More recycled content...

Gotta love these...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTQOpibv_OA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKrrHe3Fkt4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6dUCOS1bM0

Watchout for the monkeys!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnXQk5EGxKo

ADD

Have we damaged our youth to the point that they are stacking cups for entertainment or worse... exercise? Nooooooo...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIQu8j6hah4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTZuekcRT3k&NR=1

Hillary will -KILL- Obama, literally.

"It's not easy to run a 50 state political operation, to inspire the student vote, to reach across color lines and tired prejudices, to give people hope for a better tomorrow. Obama's done a neat job with that. He may not be ready for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, but I think he's more than ready for Number One Observatory Circle."

When asked what kind of vice president Obama would make, she said, "I'm sure he'd be right up there with the greats, Elbridge Gerry, Henry Wilson, Garret Hobart." When a reporter pointed out that each of those Vice Presidents died in office, Senator Clinton appeared shocked."

from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/toby-barlow/clinton-says-baracks-r_b_91463.html

Clinton then went on to say, "I'm not suggesting Obama will die in office but that he will be killed, with a knife, in the oval office. What I am saying is I will kill my vice president."

Happy times...

http://barackobamaisyournewbicycle.com/
http://godhatesobama.com/

Obama, criticism, the campaign, and the media

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/is_there_a_double_standard_for.html

I don't get this, really. I mean I understand Obama has a "sheen" akin to an, especially posthumous, JFK. What I don't get is how that sheen has done anything more than detracted from the issues in a manner that watching vs. listening to the JFK/Nixon debate did. I mean if a reporter feels he is a good orator then maybe they should report that?

Here's the thing though, has the press systematically done a poor job at critiquing each candidate. I would argue yes, but not for reasons of race and gender, but for reasons of substance.

What I would like to see is a simple matrix that looks at voting records (NOMINATE scores for example ... see here: http://www.icons.umd.edu/2002/senate/nominate.htm ), policy positions, and stances/promises. This way I could see where, at the margins, Obama differs from Hillary.

Stop telling me about yes we can, 3am phone calls, and Obama's middle name. I don't care that Hillary had botox, that Obama's pastor is senile, and that several people in Hillary's campaign think Obama is using "black" magic to get elected. How I am supposed to logically chose between these candidates if all I know about them is sillyness? Cut it out MEDIA.

A resource for the media

It's the cliff notes version of shit you need to know... http://wikisum.com

I agree...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/15/IN04VI0O5.DTL

Have some in the "media" been hoodwinked by Hillary?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/us/politics/20memo.html?bl&ex=1206158400&en=0d1e9305b145f292&ei=5087%0A

This story struck me as strange.... I noticed over FIVE mentions of Obama and his pastor and their relationship. On its face it seems similar to Kennedy and his relationship with the Pope (marching orders).

I think that Hillary+SNL have convinced major players in the media that they are not doing their job with Obama. That argument seems weak to me. The media is fucking up generally (e.g. reporting on things that are not informative, but are infotaining).

I get bringing up this pastor thing, but it seems like I read enough articles that don't have anything else but good things to say about Obama so they feel they need to latch onto things like this... as if it is helping the electorate.

While Hillary has a past to be criticized, so does Obama... one of them just happens to be more in the public eye. I just wish that articles like this would not make one Clinton point and then always come back and counter with this Obama and his pastor thing.

I know lots of people whose views I don't agree with but they are still my friends.

Don't listen to the WSJ... Obama's right on this one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/20/AR2008032003017.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

1) These are the honest views of many blacks, so is the best solution to marginalize the entire community because of a subset of crazy beliefs? I think Obama was right in that we need to learn how to incorporate these people back into society and in doing so maybe convince them that the entire world, or at least the government, is not systematically out to get them.

2) I am sure that $22,500 dollars was not paid to the reverend to go around the country speaking only about these issues (and if it was, Charles is right.) I think Charles misses the fact that the church was involved in the community. The money is not a proxy of the views necessarily, but it is of where and how the money is spent.

3) It seems that he makes a point that actions speak louder than words. It's ok for his grandmother and Harry Truman both to harbor racists feelings so long as they do not act on them in a negative way. If we are judging in terms of actions, then why don't we look at what the church has done for the community instead of through speeches. But maybe his point is more subtle, maybe it's just not ok to spout fear publicly. That Harry Truman would in fact be judged as hurting the interests of minorities if he took the same positive actions, but publicly slandered Jews and Blacks. This seems inconsistent too, though. Because, it would seem to mean that Jesse Jackson is also wrong to spread racial hatred (or in this case, racial fear of black men on the streets). So what is it that matters, words or actions... and how are we judging Wright? Let alone Obama, a degree of separation away.

4) Is he suggesting that it is best to ignore racism? Or just ignore black problems with race? Or just white problems? Obama made the point of grievances on BOTH sides. The problems he cited do not only face blacks, but whites too. Poverty doesn't discriminate, even if it is disproportionate.

5) Why expose your children to old black people, Charles asks. Why don't you shield your children from the realities of today and the opinions of many people in your own community? If we ignore the views of a segment of the older black generation then we wont be subject to them, is that the argument? Maybe the sermon provides a contrast for Obama... to teach his children that the problems of the past are not simple, but are deep seeded. That the views of a sizable minority still exist and instead of ostracizing a generation that witnessed overt and more systematic racism, that we should attempt to form a pluralistic society and demonstrate with actions that we can incorporate this generation into the melting pot.

Maybe if we can stand with these people, or at least not marginalize them, and demonstrate that the government cares about their plight, or at least cares about it as much as it does the white plight, then we will have taken one step forward in convincing a bitter, and rightly so, generation that its views do not represent modernity and are not based on facts or intentions. I think that if we can do that, and our actions speak to our intentions, that racially charged words wont have the same sting because in that world 30% of the black population wont be in jail, more than 50% of the black population will graduate high school, and cocaine will carry the same sentence, or a stiffer one, than crack.

Web Traffic & a Media Ho

Web Traffic
It's a shame that Hillary doesn't know shit about the Internets. It could have really helped her if she did. I think with the 2:1 Sept 2007 lead Obama had to Hillary in terms of website hits that the average extra 7 seconds people spend on her website clearly washes out.

http://mrwavetheory.blogspot.com/2007/09/barackobamacom-leads-hillaryclintoncom.html

Gotta love sluts who will do anything for 15 minutes
http://mrwavetheory.blogspot.com/2007/08/obama-girl-takes-break-from-campaign.html

The greatest thing about the Internet is that it lets sluts without talent get popular because of some stupid viral YouTube video. e.g. That stupid Chocolate Rain song.