It's My Party...

Recent events of nominal to no daily importance, have made me feel a need to make something about myself crystal clear... just for the sake of doing it.

I am a socially liberal to libertine, economically pro-labor progressive Democrat. ...And damned proud of it!!

I vote for Democrats.

I donate time, energy, skills and other resources to fielding and supporting my party's candidates, busting myths perpetuated about my party, raising funds for my party and our candidates and serving my party.

If I don't like one of my party's sitting politicians, I see it as a need for us to field a better candidate for that seat in our next primary, not as a reason to vote against everything I am by voting for a conservative.

I chose the Democratic party because it was and remains the best fit for who I already was and who I am, on my own... I don't bend to fit a party mold and I don't bend the party to fit me.

I won't support or vote for any candidate running on any conservative party's ticket and I won't support or vote for any conservative running on my party's ticket. I am not a conservative.

I will not vote for anyone who is too dishonest, too stupid or too wussy to run on the ticket of a party well-suited to his/her politics.

I will not support or vote for any single-issue, narrow-focus or axe-to-grind candidate.

I WILL support and vote for broad-focus liberal/progressive independents and liberal/progressive candidates running on the tickets of parties that are well suited to their politics when my party has failed to field a broad focus liberal/progressive candidate for that seat.

If there is no candidate suitable to my requirements in a candidate -- I abstain from voting in that race.

...And here's a fun fact for those of you who buy into the nauseating spin that the heartland is a wholesome conservative utopia while the west coast and upper north east are raunchy liberal hellholes -- this secular, liberal, progressive Democrat was born, bred and still resides in a small, rural county in America's heartland.

Election musings...

I keep hearing little murmers (heart murmers?) that to ensure 16 years of Democratic control of the executive branch, we should nominate Hillary, this election and Obama eight years, hence, because... get this... Hillary will be too old to run in eight years.

Here's the fun part: In eight years, Hillary will be about the same age McCain is now... so, if she'll be too old to run and serve in eight years, McCain is clearly too old to run and serve, NOW.

---

This morning, while surfing the TV dial, trying to get some local weather and news, I happened across the tail end of a morning show segment in which Tim Russert was just wrapping up an explanation of how it's likely, regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination, that the general election could end in an electorate tie and the Presidency be decided by Congress.

Uh... Tim... I think you're VASTLY over-estimating how well McCain's going to fare in November. To get out the vote, he not only has to win over large swaths of the "middle" and sway some Dems to his side, he has to win over the voters in his OWN party, that SHOULD be, but aren't, guaranteed votes! ...And with this weird "bio" tour of his, he's boring even his own core constuency into a group coma. Yeah... nothing like a good nap to fire up the base!

----

Another little murmer from the grass... should Hillary drop out?

My primary has passed. I didn't vote for either Hillary or Obama... and I didn't abstain... I voted for someone else, whose idea of which direction is "forward" came closest to my own. This was the first primary in a long time, that my party's nomination wasn't decided before I got a chance to weigh in. The same thing that makes me a Democrat, makes that very important to me... and it was SUCH a good feeling to participate in the selection, again, after all this time.

We're hearing reports from voters in states who, if Hillary stays in the race, will get to participate for the first and possibly only time in their lives. I want that for them, so I hope Hillary stays in to the bitter end (or that if things swing very heavily to her favor in the remaining states, that Barack stays in 'til the bitter end.) While I don't love the idea of super delegates breaking a statistical tie -- it's the tie-breaker that's been written into procedure for a long time.

--------
Finally... a couple of rumblings that almost tickle me, because they come from a complete lack of knowledge about who's who, politically.

First -- the whole race/gender thing with Barack and Hillary. Yes, it's historic that whichever gets our nod will be a groundbreaking first. BUT, does race or gender affect November? NO. As I've said, before, anyone for whom that's a factor at all, much less a deciding factor won't vote for ANY Democrat, regardless of race or gender.

Second -- I keep hearing that the Dems are bitterly divided between Barack and Hillary and that this signals a self-destructive rift in the Democrat party that could result in the death of the party.

Uh... nope.

The Democrat party is, by the nature of its members, a diverse party of diverse ideas, vision, motivation, focus, skills, etc. We're at our best, strongest and most unified when we DON'T agree 100% on everything.

We have taken a LOT of flack (mostly from lock-stepping Republicans hoping to convince the middle we're floundering as a party) for failing to have and deliver a "core message" -- but we wouldn't be Democrats if we DID have a so-called core message. We don't run our party for office, individuals run on our party's ticket. Whether at the polls or in Congress, etc. we don't vote as a unified block, we decide and vote as individuals.

