Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Al Franken to Run for Senate

Al Franken has left his show on Air America and is running for Senator of Minnesota.

According to Forbes, a senior Democratic official (who wished to remain nameless, because Franken hasn't officially announced yet himself) said Wednesday that Al Franken told him that he wants to run for Senator in Minnesota in 2008.

Franken, who earned over one million in his political action committee (implying, according to Forbes, that he should have no problems making money), would be attempting to boot Republican first term senator Norm Coleman.

The Associated Press reports that Al Franken has hinted that he will announce his candidacy on one of his last shows on Air America. His last show is February 14th (valentines day).

Some history of future Senator Al Franken:

Alan Stuart "Al" Franken (born May 21, 1951) is an Emmy Award–winning American comedian, actor, author, screenwriter, political commentator, and radio host. He is noted for his work on Saturday Night Live and liberal socio-political views.

Franken was born in New York City into a Jewish family, and grew up in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, in suburban Minneapolis. He attended Saint Louis Park High School until the 10th grade. He graduated in 1969 from The Blake School, where he was on the wrestling team. He attended Harvard University and graduated cum laude in 1973 with a Bachelor of Arts in government.

Franken met his wife, Franni, in his first year at college at a Harvard-Simmons mixer, and they have been together ever since. They have a daughter, Thomasin, and a son, Joe (both attended New York City's prestigious Dalton School). Joe attends Princeton University and Thomasin is a public school teacher in New York City, with a degree in sociology from Harvard University. The Frankens reside in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Al Franken Quotes:
"I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me."

"I do personal attacks only on people who specialize in personal attacks."

"It's easier to put on slippers than to carpet the whole world."

"Mistakes are a part of being human. Appreciate your mistakes for what they are: precious life lessons that can only be learned the hard way. Unless it's a fatal mistake, which, at least, others can learn from."

"Newt Gingrich is the most unpopular politician in America. His favorable rating is only four points higher than the Unabomber."

"There's no liberal echo chamber in this country. There's a right-wing echo chamber. I want to create a countervailing echo chamber."

"To make the argument that the media has a left- or right-wing, or a liberal or a conservative bias, is like asking if the problem with Al-Qaeda is do they use too much oil in their hummus."

"When the president during the campaign said he was against nation building, I didn't realize he meant our nation."

"When you encounter seemingly good advice that contradicts other seemingly good advice, ignore them both."

"You need an experienced radio veteran who is a liberal advocate. And there just hadn't been any radio that did that. And so they weren't trained - they had developed all these bad habits of being objective and balanced and stuff like that."

"[G. W. Bush's] pro-air pollution Clear Skies Initiative is designed to clear the skies of birds."

"The irony upon irony of this lawsuit was great. First, Fox having the trademark 'fair and balanced' -- a network which is anything but fair and balanced. Then there's the irony of a news organization trying to suppress free speech."

Franken for Senate, 2008.

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

My 100th Post. A Tribute to Me

For my 100th post, I'm going to put links to all of my favorite posts from this website. Enjoy.

Anti Republican Poetry (including John McCain Limericks)
Neil Cavuto is a Wrinkled Penis
Possible Presidential Candidates 2008
A Look Back at a Republican Controlled Congress
Fake News (more than one article)
Pastor Arnold Murray
Virginia Congressman - Bringing the "Ku" Back to "Republikun"
Gripes List <--- These are my favorite things to write Bush Actually Taking Responsibility for his Failures
Alex Rodriguez - A Republican (and other famous liberals and conservatives)
Funny Photos


This list may be ongoing as this blog grows longer. But for now, this is post #100. Happy Century (really more like 2 months) to me.

John McCain - Conservative Concubine?

See. I added a "?" because I'm not saying he IS a conservative concubine. I'm saying reasonable people may see him as a prostitute to the religious right. I learned that trick from Fox "News."

I figured out why he hates bloggers. Because they can expose how his "straight talk" is as crooked as the rest of the Republican party. This video shows it best, as seen on Brad's Brain.

Not only does he flip flop more than a stranded fish on crack, I'm pretty sure his cheeks have begun sagging to his naval.

For more, visit

Monday, January 29, 2007

The Scam

This is apolitical, but interesting. A website, called, accepts submissions (daily tips, like "Remember to always check between your toes for fungus every week" or "don't go jogging while constipated") from users and claims that they will pay them 3.00 per accepted tip, available usually in 7-10 days (with the small print that says it may take 4-6 weeks). A friend of mine, who coincidentelly was tip submitter number 10,000 (actually was, from a real counter, not a fake pop-up ad) found that not only doesn't pay for the tips it accepts, it also posted the tips they claimed were not accepted (stopped recently) so that they didn't have to even claim to pay the users, while still earning money from all the google adsense. One site, below, says there is news that they pay once they publish (not when it has been accepted). But considering since the site has begun it has accepted 4,500 tips and only published 700, it may be weeks before the author of the tip earns just $3.00.

Despite the complaints, however, the site is still up and running, making money every day with their adsense and capitalizing on other people's work, emotions, and time. They may publish them eventually, they may even pay eventually, but they have accepted more than they can afford to pay for and keep accepting them every day (and, from what I've been told, do not respond to emails). Visit these blogs for more on this story:
Mike's Money Making Mission

"If they are being legit, they're a horribly disorganized business with poor customer service and a bad, bad business plan"
--The Unemployed Writer

Bombs over Baghdad

Er... no. That's depressing. Instead I'm going to talk about Presidential Nominees.

Clinton/Obama (hypothetical ticket) have a slim lead in the polls over Giuliani/McCain. The order is due to their current polling ranks, where Hillary Clinton is up on Barack Obama by roughly 20% and Rudy Giuliani is up on John McCain by a similar margin.

Question: How belittling will it be to McCain, ex-war hero with years of experience in Washington to be the Vice President to a man who was mayor of a city, and whose only claim to fame is his ability to capitalize on people's emotions about a horrible tragedy, milking it for all its worth? Seems like the kind of thing that would make a candidate impotent, but I could be wrong, since he's old and probably already is.

Follow up question: What kind of an idiot votes for a mayor for president. I'm serious. It needs to stop. Seriously. Stop. I mean it. He's a mayor. An ex-mayor. An ex-mayor who is going through his 3rd divorce. I mean, the guy didn't know whether he should run for president or continue with his business ventures. Does that bother anyone? ANYONE? He was torn between running the country and making money. No? No one cares? He claimed somehow he brought people together, rather than the pain of the 9/11 attacks. Doesn't that bother anyone? Do qualifications matter to you people at all? No? Okay, well... Whatever.

As for Hillary Clinton, she has finally issued a retraction for her vote for the Iraq war. I like Obama, I like Edwards, I even like Bill Richardson (who, according to the Malaysian Newspaper "The Star," is said to be a Guinness World Record holder. His feat? He shook 13,392 hands in one day during his campaign for governor four years ago.) but I cannot help but like the strength of Hillary's character, even if she has not been as liberal as I would have liked. Plus I'd rather Obama be a Vice President, not because I think he is worse than any of the other candidates but because I think he's better, and he's young enough that I would like to see him in office for 16 years instead of 8 (eight years vice, eight as pres). We'll see what happens.

Sunday, January 28, 2007

New Segmant - News from Other Countries

I love the New York Times, but even they sometimes mute themselves instead of addressing the way other countries see the US. So with that I'm going to introduce a new kind of post: News from the Newspapers of other countries. I may miss the liberal bias (reality) but who knows, maybe there will be more truth in there than our own newspapers. I'll tag it as "World Opinion." Different from World News, which is usually from American Newspapers.

