Shameless pandering or in good faith?

Obama, the so-called candidate of change, wants to expand a policy of George W Bush.

Yeah, that’s real change alright.

The separation of church and sate is important, whether people want to admit it or not. Policies like these set a dangerous precedent by creating state recognized religious institutions, especially since I wonder if Wiccans and other non-traditional religious groups will be included in this effort. Once the state starts dipping its hands in religion both are tainted. We’ve seen it throughout the centuries of human history, and it’s a precedent the American founders were obviously not eager to set. Of course, one of the complaints with Bush was his blatant disregard for the intentions of the Founders, a standpoint Obama seems eager to continue for the sake of votes.

If it wasn’t painfully obvious before, Obama will get votes any way he can, regardless of the consequences. Now that the primary is over we can say good bye to all the change he was promising us, which was all smoke and mirrors in the first place. We already saw him refuse federal funding by claiming that it was run by “special interests”, allowing him to pull an old Washington trick by – dare I say it – flip-flopping. Well, that sure isn’t change I can believe in. Or change at all.

Wow, it's been a while...

I haven't had the chance to update in a long time, mostly due to other engagements and of course getting an education.

To be honest, I haven't really found a lot worth commenting about - there really hasn't been anything political to say that I didn't cover in the previous post. There are a few things than have gotten my goat enough to warrant a response, so I'll be typing those up sometime very soon (possibly by the end of the day) and posting them here.

If you actually have been checking back at all...thanks for listening and I apologize for not updating for close to six months.

Why I do not Support Barack Obama

Lately there has been a huge amount of press for Barack Obama – one could almost call it a very premature coronation. He’s even picked up the support of Ted Kennedy, a major boon indeed. Of course, Obama always had the support of more young and first-time voters than Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. And quite frankly, that’s what worries me. Here are just a few reasons why I do not support Obama – and the very reasons why he’s garnered so much support.

Lack of experience

Don’t play this down. No matter how much you like the guy, he’s only been in the Senate a measly two years. He’s the most inexperienced candidate, especially now that Edwards has dropped out. He hasn’t had the chance to learn the ropes in Washington. It’s like picking fruit that hasn’t had a chance to ripen. There is potential there, but right now it’s too sour to be enjoyed.

Says nothing

It’s a known fact that one of the most important skills for a politician is the ability to say as little as possible with as may words as possible. But when your entire speech is a contest to see how many times you can jam the word “change” into a paragraph you’ve way overdone it. Vaguely uplifting messages and subtle attacks make up a typical Obama speech, to the point where veterans like Clinton are put to shame with how much ham Obama packs into a stump speech.

Playing the race card

Some of us were too busy watching Power Rangers and Dragon Ball Z to remember Clinton, so it’s understandable that we don’t remember Bill Clinton all that well. You can’t expect a kid obsessed with how cool his lunchbox is to know politics. Obama, being a grown man, should have the good sense to remember that playing the race card on Bill Clinton is as stupid as calling the Prime Minister of Israel a Nazi. It’s sickening.

Add it up. Obama is the perfect candidate for a generation obsessed with MySpace to the point of distraction. Whatever is popular, whatever sounds cool – that’s what we support. Whatever happened to taking a stand? Why, when we should be at our most active and rebellious, are we going for the perfectly manufactured politician. A politician so perfect, he uses some of the oldest tricks to convince us that he is not a politician.

Could you stop fighting? Please?

Apparently one of the most beloved presidents in a while is a liability. At least, that’s what Obama would like you to believe. The constant bickering has become tiresome and idiotic.

See, if the candidates spend all this time tearing each other down, come general election time the voters will have a nice supply of resentment. The Democratic nominee will have been assaulted, smeared, and denigrated in every possible way. Every attack exchanged between Clinton and Obama is another voter they stand to lose in the general election. The Democratic Party is being looked at favorably right now, but it’s a delicate balance. Destroying the credibility of your opponent won’t do the party a bit of good if you aren’t nominated. Unless these candidates can set aside the stupid petty arguments we’re looking at 4 more years of GOP administration at least.

And I can guarantee the Democratic Party isn’t looking forward to that.

Obama attack ad
Clinton attack ad

Oh, it’s getting good now…

One thing is for sure: change is good. Politically speaking, of course. At a debate for the Presidential candidates from both major parties hosted by ABC in New Hampshire, the Democrats could have passed for hobos. They spouted the word “change” so often I almost wanted to throw a few dimes at the TV screen. This comes on the heels of Obama’s surprise victory over Hillary in Iowa, who was basically writing her acceptance speech until recently.

After being defeated not only by Obama, but also Edwards, a candidate who was quickly slipping away, Hillary realized “I’m Bill’s wife” and “Hey, I’ll probably win”, while excellent slogans, wouldn’t convince everyone. Naturally if you are a Democrat victory in the general election is paramount right now, and with good reason. Bush has made a great attempt at messing up as many things as possible at the same time, so a change of leadership is sorely needed.

Realizing that many young Dems were in grade school when her husband was in power would do Hillary some good. We don’t remember much, besides that the Congress was very mad at him about a lady named Monica. While many older voters will have little trouble glossing over what might be the most famous hook up in years, the first-timers, still bright eyed and hopeful are naturally being taken in by the constant cries of “change” coming from Obama, even if he is inexperienced. That’s why Hillary filled the recent debate with plenty of vitriol, making sure that the vaguely happy remarks that Obama has been spouting like a preacher don’t steamroll over the fact that change isn’t worth getting that excited over if you can’t implement it.