We are a party of individuals.

Gravel Exits Stage Left...and Stage Right...

I've been saying, since Gravel first blipped on my political radar, back in April of '06, when he became the first person of either major party to throw his hat into the 2008 ring, that I thought he might really lean more toward Libertarian than Democrat.

I got a heads-up, earlier today, that Mike Gravel is indeed officially switching parties from Democratic to Libertarian and will be making an announcement to that effect, today. (He may have already made it, by now.)

Not a big surprise. Left socially, Right economically... I think the Libertarian party will be a better fit for him.

So long and thanks for all the sales in my shops, Mike. (Curiously, to date, Gravel merch has far outsold Barack and Hillary merch, put together, in my shops.)

Promoting Abstinence...

There are lots of new goodies in the Melhi Ink shop I have on CafePress, since the last time I mentioned the shop. I try not to post much about my shops, since this blog isn't about the shops, but one political design is about as omni-partisan as it gets and I thought it might be of interest:



I'd rather abstain than vote for McCain

(on bumperstickers, t-shirts, yard signs and more.)

Frankly, I was shocked to discover that McCain is the true uniter! But, thanks to him, it looks like there's finally something on which Democrats & Rebuplicans, Liberals & Conservatives, the left & the right agree. Heh.

BassAckward Punditry...

The Republicans have their nominee in John McCain. Our nominee is not yet determined and so, the contest between Hillary and Barack continues.

If you listen to the pundits, media, party insiders in both major parties or even the average Joe flapping his jaws on the topic, you might believe this gives a clear competitive edge to McCain, in regards to the general election, in November.

Here's the theory behind that mindset:

1. John McCain knows he's the nominee for his party and can begin campaigning for the office he'll be seeking in the Nov. General Election.

2. Barack and Hillary must, instead, focus solely on the race FOR the nomination and against one another. Only after our eventual nominee is chosen, can our nominee begin campaigning for the office he or she will be seeking in the Nov. General Election.

Here's why that theory is backward.

1. Part of any candidate's campaign for his/her party's nomination already includes and must include campaigning for the office he/she hopes to be seeking in November. Knowing what kind of President Barack intends to be vs. what kind of President Hillary intends to be is vital to our deciding between them in the race for the nomination.

2. There are two parts to every campaign --
A. Running FOR the office and/or nomination you are seeking
B. Competing AGAINST your opponent(s.)

The edge for November clearly lies with Barack and Hillary. Not only is each already letting Americans know why they should be our next President, each already knows who the opponent will be in November. While only one of them will get the nomination, both of them will be campaigning for our nominee to defeat him. Each of them can begin campaigning specifically against McCain, now -- they both differ from McCain, but in different ways from one another and there's no law or point of rule to prevent either of them from making their differences from McCain a part of their campaigns, now.

By contrast, McCain no longer has to put any of his campaign focus on defeating a competitor for his party's nomination. But, that's been true for quite some time in this campaign season. He can certainly continue to campaign FOR the office of President.

But, but when it comes to competing against his eventual opponent, he has three options. He can put it off until he has an actual opponent. He can split his competitive focus between running against Barack and running against Hillary. ...Or he can turn it into a purely partisan "McCain vs Any Democrat."

We've had eight years of hearing that all Republicans are good Christian, America loving, straight, moral, decent, protectors of all that is good in the world and that all Democrats are evil terrorist-abetting American-hating, atheist, immoral, public-gay-orgy-having threats to everything decent. Voters of every political persuasion have seen that neither extreme is true. So, running against the evils of "any candidate" from an opposing party, instead of against a specific candidate, for any length of time, is likely only to damage a candidate's chances for a win in November.

That leaves only the options to put off competing or to spend precious campaing time and resources running against two different might-be opponents.

The advantage is clearly to the future Democratic nominee, if Barack and Hillary both adopt the following strategy: "Here's why I'm going to be a great President, here's how my Presidency would differ from my Democratic opponent's and this is why you shouldn't let McCain anywhere near the Oval Office." Don't give McCain any similarities to exploit, each should compete with McCain on areas where both differ from McCain, but also differ from one another.

The more schizophrenic McCain's efforts to compete against both, as potential opponents, the better for whichever eventually wins our nomination.

Will they both run brilliant gambits for the end game as they duke it out for control of the blue squares or will they just continue to play to the next move, ceding a portion of their advantage to the red king? My money's on the latter, but they're both smart, surrounded by smart people and ultimately on the same side, so there's at least a hair's breadth of a chance they'll wise up.