From the Iran Daily:

America Intensifying Mideast Tension
TEHRAN, Jan. 27--Defense Minister Brigadier General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said on Saturday the Untied States has adopted new policies to intensify religious and ethnic conflicts in the Middle East to compensate for it failures in the region.
Addressing a gathering of Defense Ministry personnel, Najjar said American officials are seeking to create discord among Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq and interfering in the domestic affairs of Lebanon, IRNA reported.
“They [Iraq and Lebanon] are examples of US policy for creating tension in the region. The US government believes that if it were to continue its illegitimate presence in the strategic Middle East and plunder its resources, war, conflict, tension and insecurity should be intensified in the region,“ he said.
Najjar added that the persistence of American neocons to send more troops to the region despite the opposition of the US Congress indicates that they have adopted policies to intensify tension in the Middle East.
The top military official said vigilance, self-control, non-violence, mobilization and regional unity in the Middle East are the most essential issues.
He noted that security, stability and peace in the region, in view of cooperation and constructive interaction among regional governments for preventing tension, will expedite the pullout of foreigners from the Middle East.
Najjar stressed that US moves in the region will have no result except increasing tension and hatred of nations and governments for the American warmongers.

While Iran currently poses the biggest threat to the US and the Middle East, it is interesting to note that they blame neocons and America for not only Iraq, but also the tensions between Hezbollah and the Lebanese Government. Even as a liberal hippy, I completely recognize the obvious propaganda (so no stupid emails, thanks) considering the Shi'a and the Sunni have been at war for centuries, and Hezbollah - a known terrorist organization - is organizing large protests against the government for being the government. But the efficacy in the propaganda is that Iranians, as well as most of the middle east, can easily believe that the country that invades another country and causes a civil war may have planned that from the beginning.

Apparently Iran has air pollution too. You can read about that here.

I like this article a lot:
From the Saudi Times and the Guardian Unlimited (A UK internet newspaper):
They're broken men, so don't let them take us to a new war

Presidents Bush and Ahmadinejad have lost face at home; now others must forge peaceful settlements in the Middle East

Henry Porter
Sunday January 28, 2007
The Observer

There is a striking likeness in the expressions of George W Bush and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran as they confront each other over the issues of uranium enrichment and dominance in the Middle East. It falls somewhere between the chastened and defiant playground bully.

This is unsurprising: though not political equivalents, the two are really quite similar. Both had little experience of government or international affairs before being carried to power on a tide of populist, religious conservatism. Neither travelled abroad much, but they both had certain views about the world and the destiny of their nations. They had all the answers, yet there was also a dangerous lack of seriousness in them which has now earned them both the scorn of their people and rebuffs from their elders.

We think of Bush as being the more unpopular of the two. His approval ratings are at the level of Nixon's just before he left the White House. After an unconvincing performance in the State of the Union Address, his plans for the troop surge in Iraq were rejected by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and may now be voted down by the entire Senate. Senior Republican senators such as Chuck Hagel and John Warner are furious that sensible suggestions contained in the Iraq Study Group Report have been ignored. Although the President looked receptive when the report was delivered to him by James Baker, there has been no progress in policy, no evidence of any kind of deeper thinking in the White House. Nothing except that familiar foggy, narrow-eyed truculence of Bush Junior in a tight spot.

This would be a depressing but for similar difficulties experienced by Ahmadinejad over the last few weeks. Just as the senior Republican elders have turned on Bush, so Iran's religious leaders are moving to restrain their President. They criticise his bellicose foreign policy and the exceptionally poor record on promised reforms at home. There is a sense of embarrassment among sophisticated Iranians about their President's pronouncements, which surely rings a bell with Americans.

The most important sign-off disenchantment came in Jomhouri Islami, the newspaper owned by Iran's supreme religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which said in an editorial: 'Turning the nuclear issue into a propaganda issue gives the impression that to cover up the flaws in government you are exaggerating its importance.'

The paper also suggested that the President should speak about the nuclear issue less, stop provoking aggressive powers like the United States and concentrate on the daily needs of the people - 'those who voted for you on your promises'. Two weeks ago, 150 legislators sent a letter to Ahmadinejad openly attacking him for missing his budget deadline and blaming him for inflation and rising unemployment.

A loss of confidence in both men at home is important because it offers us a brief opportunity to assert diplomacy over the habits of rhetoric and escalation. Although UN nuclear experts suggest the Iranians are at least five years from developing a bomb and delivery system, the Iranians are due to open a large uranium enrichment plant within a matter of weeks. If this goes ahead, a peaceful solution will be much harder to find; to decommission this new facility will require a loss of face for Ahmadinejad.

So the hawks in the West will begin the slow drumbeat for a first strike. Indeed, it has already started. For some weeks, the Daily Telegraph has been running a series of what, in my opinion, are extremely dubious stories all attributed to mysterious 'European defence officials' and 'senior Western military sources'. A front-page story last week suggested that North Korea has offered to help Iran with a nuclear test within the year. Apart from these shadowy spokesmen, it could offer no evidence, which is why the story was only seriously picked up in Israel.

In Israel, it is believed that the Iranians may be able to launch a nuclear warhead into its territory within three, not five, years. Former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has asked who will defend the Jews from a genocidal government in Iran if they do not themselves. Israeli historian Benny Morris contributed this chilling thought to the Jerusalem Post. 'One bright morning in five to 10 years, perhaps a regional crisis, a day or a year or five years after Iran's acquisition of the bomb, the mullahs in Qom will convene in secret session... and give President Ahmadinejad the go-ahead.'

In Iran, 38 nuclear inspectors have been barred from entering the country in retaliation for the UN resolution introducing mild sanctions, and now the Iranians have installed a missile defence system (supplied by the Russians) to defend their nuclear facilities from air attacks. The Americans have responded by moving another aircraft carrier into the region and by offering Patriot missile systems to Iran's uneasy Arab neighbours.

Make no mistake: this a much more dangerous situation than Iraq and it is unfolding on the watch of a couple of second-raters.

It is true that few nations that have been more estranged over the last quarter of a century, but with the stakes so high, it seems extraordinary that America has no representation in Tehran and almost no contact except through the Swiss embassy. As Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times reminded us last week, in 2003, America rebuffed an advance made by the Iranians through the Swiss, which, in exchange for the lifting of sanctions, suggested the two countries work together on the capture of terrorists in Iraq, stabilising the country after invasion and coming to an agreement on uranium enrichment as well as the financing of Hizbollah and Hamas.

The offer, made almost two years before Ahmadinejad was elected, was layered with insincerity and bluff, but professional diplomats are used to this. At least the two sides would have been talking and Tehran could have been held to account for some of the things that have been going on in Iraq.

But the situation is not beyond hope. The West must realise that if a first strike takes place we have lost. Whatever is destroyed in Iran, the Iranians will come back and produce a bomb that they may feel more entitled to use. The clash of civilisations predicted by neocon academics for years will have moved a step closer to dominating the 21st century at the very moment when all civilisation needs to concentrate on the multiple threats presented by climate change.

What we must hope for is a collective act of will in Europe, and among wiser heads in Washington DC, which says it doesn't have to be this way. This is not impossible. Only last week, representatives from 30 countries led by America and Saudi Arabia met in Paris to contribute to a £5bn fund to prop up Prime Minister Fouad Siniora's government in Lebanon. This was a diplomatic action taken by both Middle Eastern and Western powers to defend Lebanon against Iran's proxies in the Hizbollah terrorist organisation, and it is exactly the right way to deal with Iran.