Meanwhile, on the Republican side, the right-wingers are demonstrating how to take care of a flip-flopper: beat him up until everyone hates him. They did it to Kerry, and now Romney spent the last debate getting trashed – most memorably by Huckabee – for anything and everything. I must admit, it was nice to see some fur fly; after all, what good is democracy if everyone agrees?

With a victory in Iowa, Huckabee now has a chance at a nomination, something that seemed desperately unlikely before now. Sure, he had the Norris bump (similar to the Colbert Bump but with more roundhouse kicks) and Evangelicals love the guy, but no one thought he could carry the state against the oiled machine Romney was running. Now his big challenge is to carry New Hampshire, where his good-guy image and pastor heritage won’t do much to cover up his weak economic policies and lack of foreign policy knowledge.

Still, Huckabee, Obama, and to a lesser extent Edwards did what they had to do. They made sure they put themselves in the minds of voters by not knuckling under. People dead set on Clinton might now look at the possibility of Obama as the nominee in a more positive light. And Huckabee’s rise will get conservatives concerned with family values thinking about having a guy like him. Butter up some popcorn. It’s going to be a heck of a show.

Breaking News: teens can get pregnant

Britney Spears’s little sister is pregnant. In other news, there are leaves on my front lawn. This is non-news at its finest – a perfect storm of stupidity and drama. It’s a waste of valuable time, a distraction from reality.

If anyone is interested as to why stars are going off the deep end, the answer is simple: look in a mirror. People everywhere are fascinated with people who are absolutely nothing special. Hollywood isn’t about talent. It’s not about looks. It’s about getting as many people to watch something as humanly possible, whatever the cost.

See, the people who care about this garbage are the problem. Me, I’m only complaining because every 5 minutes on CNN they talk about how some teen star got knocked up, as if this is some kind of brand new phenomenon. Here’s a hint: it isn’t. Train wreck TV is a brand new genre, one where the actual quality of the programming isn’t the issue. It’s all about just how messed up the star of the show is. The closer you are towards utter destruction, the more popular you get.

What’s the problem? The viewers. Watch a newsmagazine on cable, and I guarantee there will be some celebrity reporter gleefully recounting the tragic fall of a star. Let’s all be honest here; if Lindsay Lohan or Britney were our sisters, we’d consider their predicaments tragedies. We’d be trying to help them, not laughing and pointing at the freaks. It’s like saying don’t jump to the guy on the roof: you’re just making it worse.

As long as you feed a bratty young person’s over inflated and misguided ego, that person will continue to perform those acts that garner attention. If you watched gleefully as your child walked down the path to oblivion they would continue to do so with reckless abandon. On some level, that’s how it is in Hollywood. Record sales, movie ticket sales, TV ratings – all of this depends on garnering the love and respect of your target audience. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with that, per se. I don’t think anyone is going to complain when opera singers or stage actors do their jobs. But to allow someone to rely purely on self-destruction is irresponsible and troubling. Come on people, this is basic parenting.

Not to mention that with our reliance on famous people as role models, my generation is growing up to learn some nasty habits. It’s not about morality, either; it’s about responsibility and self-respect. It’s not what others think of you, it’s how you treat yourself. With the rise of self-indulgent, attention seeking behavior comes a blessing of problems as attributes.

So here’s my New Year’s resolution. I will change the channel or leave the website anytime one of these so called “news stories” comes on the air. No more lowbrow reality TV. I would not find a friend’s battle with addiction and pregnancy funny or entertaining. I don’t find a bratty starlet’s battles any more worthy of exploitation.

Political ads! Now with 5% more subliminal messages! Also, Christmas is not evil.

So lots of folks are talking about how Mike Huckabee has a bookshelf that looks suspiciously like a cross in a recent ad. And from the right angle, I’d say it might. Of course it could just be a bookshelf. You know, with books.

Huckabee also had this to say when asked as to why he didn't say "Happy Holidays":

“I don’t know what else to call Christmas, last time I checked that is what we celebrate. If somebody can give me a way to get around that and do it honestly, then perhaps that’s what Christmas is,” said Huckabee.

“The very word Christmas comes from the contraction of 'Christ Mass' — the worship of Christ – again, change the word if we don't want to talk about it, but that’s what it symbolizes and represents.” (From CNN)

Now, normally I’d be the first to point out that Christmas is not some kind of vicious beast, eager to raise its bloody head to devour all of those who don’t stick a dead tree in their living rooms. I mean, seriously, the Happy Holidays movement is blowing this way out of proportion. People can wish you whatever they like – Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Yule – so don’t get your shorts in a twist.

But Huckabee is running for President. If elected, he’s going to have to represent everyone, even if they’re Hindu or atheist or any other religion on the face of the planet. Heck, if you pour chicken blood on the ground while wearing a loincloth in the dead of night as part of your religion, you’re still American. This kind of “what we celebrate” talk isn’t going to do anyone any good anytime soon. It’s the primary problem with right-wingers. Word of advice guys: start embracing everyone of all faiths. It’ll get you further.