...And this is from his own party!

(I didn't make this... I found it on YouTube)

Props to George W. Bush

Until very recently, I would never have believed I'd be giving George W. Bush props, but I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't give credit where it's due.

George W. Bush (yes, the one in the Oval Office, not some dude with the same name) taught us one very valuable thing... showing us by example of a job (I'm almost choking on the words) well done.

He showed us exactly how to beat McCain.

WWRE? (Who Would Russ Endorse?)

Russ Feingold, upon announcing that he had decided against a 2008 Presidential bid, warned his supporters against supporting anyone for the Presidency who had voted for the Iraq War, whether they later regretted it or not, saying his first choice for President in 2008 would be someone who had voted against the war, and his second choice would be someone who wasn't in Congress but who spoke out against the war, at the time.


Of the seven remaining candidates on the red and blue ballots...

Hillary Clinton (Blue) - Voted Yea (see below)

Mike Gravel (Blue) -- Would have voted Nay. Was one of the first current or former elected officials to publicly oppose the planned invasion of Iraq in 2002 and has been very public in his opposition to the war, from the beginning.

Mike Huckabee (Red) -- Would have voted Yea. In his biography of 2007, he said he believed invading Iraq was the right thing to do.

John McCain (Red)-- Voted Yea (see below)

Barack Obama (Blue)-- Would have voted Nay. Delivered famous speech, against the Iraq war in Chicago's Rockafeller Plaza in Oct. 2002. Has been very public in his opposition to the war, from the beginning.

Ron Paul (Red) -- Would have voted Nay. Has been very outspoken, in a very public way, against the war from the beginning.

Mitt Romney (Red) -- Would have voted Yea. Has not only supported the war from the beginning, but has displayed a stunning ignorance of the events leading up to the war by stating, during the June 5 Presidential debate, that there wouldn't have been an Iraq war if Saddam had allowed the IAEA into Iraq to inspect (he DID) and the IAEA had found that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction (they DID find no "evidence of the continuation or resumption of programmes of weapons of mass destruction")

------------------------------------
Senate roll call on H.J.Res. 114 (Public Law 107–243), Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002:

Alphabetical by Senator Name:

Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Campbell (R-CO), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Carnahan (D-MO), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Nay
Cleland (D-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corzine (D-NJ), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Nay
Gramm (R-TX), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Helms (R-NC), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Hutchinson (R-AR), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Miller (D-GA), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-NH), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thompson (R-TN), Yea
Thurmond (R-SC), Yea
Torricelli (D-NJ), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wellstone (D-MN), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Nay

-------------------

State of the Union...

Wow... Bush has a long list of things he intends to do in the remainder of his term. So much, he probably should have gotten started chipping away at the list awhile ago... like maybe 7 years ago.

Among other things, he made it very clear that he has a plan that, once put in action, would give us a surplus by 2012.

Pssssst... Dubya... I know you're basking in the thunderous Republican applause you got from that little gem, but... uh... two things:

1. We HAD a surplus... you replaced it with a deficit.
2. You made Clinton out to be a thief of Americans' pocketbooks for having the audacity to operate the nation at a profit... I still have the bad taste in my mouth from cashing the check from what you said was my share of the surplus -- I should have been cashing that check after I retire... and it should have come from the Social Security office.

So suck up that applause, Dubya... I'm just glad the end of this dark time you plunged us into is in sight.

...And yes, the union is strong, because we the people are strong and enduring -- in spite of everything you did to break us down.

Stimulating Whose Economy?

First, my appologies for taking so long to find time to blog on this. Like most Americans, I'm working around the clock. In my case, most of the work I'm doing is currently not compensated with a paycheck. I'm working, for free, as a member of the DeWitt County Development Council to help turn our local economy around and I'm busting my ascii almost around the clock, building a business to help improve not only the household economies of those of us working to build this beast, but to take the bite out of the bottom lines of businesses in an entire, huge, domestic industry... so that the savings will be passed along to every American who's struggling to make ends meet and maybe achieve a little of the American dream in the process. That said...

By now, you've no doubt seen the press on the bipartisan emergency stimulus package. Neither party is particularly thrilled with it, but boy are they quick to dangle that dazzling rebate in our faces.

What a shiny thing it is, too -- a $700 to $1200 (or higher) lump sum rebate payment. It sounds pretty darned good when you're deciding between fuel for the vehicle that gets you to the job that feeds your family or fuel for the bellies of the family you work so hard to provide for.