What can the British government do about Ahmadinejad? The first thing to is to recognise his failing support at home is an advantage that will be lost if the drumbeat to war is allowed to continue. There is no reason why Tony Blair should not add to the call from the head of UN inspectors, Mohamed ElBaradei, for a time out in which sanctions would be suspended. Blair still has a voice that is heard in the US. He should consider making a speech which insists that Bush initiates direct diplomatic relations with Tehran as well as a renewed effort to create the two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. He owes something to the cause of peaceful resolution and, besides, these are hardly controversial views: both have already been expressed by James Baker's Iraq Study Group.

I like how he says "[the possible conflict with Iran] is unfolding on the watch of a couple of second raters." and that "Both had little experience of government or international affairs before being carried to power on a tide of populist, religious conservatism... They had all the answers, yet there was also a dangerous lack of seriousness in them which has now earned them both the scorn of their people and rebuffs from their elders."

Well said.

Daffy Does Doom - Another Article by Maureen Dowd

The Text of this I found on Blue Spot, who had gotten it from The New York Times.

Maureen Dowd Continues to be Awesome.

Dick Durbin went to the floor of the Senate on Thursday night to denounce the vice president as “delusional.”
It was shocking, and Senator Durbin should be ashamed of himself.
Delusional is far too mild a word to describe Dick Cheney. Delusional doesn’t begin to capture the profound, transcendental one-flew-over daftness of the man.
Has anyone in the history of the United States ever been so singularly wrong and misguided about such phenomenally important events and continued to insist he’s right in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
It requires an exquisite kind of lunacy to spend hundreds of billions destroying America’s reputation in the world, exhausting the U.S. military, failing to catch Osama, enhancing Iran’s power in the Middle East and sending American kids to train and arm Iraqi forces so they can work against American interests.
Only someone with an inspired alienation from reality could, under the guise of exorcising the trauma of Vietnam, replicate the trauma of Vietnam.
You must have a real talent for derangement to stay wrong every step of the way, to remain in complete denial about Iraq’s civil war, to have a total misunderstanding of Arab culture, to be completely oblivious to the American mood and to be absolutely blind to how democracy works.
In a democracy, when you run a campaign that panders to homophobia by attacking gay marriage and then your lesbian daughter writes a book about politics and decides to have a baby with her partner, you cannot tell Wolf Blitzer he’s “out of line” when he gingerly raises the hypocrisy of your position.
Mr. Cheney acts more like a member of the James gang than the Jefferson gang. Asked by Wolf what would happen if the Senate passed a resolution critical of The Surge, Scary Cheney rumbled, “It won’t stop us.”
Such an exercise in democracy, he noted, would be “detrimental from the standpoint of the troops.”
Americans learned an important lesson from Vietnam about supporting the troops even when they did not support the war. From media organizations to Hollywood celebrities and lawmakers on both sides, everyone backs our troops.
It is W. and Vice who learned no lessons from Vietnam, probably because they worked so hard to avoid going. They rush into a war halfway around the world for no reason and with no foresight about the culture or the inevitable insurgency, and then assert that any criticism of their fumbling management of Iraq and Afghanistan is tantamount to criticizing the troops. Quel demagoguery.
“Bottom line,” Vice told Wolf, “is that we’ve had enormous successes, and we will continue to have enormous successes.” The biggest threat, he said, is that Americans may not “have the stomach for the fight.”
He should stop casting aspersions on the American stomach. We’ve had the stomach for more than 3,000 American deaths in a war sold as a cakewalk.
If W. were not so obsessed with being seen as tough, Mr. Cheney could not influence him with such tripe.
They are perpetually guided by the wrong part of the body. They are consumed by the fear of looking as if they don’t have guts, when they should be compelled by the desire to look as if they have brains.
After offering Congress an olive branch in the State of the Union, the president resumed mindless swaggering. Asked yesterday why he was ratcheting up despite the resolutions, W. replied, “In that I’m the decision maker, I had to come up with a way forward that precluded disaster.” (Or preordained it.)
The reality of Iraq, as The Times’s brilliant John Burns described it to Charlie Rose this week, is that a messy endgame could be far worse than Vietnam, leading to “a civil war on a scale with bloodshed that will absolutely dwarf what we’re seeing now,” and a “wider conflagration, with all kinds of implications for the world’s flow of oil, for the state of Israel. What happens to King Abdullah in Jordan if there’s complete chaos in the region?”
Mr. Cheney has turned his perversity into foreign policy.
He assumes that the more people think he’s crazy, the saner he must be. In Dr. No’s nutty world-view, anti-Americanism is a compliment. The proof that America is right is that everyone thinks it isn’t.
He sees himself as a prophet in the wilderness because he thinks anyone in the wilderness must be a prophet.
To borrow one of his many dismissive words, it’s hogwash.

Saudi Arabia to Pleasure the President

Saudi Arabia, Oil exporter and Bush's "BFF," has promised to lower their barrels of oil to 50 dollars a gallon, enough to sustain its economy while still lowering prices for Americans. The Seattle Times reports that this is to steal some of the oil revenue from Iran in an attempt to cripple its economy. But right now that is just speculation. Regardless, with tensions already running high in the middle east, this strategic price reduction for the Saudi's may create added tension in the region, and could prompt a response from Iran even if that wasn't the intention.


In other middle eastern news, the NYTimes Reports that the Palestinians are continuing their civil war that started last month. Hamas, the known terrorist organization that took the most of the country's government in elections over a year ago, and the Fatah, a more moderate but corrupted party, are escalating the fight throughout the province, especially on political figures and their families.

Israel, which usually tries to stay out of the Palestinian's internal conflicts, is considering getting involved because anarchy in the region makes it even more unstable and dangerous.


Saturday, January 27, 2007

I'm Confused

Why is a mayor going to run for president? I was the leader of an honor society in my college, but I don't think I'm qualified to be in high office. All Giuliani did was run a large city - poorly - hate the homeless, and happened to be in charge during one of the most horrible tragedies in America's history. And not only is he running, he is WINNING - he is the leading Republican Candidate! Do they not have anyone who can at least pretend to have qualifications? McCain may be a horrible human being, but at least he's been to DC before.

And they say Obama is underqualified.

Michelle Malkin - Exposed

I thought these were funny. Neocon talk show host/blogger Michelle Malkin - Exposed like Paris Hilton.

I got the picture above of the Filipino conservative in a bikini from a website called I don't know if it is real, but it looks a lot like her, and regardless it is funny. She would have been 21 at the time, and still attending Oberlin college, which would explain her youth and perkiness. But supposedly it is fake, especially because is actually a conservative libertarian blog and that is actually a fan of Malkin.

Michelle_<span onclick=

(410) 347-1488

Thanks to Jesus' General we know she lives in Germantown, MD.

Call her now!

Also, a website called "The Defeatists" posted her phone number, above. And it is supposedly real. So for those looking for a good time or those who simply hate her as much as I do, knock yourselves out. I bet it's been changed by now, because the area code isn't (666), but who knows?

Book Review: Conservatize Me

John Moe's "Conservatize Me" is the story about a liberal (Starbucks drinking, bike riding, anti-war, pro-choice) talk show host from Seattle, who goes on a mission to try to become a conservative.

A quote from Dave Eggers on the back: "John Moe is almost always funny, and when he's not funny, he's from Seattle, which is also good."

Well said. Moe is hilarious, with a liberal wit on par with Jon Stewart and The Daily Show. Even when he is learning and agreeing with some of the most prominent conservative pundits, he throws in lines of humor that accurately describe the liberal viewpoint.

Also, as a Seattleite myself, he describes the political environment in Seattle so well, I couldn't help but be proud of my city all over again.

