Saturday, July 19, 2008

Random Musings

Why is "because he's bound to be better than George Bush" a sound reason to elect Obama as President? Last time I checked, Bush wasn't running for re-election.

Does it really matter that Obama has "rock-star"status in Europe? Didn't John Kerry wow them in Paris also?

The New Yorker shouldn't be ashamed of it's recent magazine cover mocking the opinions of the right. They should be ashamed of apologizing for it. I don't recall anyone screaming for an apology for all the times McCain, or any other conservative was mocked in a cartoon.

Aside from absolute hatred of all things George Bush, why would any American want to vote for Barack Obama?

Answer this honestly, what does "change" mean?

The media has been stating recently that Obama is "moving to the center" in order to appeal to the masses. Does that mean that by expressing his true beliefs, his appeal is unappealing to middle America?

At least when John McCain changes his mind, he doesn't change his core beliefs. Is THAT the kind of change we're supposed to believe in?

What is wrong with questioning what Michelle Obama says while campaigning for her husband? Should we give her a free pass because she might become the First Lady? Did anyone give Nancy Reagan a pass? I seem to remember a tremendous amount of vitrol aimed at Mrs. Reagan and all she said was "Just Say No." It seemed to work for Josh Hamilton.

If anyone asks me what the definition of agony is, I will show them this picture of Karnit Goldwasser, the widow of murdered IDF soldier Ehud Goldwasser, taken at the time of the exchange between Israel and Hezbollah.

If anyone asks me what the definition of evil is, I will show them this picture of child-killer Samir Kuntar, the monster who they traded the two dead soldiers for. Never has a contrast in pictures been so blatantly telling.

Did anyone else notice just how hypocritical Al Gore is? Did you see the limousines that were idling while he was telling the world to stop with the excess?

Did anyone else notice how much money Al Gore stands to make in his investments should the United States decide to follow his reckless advice?

It may well be that Al Gore is absolutely correct in all of his preachings (although 50,000 scientists now say he's not). But sometimes the right message is disregarded because of the wrong messenger.

How ironic is it that Nancy Pelosi can say that President Bush is the worst and most unpopular president in the history of our history? Hey Nancy, have you seen YOUR approval rating? Bush may be hovering around 30% (still higher than Nixon, although that is of little comfort). But Pelosi and company are at 9%. Even Ted Kaczynski was more popular than 9%.

Here is a brilliant video of a politician being owned by his rival (make sure to watch to the end):



Well...hardly "Random Musings"...more like "Cherry-Picked Musings", but I digress as today's rant was certainly up to your "Huh? Wha?" leave-my-reader-shaking-his-head standards. Always an interesting read at least (and at best).

OK. So a few "Random Responses"...

1. You are right, Shayne, when you write that Bush is not running for re-election...and -- Whew! -- Thank G-d for THAT!

2. Half-agree with note on the now-notorious cover of The New Yorker. The magazine should NOT be ashamed for it, I agree -- satire is satire, and public figures are natural and correct targets for it. The half that disagrees, though, has to do with the your opinion that the magazine should be ashamed for apologizing for i as that never happened! David Remnick -- the Editor-in-Chief of the magazine -- defended the cover with great vigor, as has the cover artist Barry Blitt. (Disclosure: I am a 23-year-subscriber to the magazine who eagerly awaits each issue and who does his darndest to read it cover-to-cover). You, though, might want to drink from the bowl of shame, Shayne, for not doing your homework before issuing your rant here.

3. It is unfortunate, but absolute hatred of George Bush truly is a good enough reason to vote Democrat this time 'round. Bush's stink is such that it has permeated the whole of the GOP, and until some time has passed and the stench has been allowed to fade (it is unlikely to ever completely dissipate) the Republicans deserve to be spending the majority of their time washing/rewashing their laundry and soaping up and rinsing under their collective pits and other orifices.

4. 50,000 scientists? Rocket scientists, right? Like those practicing their punditry on the FOX News Network? Hint: So-called "political scientists" typically know nothing about science, Shayne.

5. Dodgy approval ratings comparisons aside (as Nancy Pelosi has never been President, this bullet really was a terrific example of your penchant to go the apples-to-oranges route in the attempt to make a shaky point), there is one thing you simply cannot deny: Ironic or not, Pelosi's statement is dead-bang correct.

As always, this was fun. Keep launching those clay aim is improving dramatically as a result, and that can only be good as we move towards November.

Shayne said...

"The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming."

Hardly FOX News folks.


So that is how you got to "although 50,000 scientists now say he's not"...because an organization that has 50,000 dues-paying members says"many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming"? Shayne, that is like saying that 1,300,350 people in Dallas eschew the Cowboys in favor of the Redskins because there are more-than-a-handful-but-less-than-a-majority of Redskins supporters living in the Metroplex area!

Your quoting of "fact" here DOES sound more and more like FOX News Network thing you know you will be saying that 33,390,141 people in Canada are card-carrying members of Al Queda.

Forget the dictionary, mon ami...pick up a math book (with a sidecar of Statistics Theory).

WomanHonorThyself said...