each other and spend all of their money. At a time when we are all sick of the names we have been hearing over and over for the past year, Gore will swoop in as the savior and announce that he is running for president. As we all know Gore won the popular vote in 2000, at a time when his name was tarnished by the Clinton scandals. Can you imagine how much support he would have today?

Let’s be honest, presidential campaigns are popularity contests. It is sad but we as citizens do not know enough about government to make truly informed electoral decisions. Al Gore is as popular as any politician can be. He is the face of the global warming movement, he represents change, and will capitalize on the ‘if I were elected’ aspect of the Bush presidency. Not to mention he will have all sorts of celebrities coming out to support him, which will drive even more people to vote.

The best candidates are the ones who don’t want to run.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, feeling heat from every corner of the political world, resigned today. Democrats were very happy saying that they have been calling for his resignation for months.

Gonzales is blamed for approving illegal wiretapping of Americans, the firing of US Attorneys, and approving torture on enemy combatants (among other things). President Bush said that Gonzales was being “dragged through mud for political reasons.”

It is very easy for any Attorney General to be criticized because the job, much like the presidency, entails making decisions that are so tough that they are brought up the ladder to him. When a decision reaches this place in the political system whatever decision is made is bound to make one group of people mad, and the other happy.

We never hear from the group of people who are happy, it doesn’t sell newspapers.

Senator Barack Obama said in an interview yesterday that he can unite U.S. “More Effectively” than Clinton…so could a 7-year-old girl!

I definitely agree with Obama that he can unite the U.S. better than Clinton, but that isn’t saying much. Hillary Clinton is as polarizing a candidate we have seen in a long time. Her demeanor and tone of voice are of someone who thinks they are better than everyone, of someone who doesn’t listen. Her issue stances are flimsy, and her promises empty. Not to mention her biggest achievement, her husband’s presidency, is tainted. Does she think that we have forgotten that Bill Clinton was IMPEACHED?

Bill Clinton’s presidency looks like a shining beacon of hope right now because of the disasters that are unfolding under George Bush! It was a different time then, and if the Clintons had better foresight we would not have been attacked on 9/11.

She actually feels that she is qualified to be president, that she has ‘been there and done that.’

The debate over the new president meeting with heads of state from hostile nations displays Hillary’s attitude and stale 1993 thinking. Obama said that he would meet with these leaders without preconditions because “…setting preconditions for discussions would imply that the US is the superior power and other states have to give into our demands before we even meet with them…that reinforces the sense of the arrogance of US power around the world, which is a source of great damage — and makes us less safe.”

Of this new take on diplomacy Clinton called Obama, “irresponsible and frankly naive.” Does that make you grit your teeth also?

As you know Karl Rove, “The Evil Genius,” is leaving the White House… who cares? He is a (sneaky, malicious, detestable) political strategist, there are not more elections for W to win so why is this news?

On The Washington Post’s website there is a slideshow of good ol’ Karl highlighting his 14+ years as a Bush family aide. There are pictures of him (like 200 pounds lighter) at W’s side in 1999, pictures of him getting off an airplane carrying his baggage, pictures of him gazing at W, it’s like he died!

Most people dislike (hate) Karl Rove including presidential candidate Sen. Obama who said today, “Karl Rove was an architect of a political strategy that has left the country more divided, the special interests more powerful, and the American people more shut out from their government than any time in memory.” So why is this treated like a funeral?

Rove is making time to write a book (that will make him millions), I do not feel sorry for him. At these times (such as when Paris Hilton went to jail) I wonder why the news media makes us focus on such meaningless events. Sure it’s a slow news day (hence, I’m writing about Karl Rove) but can’t we focus on something else?

Today Cindy Sheehan, “war mom,” announced that because Speaker Pelosi didn’t file articles of impeachment against President Bush she will be running for Pelosi’s seat in the House.

Part of me likes this; the other part says…’ehh, what’s the point?’

Sheehan feels that our government is not doing its job and wants to do something about it, which is commendable. The Declaration of Independence says that we have the responsibility to challenge our government when we feel that it isn’t working. I also like that she will be running (if she makes it that far) as an independent.

I don’t like how Sheehan threatened Speaker Pelosi; it’s a bit cocky. As much as it would please a lot of people, impeaching President Bush is simply not realistic. Bush cannot be impeached for making questionable decisions. And, at the risk of sounding like a jerk, her son died while he was in the volunteer Army. President Bush didn’t pull Casey Sheehan out of bed in the middle of the night, give him a M-16, and force him to fight.

Sheehan said that Pelosi has lost touch with the people in her district. At least Pelosi lives in that district, Sheehan lives outside of Sacramento. Can she be more in touch with these people when she lives over an hour away?

Sheehan will run on the familiar platform of universal health care and making college more affordable. Does she even have a clue about how to take on these issues?

Should our politicians have actual experience in government before running for office? Or would they be more effective if they were a bunch of ordinary Joes? With the track record of our politicians it makes me wonder. I know that some people think a chimp could get more done than their congressman!

I live in Congressman Doolittle’s district…enough said.

President Bush (remember him?) met with the President of Afghanistan today. They debated the conditions in Afghanistan and the role of Iran in the current wars.