He even writes it so that a Conservative/Republican could read it, because he pokes equal fun at liberalism with the same witty remarks - although the book is, of course, left leaning.

I give it 9.5 out of 10. It only loses the .5 because the final 3 pages are predictably corny. But this is the best political book I've read in over a year, and I highly recommend it.

Friday, January 26, 2007

The Liberal Army: Scores of Protestors in Our Own Country

We may be anti-war, we may be anti-Bush, we may be anti-combat -

But we can protest like a mother f----------------

Tomorrow, in over 300 US cities, pissed off citizens will begin their march across their respective streets in protest of the Iraq War and "President" Bush. According to Deborah White on (who is a great blogger, for all of you who read my site religiously - That's right, I'm talking to you, mom), and Progressive Democrats of America are mobilizing their readers and donors, sending out emails en masse, arranging whatever is arranged for marches (presumably, shoes... maybe Dasani) and readying their throats, ready to shout anti-Bush epithets in honor of the catastrophic failure that is the war in Iraq.

No where is this going to be more prevalent than in Washington D.C., where over 250,000 people with 1,400 different organizations will be walking towards the capital, metaphoric pitchforks in hand.

But it's not just the number of protesters that makes this protest so important, it is also the environment. A few years ago when the war started and first groups of Librocrats hit the streets, there were two accepted ways of thought. Those that were anti-war, and those that "Supported our troops." Despite our best efforts to explain that wanting them to come home alive is supporting them, the thick headed ideology still stood.

Some time ago, after one of the protests, a man who noticed my "I DID NOT VOTE 4 BUSH" bracelet told me how there were literally thousands of people with him, surrounding Westlake mall in Seattle. "But," he said "I bet the news will say it was a couple hundred and forget about it." So I turned on the news to see if his guess was right. Sure enough, the news anchor on King 5 News said "hundreds of Seattleites gathered downtown this afternoon to protest the Iraq war. But there was another, less known protest going on by the Montlake Bridge. Mary [last name] and 12 of her friends gathered, waiving 'Support Our Troops' banners..."

So, basically, the "hundreds" of protesters was just a transition to the much longer story of Mary, the elderly white lady and her equally old and white friends supporting the position of the "President."

This year, however, things for the "President" have gone south. November showed not just the Republicans, but the media and apolitical America that the war is a catastrophuckic [sic] failure, and America isn't going to take it anymore. And that's why this year it is time to protest yourself, to gather on the streets and fight back, Ghandi-like, against the injustices of the Administration. Find where your event is taking place (here), wear your best nikes, bring cough drops and get ready to show Bush and the remaining 3 people in Rexburg, Idaho that like him that he's doing a Heckuva crappy job.

Connecticut's Apology

This isn't funny. They spawned him, they should apologize.

Karl Rove Arrested

Okay, so this photo is fake, but I can dream.

The Statue of Liberty - Butch?

I like this picture. It's from The statue of liberty a lesbian? She is French. For some reason I see half of conservatives killing themselves, while the other half stare at this picture when they're home alone and the mood is right.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Fun With Political Anagrams

Neil Cavuto - Vile Toucan
Conservative - Soviet Cavern, Investor Cave, Naive Coverts, Over Vesicant (A Vesicant is a chemical which, if it escapes from a vein, causes extensive tissue damage with vesicle formation and blistering), Tavern Voices.
Ann Coulter - Cannot Rule, A Runt Clone, Unclean Rot
Michelle Malkin - I Suck Majorly. Seriously, it's there, just look really really hard.

That's all? There are no good Republican Pundit names. Too many of one letter, or poor combinations. Bill O Reilly: 4 L's. Robert Novak: A "V" and a "K." Sean Hannity: three 6's.

To Avoid Being Drafted, Read this Post

I began a new site for adults ages 18-29, or the people who care about them, to use as a forum for their own objections to war. The website is For some reason, likely due to lack of internet knowledge, you must type the "www."

The first post on the new website is written below. If you know anyone who is of drafting age, send them the link and have them contribute:

There is a lot of war. There is the war in Afghanistan, the War in Iraq, and the likely immanent war with Iran, possibly even Syria. The United States Military, though strong and powerful, cannot sustain that much war. Congress may be forced someday to reinstitute the draft, and if you're between the ages of 18 and 30, possibly older, you may be forced to into a war you are whole heartedly against.

One of the only ways to legally avoid the draft is to be known as a Conscientious Objector. A person who has documented proof that he or she is anti-war/anti-combat/anti-armed conflict. Be it for Religious reasons, or simply because you truly don't believe in the fighting, you are against the war.

But simply being against war is not enough. You need a record to point to that can show a draft board or a discharge committee that you are against the war before you were put into it. And that is the point of this blog. Email me your anti-war thoughts, opinions, reasons, even humor, along with your name, blog (if you have one) and any other information you'd like posted, and I will do so. But be sure that everything you send me you want available to the public. The more you can show the military of your anti-combat beliefs, the better position you will be in.

Last, however, never forget to support the troops that are there, even if you are completely against the fight they're in. It's men and women like them that allow for conscientious objectors to exist.

George Bush Photo - Yellow Snowing the White House

The last photo I posted received a good response - although no one commented. Shame. So I'm going to post another Bush photo below:
Thanks to spiiderweb™ for this photo - one of the only bloggers I read regularly.

I think he's peeing...

Actual Headline:

New Jersey Warns: Don't Eat Squirrel Near Dump

Fine. Spoil my day.

Is George Bush Gay?

Please, Mr. "President" - Not in front of the Press. Won't Fox News be Jealous?

The guy in back looks way too happy. And if you look very very closely in the bottom left corner, you can see a secret service man who likes to watch.

Feel free and make your own captions.

The State of Our Union is Long... And Boring

Blah, Bush and his liberal agenda. At least he accepted a Republican's worst enemy: Reality. At first it didn't seem like there was anything worth commenting on. The whole speech was certainly different then others. There were maybe 5 standing ovations, and 2 of those were for the new "Madam Speaker" Nancy Pelosi, who of course is awesome and choked back sarcastic laughter during the "President's" address.

But there was something to comment on, and it took an episode of the Colbert Report to make me realize it. Bush says the poorest people who cannot afford health insurance will get tax breaks to help them pay for their insurance.

Uh... Dude... The poorest Americans don't pay taxes. They get it all back. So their tax break does nothing other than use the words tax break one more time than he would have otherwise.


Wednesday, January 24, 2007

The Element of Fire - Martha Wells

It's not political, but she is one of my favorite authors and her first book was re-released last month. Unfortunately, this brings down the value of my out-of-print paperback down from $50 to right around 5 or 10, but that's okay, because at least people can buy the book themselves instead of asking me to borrow it. I wasn't going to let their greasy hands mess up my extremely rare paperback.

Anyway, she's a great author, and I tend not to like fantasy novels. Her 2nd book, "City of Bones" is the reason I started reading when I was younger, so plugging her book feels like my duty. Her blog is here.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

CEOs to Bush: Reduce Emissions Now

On the eve of the "President's" state of the union, 10 CEOs from major US corporations (Alcoa, BP America, DuPont, Caterpillar, General Electric, Duke Energy, Florida Power & Light, PNM Resources, Pacific Gas & Electric, Lehman Brothers) sent a joint letter to Bush, urging him to reduce emissions, and acknowledging global warming, reports the Seattle Times:

"The group, called the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, supports a nationwide cap that would reduce the amount of carbon dioxide by up to 10 percent within 10 years and by as much as 30 percent in 15 years. By 2050, the levels of carbon dioxide would be cut by 60 to 80 percent from current levels."
And since we all know that the only voices that Bush listens to, besides those in his head, are the voices of major corporations, maybe he will finally admit what every liberal/scientist has said for the past 10 years.