President Bush is playing defense (just like our troops) on these issues. When the US invaded Afghanistan is seemed that al-Qaeda and the Taliban were defeated and Osama would be captured. Fast-forward 6 years, the Taliban has rebuilt and Osama is wasting perfectly good oxygen in some dark cave (what a hero). On top of that we have an unstable Iraq, and a hostile nation, Iran, building nuclear weapons. Are we back at square one?

No, we are back at square -5.

Karzai, the Afghani President, says that Iran has played a “helpful role” in Afghanistan. Considering that Iran is providing the IEDs that are killing our troops daily in Iraq, I would say that Iran is being “less than helpful.”

President Bush said, it was up to Iran ‘to prove it is not a “destabilizing force” in the region.’ I agree with this, Iran is secretive and blatantly hostile towards the US. Iran needs to show that it is being helpful, and President Bush needs to find out why President Karzai thinks that Iran is.

It is always nice to know if you are in bed with the enemy.

Source: BarackObama.com

Barack Obama’s views on the use of military have been making headlines lately. He made a comment about how, as president there would be no use of nuclear weapons…on civilian targets. Which was criticized by the other candidates including John Edwards who said, “A candidate for president should, in general, avoid talking about the potential use of nuclear weapons.”

Now other campaigns are giving campaign advice?

Obama then made a comment about attacking al-Qaeda leadership in Pakistan, which caused everyone within a 10,000-mile radius to try to spin it to harm his campaign…ahh yes good old politics.

Obama’s comments also caused President Bush to call the President of Pakistan and discuss how the comments, “were unsavory and often prompted by political considerations in an environment of electioneering.” A presidential candidate has that much pull? I’m impressed.

The Obama campaign has been ratcheting up its display of a ‘tough’ Obama who will fight terrorism. An update email to supporters displayed the image above of an angry Obama and talked about the pressing need to deal with Taliban and al Qaeda and how the Bush Administration missed its chance to take them out. All other update emails have been about ending war, then highlighting his views on domestic issues…there must have been a poll that suggested he would gain points if he took a tough terrorism stance.

I like the move because every other Democratic candidate is preaching the same things. Obama realizes that he must beat the other candidates to get the nomination, to do so he must separate himself from them.

It is good to see the anti-war candidate talking about something other than a pullout. A pullout will only cause the strife in the Middle East to fester.

Senate Democrats continued the circus of making it appear that they want to end the war in Iraq. Last night amidst orchestrated photo ops of rolling out cots, and cold pizza Senate majority leader Harry Reid hosted an all night debate to block the Republican filibuster on an amendment to the defense bill.

The amendment would set a timetable for troop withdrawal in Iraq, it fell 8 votes short or the necessary 60.

Numerous Senators took the podium and spoke for or against the amendment, or about nothing at all. Other Senators accused Reid of “playing politics.”

I would have to agree. According to a Capitol Police Officer, the rolling out of cots and pizza was simply a “photo op.”

Even if the vote succeeded what happens next? VETO…they need to figure out another way to solve this!

Senator McCain seemed to speak off sript when saying, “Nothing we have done for the last 24 hours will have changed any facts on the ground in Iraq,” McCain said. “No battle will have been won or lost. No enemy will have been captured or killed. No ground will have been taken or surrendered. No soldier will have survived or been wounded or died or come home because we spent a whole night delivering our poll-tested message points, spinning out sound bites or arguing with each other and substituting our amateur theatrics for statesmanship.”

Well put Senator.

Despite the benchmarks, many of them political, to be met by September the Iraqi Parliament has decided to take the month of August off…good idea.

Facing tough questions from reporters White House spokesperson Tony Snow said that it is 130 degrees in Baghdad during the summer. OK, still waiting for a reason. As John Stewart put it, “we’re not asking them to play touch football, we’re asking them to stay inside and get sh*t done!”

Our troops are outside in sweltering heat dodging bullets sweating like Patrick Ewing, and these lawmakers can’t even sit inside of an air conditioned room and agree to easy legislation that will shape their country?

This just proves that the Iraqi “government” is relying on the US for absolutely everything and they know if they don’t meet the benchmarks nothing will happen. Can you think of a more blatant way for them to show the US that they know this?

Maybe the Army should take August off, we’ll see how Iraq runs without them.

Senator Clinton plans to introduce an amendment repealing the Congressional authorization for the war; it would require President Bush to seek Congressional authorization to extend the war past October 11, 2007.

One word: VETO

Why would President Bush even consider signing this? He seems hell bent on staying in Iraq, and will veto anything that comes within a 5-mile radius of his desk that has to do with pulling out of Iraq. Congress has tried the timetables and it didn’t work. They tried the timetables again, didn’t work. They are currently trying the timetables again (sneak preview…didn’t work).

Now Senator Clinton is trying to slip this in as if the president and will not realize it’s there and accidentally sign it. This isn’t a mortage application! Sorry Hillary, he WILL see it.

Barack Obama has even said that Clinton’s approach is ”a convoluted approach to the problem.” Obama went on to reiterate that he was against the war from the start and if elected he would meet with military leaders to determine an exit strategy.

Obama also said the he believes the U.S. has a ”humanitarian obligation and national security interest in ensuring there’s not a complete collapse in Iraq.”

This is the first time I have heard an anti-war candidate say something about Iraq other than PULL OUT. Obama realizes that our troops are currently needed in Iraq, he (like most people now) just disagrees with the reason why we invaded in 2003.

If we only had a crystal ball.