Monday, January 22, 2007

Off to a Roaring Stop - Bush's Liberal Agenda

"This administration doesn't base their decisions on intelligence."
--Richard Clark on Keith Olbermann's "The Countdown"

According to the New York Times, Bush's State of the Union Address is going to be something we have rarely heard from the "President." It's going to be liberal.

Unlike most State of the Unions, which tend to be a laundry list of ideas and goals, most of which rarely reach congress let alone pass, this speech is supposed to focus on three issues: Health Care, Immigration, and... more shockingly... energy. What sounds like a complete 180 on his opinion of Global Warming, Bush looks as though he may actually mention something that pertains to something else related to something that addresses something that sounds a lot like global warming. I am itching in anticipation.

Note: He may even tell American car manufacturers that they have to start creating cars that have better than 5 miles to the gallon. Gasp.

Equally shocking is that he will propose a health care plan that actually TAXES those that have health care plans that cost significantly more than the national average, while giving tax breaks to poor people. Yes... poor people. Not rich. Poor. Sometimes it helps repeating it since it is so difficult to believe.

Yet still, neither of these plans is likely to get passed the house in their current forms, but at least the "President" admits they are problems, even if he does a poor job fixing them.

More importantly is that although these are issues the Democrats have been screaming to be dealt with for years, the Republicans will act as though it was all Bush's idea.

We'll see what he says on Tuesday...


Question: What does he accomplish addressing liberal issues? Does he expect liberals to like him more? Does he expect to regain respect among Republicans?

Naming a Dog

Right now I have a puppy. His name is Demo (like the -crat). I was toying with names of what to name another dog if I get one. I was thinking about naming him "Buttface" so that when I call out his name and some random John turns around, I can say "Oh, sorry, not YOU Buttface, I was talking to my DOG Buttface.

Or maybe I'd name him "Karl Rover" except I think I'd get the strong urge to chain him to the fence and beat him with a rusty pipe. So that's probably not a good idea.

Sunday, January 21, 2007

Anti-Republican Poetry: Mitt Romney

For the next entry into the anti-Republican Presidential Poetry collection, we have former Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney. For Romney, I am going to allow two kinds of poetry. First is a type of poetry called "Rispetto." It is an Italian rhyming poetry that rhymes ABAB-CCDD - meaning that the first and third lines of the first stanza rhyme, as well as the 2nd and 4th. But the first and 2nd of the second stanza rhyme as well as the 3rd and fourth. Also (and here is the difficult part) it usually and strictly has 11 syllables per line (called iambic tetrameter). An example:

Somewhere in Massachusetts, sits a Mormon
With bright, colorful Presidential daydreams,
Hoping that New England's liberal women
Ignore his NeoCon flip-flopping speech themes

Once he was pro-choice, with bipartisan dotes
Now he has changed for Evangelical votes
What kind of a prick would switch and not explain
That is, of course, besides Senator McCain


I will also offer an easier type of poetry. It is called a Tetractys. It is simpler. It is like the British form of a Haiku. Each line has a set number of syllables, and it is much shorter. The syllable structure is 1, 2, 3, 4, 10. Feel free and give it a title to make more sense. An Example:

Why a Moderate Can't Win
Will Lose
One Reason
Dislike those who once supported gay rights


Good luck! And PLEASE remember to submit other anti-Republican poetry to this site, by clicking on the "Contribute" link at the very top of this webpage underneath the banner. Email the page to everyone you can think of who would enjoy contributing.

Saturday, January 20, 2007

Fake News: Obama and Clinton Overshadowed by New Candidate

For months CNN and similar stations have been peppered with news about the two strongest Democratic presidential candidates: Senator's Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Thought to be the two front runners for the 2008 presidential nomination, their candidacy has been shaken up by the surprise announcement by the Governor of Puerto Rico, Mr. Eniwon Butboosh.

Mr. Butboosh has entered the primaries as a Democrat, but his campaign is that of the newly established party, the Librocratic party. His announcement comes in the final days before the first debates, and already he has gathered millions in donations from recently converted Librocrats. Mr. Eniwon Butboosh has several key qualifications that make him such a strong candidate:

1) He is proudly liberal
2) He is an outspoken Democrat
3) He is not George W. Bush

Known for his straight talk and self described "lack of Bushit," Mr. Butboosh has already caused some of the less known candidates to drop out and campaign to be Eniwon's Vice President.

Mr. Butboosh's political fame started when he combined the two major Puerto Rican political parties, the Popular Democratic Party (PDP) and the New Progressive Party (NPP) into the current ruling party, the Democratic Progressives Party (DPP) Which garnered 98% of the vote in the last elections. He has also been credit with solving the AIDS crisis, balancing the budget, calming the Iraq insurgency and, more recently, he has gained huge political clout by being neither a totally incompetent fool nor the ex-Governor of Texas.

Mr. Butboosh plans to take the seat soon to be vacated by President George W. Bush, known in Puerto Rico as "El Presidente Pendejo." Although he enters a very competitive race with fellow competent Democrats who are also, likely, not Bush, Democratic pundits like his chances. And many members of the Democratic party have already placed his bumber sticker on their cars:

Eniwon Butboosh 2008

Answers to Hillary Clinton Questions - Just the FAQs

The basics: Answers to questions about Hillary Clinton's chance at presidency.

Question - Is America ready for a female president?
Answer - Yes. When it comes to public office, most people have become blind to gender. Provided she appears as a strong, hard hitting candidate, it will not affect her chances and may actually be a bonus with moderate female voters. Besides, most of the remaining blatant sexists vote Republican. And if there is a hegemony remaining in the more liberal/moderate population, a male vice president should put those societal subconscious worries at ease.

Question - Is Hillary's greatest strength her husband's fame?
Answer - No. While Former President Bill Clinton may be the reason Hillary was thrown immediately into the spotlight, Hillary has created her own place in Congress, taken on lead roles, including those in the Armed Services Committee, the Environment and Public Works Committee, and the Special Committee on Aging, among others.

Question - Will her Husband's problems in 1998 affect her bid for presidency?
Answer - No. Because even talking about them is a waste of breath, since they have nothing to do with anything.

Question - Is Hillary too liberal to win over moderate Republicans?
Answer - No. In fact, she is not even close to the most liberal member of the Democratic Senate. While the far right will try to paint her as "liberal" thanks to their own disdain (and insecurities) about her husband, the fact according to Almanac of American Politics, which rates senators on a scale from 1 (100% Conservative) and 100 (100% Liberal), Hillary ranks a 68, well enough near the center to appeal to moderate independents.

Question - Is America going to elect a Senator to the presidency?
Answer - Yes/No. This is the most valid concern about her chances at the white house. It is difficult for a Senator to run for president because it is easy to skew voting records and spin them to paint the candidate in an ugly light. Governors, on the other hand, have little to no voting record, so that even the most incompetent dolt can be elected president despite sub par qualifications and intelligence. However, Hillary Clinton of all senators has been outspoken, unafraid to challenge responses to her voting record, and willing to explain her tough decisions. Equally in her favor, is that most of the potential opponents from the Republican Party are Senators, with Senator McCain being the front-runner, which will make previous public office an equal playing field.

Question - What demographic will be the biggest hurdle for Senator Clinton to win over?
Answer - Ironically, it will likely be apolitical moderates. Those that are easily swayed by attack ads, which Republicans are sure the fire off in full force. But America is also ready for a change, and so with enough positive advertising about where Clinton will take the country, these voters should realize the right choice.

Question - If Senator Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, who will be her running mate?
Answer - Who knows? Maybe Clinton/Obama? Clinton/Clark? Clinton/Edwards? Maybe even Clinton/Gore?

Question - Can she win?
Answer - Yes.

These next two years are going to be exciting.

HILLARY CLINTON: "I'm in. And I'm in to Win."

Senator Hillary Clinton has announced her candidacy for the presidency of the United States. See the video on her website. In an email message sent to her supporters early Saturday, Senator Clinton wrote: "I'm in. And I'm in to win." On Monday, January 22nd, for three nights in a row, she will be participating in discussions on her website, allowing anyone to ask her questions and understand her as a candidate. She issued the following statement on her website:

Today I am announcing that I will form an exploratory committee to run for president.

And I want you to join me not just for the campaign but for a conversation about the future of our country -- about the bold but practical changes we need to overcome six years of Bush administration failures.

I am going to take this conversation directly to the people of America, and I'm starting by inviting all of you to join me in a series of Web chats over the next few days.

The stakes will be high when America chooses a new president in 2008.

As a senator, I will spend two years doing everything in my power to limit the damage George W. Bush can do. But only a new president will be able to undo Bush's mistakes and restore our hope and optimism.

Only a new president can renew the promise of America -- the idea that if you work hard you can count on the health care, education and retirement security that you need to raise your family. These are the basic values of America that are under attack from this administration every day.

And only a new president can regain America's position as a respected leader in the world.

I believe that change is coming November 4, 2008. And I am forming my exploratory committee because I believe that together we can bring the leadership that this country needs. I'm going to start this campaign with a national conversation about how we can work to get our country back on track.

This is a big election with some very big questions. How do we bring the war in Iraq to the right end? How can we make sure every American has access to adequate health care? How will we ensure our children inherit a clean environment and energy independence? How can we reduce the deficits that threaten Social Security and Medicare?

No matter where you live, no matter what your political views, I want you to be a part of this important conversation right at the start. So to begin, I'm going to spend the next several days answering your questions in a series of live video Web discussions.

Starting Monday, January 22, at 7 p.m. EST for three nights in a row, I'll sit down to answer your questions about how we can work together for a better future. And you can participate live at my Web site. Sign up to join the conversation here.

I grew up in a middle-class family in the middle of America, where I learned that we could overcome every obstacle we face if we work together and stay true to our values.

I have worked on issues critical to our country almost all my life. I've fought for children for more than 30 years. In Arkansas, I pushed for education reform. As first lady, I helped to expand health care coverage to millions of children and to pass legislation that dramatically increased adoptions. I also traveled to China to affirm that women's rights are human rights.

And in the Senate, I have worked across party lines to get billions more for children's health care, to stop the president's plan to privatize Social Security, and to make sure the victims and heroes of 9/11 and our men and women in uniform receive the fair treatment they deserve. In 2006, I led the successful fight to make Plan B contraception available to women without a prescription.

I have spent a lifetime opening opportunities for tens of millions who are working hard to raise a family: new immigrants, families living in poverty, people who have no health care or face an uncertain retirement.

The promise of America is that all of us will have access to opportunity, and I want to run a 2008 campaign that renews that promise, a campaign built on a lifetime record of results.

I have never been afraid to stand up for what I believe in or to face down the Republican machine. After nearly $70 million spent against my campaigns in New York and two landslide wins, I can say I know how Washington Republicans think, how they operate, and how to beat them.

I need you to be a part of this campaign, and I hope you'll start by joining me in this national conversation.

As we campaign to win the White House, we will make history and remake our future. We can only break barriers if we dare to confront them, and if we have the determined and committed support of others.

This campaign is our moment, our chance to stand up for the principles and values that we cherish; to bring new ideas, energy, and leadership to a uniquely challenging time. It's our chance to say 'we can' and 'we will.'

Let's go to work. America's future is calling us.

Senator Clinton's announcement came early and strong. She states that she wants to "start a conversation" and is offering her own blog as a starting point for opening the discussion, telling the media and her followers that she wants to use modern technology to gain strength - just as Howard Dean gained his force and popularity in 2003. Here is what she writes on her blog page, as well as the link to be part of the dialogue:

Soon we'll launch the official blog of, a crucial part of our exciting national conversation about the direction of our country and the place to go to learn more about Hillary.

We know our readers are going to have a lot to say, so we want to give you the first word.

We're looking for your ideas on how we can work together for change. If you'd like to write the very first guest post on the blog, submit your entry in the form below. And if you already have your own blog or other website, please post your entry there and let us know about it. We'll select one entry as the first guest post on our blog.

To sign up, click here.

Mrs. Clinton, if successful, will be the first female nominee of a major US party. However, her announcement comes at the heels of Barack Obama, another major player in the Democratic primaries. Obama is also considered a more likeable candidate, but on without as much experience as Mrs. Clinton, and without the donor power.

Also, Clinton's announcement overshadows that of Senator Sam Brownback, the conservative Republican candidate from Texas. Mr. Brownback is most anti-abortion, homophobic candidate thus far on the Republican side and may garner most of the votes from conservative evangelicals as well as much of the funds. He is also one of the few candidates who can steal funding from John McCain, who has yet to announce but has been campaigning since almost 2002, and the first prominent Republican to officially announce his presidency.

As far as Mrs. Clinton's chances, she is both loved and hated. Most Democrats love her, and she is centrist enough to not alienate the Democrats that lean a little more right. But she is hated by Republicans passionately, and simply by running she could bring them out to vote in large numbers. Also, some of the far left dislike her because she voted for the war in Iraq and is against same sex marriage (although she is for same-sex unions). But with a strong running mate (perhaps Barack Obama?) she is a viable candidate, and the race for the presidency will be exciting.

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Iranians Are Abandoning Their President...


Just as most Americans are finally waking to their country's failed government, so are the Iranians losing faith in their president's decision making. Even the Ayatollah has told Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to stay out of nuclear matters, as Iran is beginning to cave under international pressure.

The Iranians are displeased that they are thrown into the heart of a pre-nuclear war against their will, by an overcompensating outspoken anti-semetic madman.

And so are we...

Voiding Big Oil Tax Breaks

Gas has gone down 20 dollars a barrel in the last 3 or four months. Why do we still pay for much?

Answer: Why the hell not? There is no regulation for the tax companies, and there is no oversight. Remember back some year or two ago, when the oil companies made record profits? They claimed it was because people were driving more. Economists said it was because they charged people in advance of price increases (it takes months for oil to become gasoline, but the gas companies boost their price immediately after purchasing the oil for higher dollars per barrel). But the prices didn't go back down with barrel prices.

Whatever the reason, prices have gone up and with each increase the Bush Administration has REWARDED them with tax breaks, even though it did not show prices to drop. Shouldn't the oil industry pay taxes on the money they gauge from their consumer?

Finally they will. The Democrats have rescinded the Republican tax cuts, and are finally taxing them on the profits they have raked in over the past 2 years. Even if the Oil industry shoots up their price again, at least the ridiculous profits they earn will go back to the people who pay for them, and maybe the government can use the money to fund cost-effective alternative energy programs.

Bushcronium - Sent in a Forward

This was sent to me in a forward. It was funny, so I'm giving it some blog space:

A major research institution has just announced the discovery of the densest element yet known to science. The new element has been named "Bushcronium." Bushcronium has one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy neutrons, and 224 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 311. These particles are held together by dark forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. The symbol for Bushcronium is W.

Bushcronium's mass actually increases over time, as morons randomly interact with various elements in the atmosphere and become assistant deputy neutrons in a Bushcronium atom, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to believe that Bushcronium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as "Critical Morass." When catalyzed with money, Bushcronium activates Foxnewsium, (adnaseum) an element that radiates orders of magnitude, more energy, albeit incoherent noise, since it has as many peons but twice as many morons.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Plugging a book because a reader took the time to email me

I don't exactly have the patience to post today, but some reader emailed me asking me to plug his book. So I will. I'm guessing he emailed many, many other bloggers and I am in no way giving an opinion of this book, which I haven't read, but I feel like being generous. Apparently it's about the separation of church and state, where Jesus and Buddha and Moses (Moses? Not a God) among others have arisen from the dead.

Here is what a reviewer wrote:

Jerry Fletcher, cynic, is abducted while on a hiking trip with co-workers. He wondered if he was trapped in an "X-Files reality." Yoshu'ah, an alien, appears to Jerry and explains that there are two forces at work on planet earth, one is the force of LIGHT or good and one is the force of DARK or evil. Star Souls of LIGHT include Moses, Buddha, Isaiah, Daniel, Joseph and Jesus they taught love of God and the universe. But DARK took the teachings of LIGHT and "manifested the institution of religion, creating the hierarchy of power."

Jerry is one of the Star Souls and has been chosen to enlighten Earth. "You are like many great warriors of the Light. We have transferred large amounts of information to your DNA within your bones, and later, while on the Earth plane, you like thousands upon thousands of LIGHT warriors, will battle to save the Earth plane, bringing LIGHT unto Earth."

Jerry is returned to Earth and begins to enlighten others; his message is not one that the system of institutions wants spread. The people stage a rebellion against the government, there is rioting and civil unrest. Jerry has become a "threat."

Anyway, again, it could be good, it could be bad, I don't know. But he is the first person to email me through this website asking for something to be posted and for that, he is rewarded.

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Summing of the News of the Day

Lots of news from the New York Times:

80 people were killed in Baghdad today, and the UN brings the death toll in Iraq for 2006 to 34,000... But I heard that the ones that are still alive are totally greeting us as liberators. All 17 of them. Who'd have thought the decapitation of Saddam's brother would spur a public outcry?

Barack Obama has finally created his exploratory committee for the 2008 presidential election (Woo! Obama '08!), and has begun collecting donations as dipping his toes into the public water. He also said he would make a decision by February 10th, becoming one fo the only people to give him/herself a deadline. See previous posts about my thoughts on his bid for the presidency.

The Golden Globes are over. Life, surprisingly, goes on.

The idea of abolishing the electoral college and winning by popular vote has made some headway, so that we will never again have a competent president elected only to be replaced by a mentally handicapped monkey simply because of an operations error.

And 51% of women are living without a spouse for the first time in... ever. And you know who I blame? The gays. With their impeccable sense of style and effeminate hand gestures. How dare they not date and impregnate women and live in a unhappy marriage based on a lie, leaving the couple and their children miserable until sweet, sweet death finally knocks on the door. Gah... selfish.

Monday, January 15, 2007

Alex Rodriguez - A Republican (And Other Famous People and Their Politics)

From and a conservative blog known as Right on the Right, I found out who some of the famous liberals are, and some of the famous conservatives:

In a piece titled: "Know your enemy" this neocon blogger posts all the "evil liberals" who donated thousands to Democratic candidates. Some names include:
Natalie Portman
Gwyneth Paltrow
Courtney Cox
Kevin Costner
George Lucas
Harrison Ford

Among many, many others.

But the real shock is who this writer BOASTS as Republican donors. There are not many (one per 7 liberal names) but these are the actual people he is proud are Republicans (I will not link to each one, but you can search yourself):
Alex Rodriguez (A-Rod)
Toby Keith (note: is actually a conservative democrat)
Tom Clancy
Chuck Norris
Kelsey Grammer

Wow... Way to list an impressive bunch of nobodies. Ooooh - a terrible writer, a washed up martial artist who has become a running joke, a country singer (SHOCK! SURPRISE!), and Frasier... No wonder he never fit in in Seattle. And a baseball player who I've hated since he was a Rookie on the Mariners.

So I did some snooping of my own and found more names, with their affiliation listed in parenthesis as (L) for liberal/Democrat and (C) for conservative/Republican - based solely on their donations - This is a long list:

Celebrities/Actors/Actresses/Famous People

Ben Affleck (L)
Jessica Alba (L)
Alan Alda (L)
Alec Baldwin (L)
Tyra Banks (L)
Bob Barker (C)
Drew Berrymore (L)
Jason Bateman (L)
Kim Basinger (L)
David Blaine (C)
Zach Braff (L)
Nicholas Cage (L)
Drew Carey (C)
Billy Crystal (L)
Matt Damon (L)
Robert Deniro (L)
Danny Devito (L)
Leonardo DiCaprio (L)
Angie Dickenson (L)
Shannon Doherty (C)
Fran Dreschler (L)
Richard Dreyfuss (L)
Robert Duvall (L)
Farrah Fawcett (L)
Will Farrell (L)
Jeff Foxworthy (C)
Brendan Frasier (L)
Morgan Freeman (L)
Jennifer Garner (L)
Kathy Lee Gifford (C)
Cuba Gooding Jr. (L)
Matt Groening (L)
Tom Hanks (L)
Ethan Hawke (L)
Salma Hayek (L)
Marilu Henner (L)
Jim Henson (L)
Charlton Heston (C)
Faith Hill (L)
Dustin Hoffman (L)
Bob Hope (C)
Samuel Jackson (L)
Billy Joel (L)
Tommy Lee Jones (L)
Garrison Keillor (L)
Dean Koontz (C)
John Larroquette (L)
Matt LeBlanc (L)
Jennifer Jason Leigh (L)
Lucy Liu (L)
Heather Locklear (C)
Jennifer Lopez (L)
Traci Lords (C)
Seth MacFarlane (L)
Dave Matthews (L)
Jenny McCarthy (L)
Reba McEntire (C)
Dr. Phil McGraw (C)
Tim McGraw (L)
Bill Murray (L)
Jack Nicholson (L)
Leonard Lemoy (L)
Conan O'Brian (L)
Ozzy Ozborne (L)
Al Pacino (L)
Chuck Palahniuk (L)
Mandy Patinkin (L)
Michelle Pfeifer (L)
David Hyde Pierce (L)
Maury Povich (C)
Prince (C)
Burt Reynolds (L)
Christina Ricci (L)
Tony Robbins (C)
Chris Rock (L)
Meg Ryan (L)
Martin Scorsese (L)
Jerry Seinfeld (L)
Tom Selleck (C)
Tony Shalhoub (L)
Martin Sheen (L)
LL Cool J (L)
Kevin Sorbo (C)
Kevin Spacey (L)
David Spade (L)
Ben Stein (C)
Jon Stewart (L)
Amy Tan (L)
Uma Thurman (L)
Rip Torn (C)
Chris Tucker (L)
Usher (L)
Mark Wahlberg (L)
Robin Williams (L)
Owen Wilson (L)
Henry Winkler (L)
Reese Witherspoon (L)
James Woods (C)
Noah Wyle (L)
Renee Zellweger (L)

Billionairres (who matter):

Paul Allen (L)
Jeff Bezos (L)
Michael Dell (C)
Charles Schwabb (C)
Steven Spielburg (L)
Ted Turner (L)
Oprah Winfrey (L)

Sports Stars:

Hank Aaron (L)
Troy Aikman (C)
Mario Andretti (C)
Charles Barkley (L)
Lance Berkman (C)
Oscar De La Hoya (L)
Mike Ditka (C)
Clyde Drexler (C)
Dale Earnhardt (C)
Jeff Gordon (C)
Evander Holyfield (L)
Phil Jackson (L)
Michael Jordan (L)
Davis Love III (C)
Peyton Manning (C)
Alonzo Mourning (L)
Rafael Palmeiro (C)
Pat Riley (L)
Alex Rodriguez (C) <----WORTH REPEATING
Emmitt Smith (L)

I see a theme with authors who write crappy novels.

There are many, many more names, but I didn't know who they are, or care, or it was too obvious.

Others of Note: Jim Cramer, 280,000 dollars, all Democrat
Neil Cavuto - only donated 1,000 dollars ever - obviously to the Red candidate
Hugh Hefner - Democrat
Joe Scarborough - Has only donated to Democrats.
Ann Coulter, in her entire succubus life, has only donated 250 dollars.

If you are on this list, and can prove to me you are actually you (with a picture of yourself holding my blog name) and want to change your C or L to the other, because your donations are misleading, email me.

Otherwise, your comments are appreciated.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Submission: Michelle Malkin - Truth in Advertising?

Thanks to Moron Cowboy's Demon Princess for the following:

According to "Malkin" means the following:

1. Originally, a kitchenmaid; a slattern.
2. A mop made of clouts, used by the kitchen servant.
3. A scarecrow.
4. (Mil.) A mop or sponge attached to a jointed staff for swabbing out a cannon.
5. slattern; untidy woman
And according to
6. [a slang term that denotes a sexually loose woman]
as in, "that girl with the short skirt is a real malkin"

I don't know why that's so funny.

No, wait, I do. She spews more bullshit then a cow on exlax. And I'm pretty sure definition #4 is against her religion.

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Bush Comic - The Adventures of Lame Duck and Lamer Duck

Click for a large size. And give me some credit, I made it on Microsoft Paint.

Friday, January 12, 2007

To: Ann Coulter - God Doesn't Forgive Felony Charges

According to News Reports in "Editor and Publisher" as seen in the Progressively Treva blog, Ann Coulter, the Conservative Columnist and long time infected hemorrhoid, may face 2 felony charges and 1 misdemeanor for voter fraud. Apparently the author of "Godless" decided to purposefully list the wrong address so she could vote in a different county, going so far as to provide her Realtor's address when applying for her Driver's license.

Strangely, however, it appears no one is willing to arrest her for her crime, and so the prosecutor is searching for a police precinct with Jurisdiction before he charges her.

So if you happen to work for a newspaper, please try to get this story published in a newspaper to create pressure on the police force to carry out their sworn duty.

I wonder if she'd be the giver or the receiver with her cell mate in prison? At least she'd fit in with the other supremacists.

Daily Show Quotes My Blog

I don't know if they actually quoted my blog, but today they used my analogy of the 15% increase in troops as a tip. I didn't hear any of the news shows say it and that post was written 24 full hours before the Daily Show episode.

Woo for me. One small step in my blogolution.

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Lame Duck, Lamer Duck

Which One is More Pathetic?

Bush: The Responsibility Rests with Me

I can't stop watching it over and over and over again.

You're Damn right it does.

No Backup for Troop Increase

Britain has said they will not add additional troops to assist the US in their "surge." In fact, of the 7,000 troops that remain, they have promised to cut 3,000 by the end of May.

Ironically, the US has snagged David Beckham, the uber-popular soccer player from England. He signed a 250,000,000 dollar deal with the Los Angeles Galaxy. TAKE THAT A-ROD!

Democrats and Republicans Agree - WTF?

Today marks a strange occurrence. There is a buzz travelling across the country. It seems that, however so slightly, Democrats and Republicans are actually in agreement about something: The escalation of the war won't solve anything.

But there is yet another interesting change in events.

Democrats, who are primary against the war and only grow stronger in their beliefs in each passing day, tend to be viewing the increase in troops as a waste of time, and view the "plan" with a resigned indignation brought on by their faithlessness in the President. <-- This, of course, is nothing new.

Where the real surprise arises is that Republicans are the ones who are actually pissed at the president for not pulling troops out. From the New York Times:

“What I don’t understand is who the president is listening to,” said Mr. Polidoro, a life-long Republican who like a majority in this Republican district voted for an anti-war Democrat in the last election. “If vets, military brass, the Baker Committee, the international community and now most voters say it’s time to get out, then in my view it’s time to get out.”
For over 3 years now, Democrats have been urging not just the president, but the entire country to get the troops out of Iraq, and as time passed we felt our voices fading against a thick, dense wall. The president's new proposal didn't shock Democratic citizens into an anti-war tirade because we have been kept silent by an incompetent boob who decides everything on his own, regardless of public opinion.

But the Republicans are finally the ones angry. They are finally turning off Fox News and watching MSNBC. They are finally not listening to conservative robots like Michelle Malkin and Sean Hannity spew BS like Diarrhea out their mouths, and starting to ask the question:


Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Bush Had a Speech Today. And it Was... Definitely a Speech

Why was this worth a speech? He is the commander of the entire army, and "moving 4,000 troops to the Anbar province" isn't exactly a groundbreaking decision that merits announcing it to the nation. It's a normal strategic decision that happens when you're in war. The fact that he somehow believes a small change in the numbers of troops is some sort of groundbreaking military strategy only makes it look like he's averse to complex thought. Ooooh, 20,000 troops. Ooooh. What a... number... That's a full 15% increase.

I leave more than that for tip.

More later.

Correction - Bush WILL Solve Iraq

Excuse me, ignore my previous satirical post where I refer to Bush's plan as stupid and useless. That was because I had originally thought it was only 20,000 soldiers he was sending to Iraq. But the New York Times has now corrected me, and said it is actually 22,000.

Well, now that I know those extra 2,000 are there, I feel much, much safer.

Bush is an idiot.

Tuesday, January 9, 2007

Fake News - 20,000 Troops Fixes Iraq - Mission Accomplished

CR-AP Wire - 02/10/2007 -----

President George Walker Bush successfully solves the Iraq conflict. Just one month after his historic speech, announcing his brilliant and complex Iraq Strategy despite protests by the majority of Americans, the United States has completed the war with Iraq.

In a speech given this morning to the Conservative Republican Associated Press (AKA - CRAP), President Bush announced the completion of Mission Accomplished in Iraq. "We won, plain and simple. Just as I knew we always would," He said with his trademark grin, "my plan of waiting until the most opportunistical time worked perfectly."

Critics of his strategy back in January argued that simply sending 20,000 more troops into a country in chaos was not actually a plan. That instead it was a ploy to make it appear that he had made a change when in fact he had simply increased what had become an arbitrary number of soldiers fighting an unclear objective without so much as a roadmap let alone a specific strategy or mission.

Boy, were they wrong.

"See what the American people forgot is that things in Iraq have changed." Said the President.

"Like what?" Asked a chorus of eager reporters.

President Bush grinned again. "Well, for one, we not only have more troops in Iraq, \we also have less Iraqis. Hundreds of thousands less. Ya see, it's about thinking mathmaticianly. We have less Iraqis to protect, so we send in some more Americans to spread freedom to the Iraqis that are still alive and we solve the equator."

"The equation, Mr. President?" Asked a reporter from the Kansas Intelligencer-ish.

"That's what I said, the equation. We add numbers, they lose numbers, and the scale evens out."

Democratic pundits and bloggers were left speechless.

"We had assumed that blindly sending a small number of troops into a civil war with no objective under the direction of an incompetent impotent idiot would be a recipe for disaster. Who knew?" One liberal blogger said under the condition of anonymity.

Bush responded to this with his usual confident manner: "Ha, what a moron. I'm not blind."

Indeed, Mr. President. Indeed. Mission Accomplished.