But, will it do what they say it will? Will we go spend it on beads and baubles at the big box discount store, thus stimulating the American economy by creating a demand for beads and baubles that will, in turn, create jobs in the beads and baubles industries?

You and I know the answer to that question is a huge, resounding "No." But, then, it's a little hard for us to lose touch with economic reality when we're the ones out here trying to survive it.

If they were in our shoes, they'd realize that we've been struggling to make ends meet for so long that $700 - $1200 isn't nearly enough to catch most of us up. Most of us will probably spend that money on necessities and catching up on bills.

But, even if we did all go out, en masse, to spend our little rebate windfalls on beads and baubles -- it wouldn't stimulate OUR economy, because we don't manufacture beads or baubles or much of anything else, here, anymore.

We have the economic equivalent of a gaping belly wound -- a band-aid isn't going to do anything to improve or even stabilize our condition. We need a real emergency cure, an enduring one, that stops the bleeding and keeps our money, here... or we're going to bleed to death.

That's the simple truth of it.

Eenie Meenie Miney...NO!!

I definitely won't be giving my primary vote to any of the top three candidates. I'm not terribly thrilled with any of them, to be quite frank. The best thing I can say about them is that the worst of them is still a damned sight better than anyone vying for the nomination on the red ballot.

What are some of the kinds of things are bugging me about the contenders in the big blue donkey race? Let me give you some examples for each:

Obama - Promised, repeatedly, that if elected to the Senate he would serve at least one full term before running for President. Broke that promise to voters, party workers and countless campaign volunteers several months before completing even one full year of his six year term.

Hillary -- two words: Wal-mart, NAFTA.

Edwards -- Two Americas... namely, his unabashed support, thereof. Example: One America for legal US citizens, legal immigrants and foreign students studying in the US under legal VISAs who have to pay the higher out of state college tuition rates when they fail to meet state residency requirements to qualify for lower in-state tuition rates and Another America for illegal immigrants who pay the lower in-state tuitioon rate despite failure to establish legal residence in ANY US state.

Richardson -- Voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. Supports "sanctuary cities" and drivers licenses for illegal immigrants, supports NAFTA, WTO & GATT.


Dodd -- Voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. Supports national tobacco smoking ban but, at the same time, supports decriminalization of marijauna. Wants to include undocumented illegal immigrant workers in health plan.


Biden -- Words don't match actions:
Said this, "...I don't think the government can dictate the definition of marriage to religious institutions. But government does have an obligation to guarantee that every individual is free of discrimination. And there's a distinction. I think government should not be able to dictate to religions the definition of marriage, but on a civil side, government has the obligation to strip away every vestige of discrimination as to what individuals are able to do in terms of their personal conduct"
Did this: Voted FOR the Defense of Marriage Act, which effectively bans churches of any religion or denomination from deciding for themselves, as they have the right to do concerning opposite gendered couples, whether or not to join same sex couples in legal marriage (civil) as well as in holy matrimony (religious.)

Gravel -- His "fair tax" plan is plenty fair to the same people the Bush tax plan is plenty fair to. His compromise health care voucher plan, while standing the best chance of passing Congress, of any health care plan put forth by any other candidate on either the blue or the red ballot, leaves MUCH to be desired and, if passed, would more than likely have the unintended (by Gravel) impact of preventing progression to universal health care, just as the "don't ask don't tell" compromise has so effectively prevented lifting the ban on gays in the military.

Kucinich -- Wants to ban handguns. Wants to extend more rights and protections to illegal immigrants. Supports national tobacco smoking ban but, at the same time, supports decriminalizing marijuana.


Heavy Sigh

Ethical Economics...

First, let me wish each of you a Happy Festivus, Belated Joyous Yule (Ves Heil!) and Belated Happy Solstice (the light is waxing!) to each of you.

As many of you are blissfully unaware, I have some uniquely ethical business philosophies I'm very proud to say that my friend and business partner in USBuyBid shares. I don't meet many entrepreneurs who share my mindset -- so far, outside of my own bloodline, I've met a grand total of one... the aforementioned friend and biz partner, Samuel.

Aside from working almost round the clock on developing USBuyBid with Samuel, I also have my own little semi-backburnered project, designing for products such as t-shirts, greeting cards, bumper stickers, etc. which I sell through shops on various Print on Demand fullfillment services.

I have at least one design available, in at least one shop, on each of 7 such services -- CafePress (my primary shop,) Printfection (my secondary shop and Evil shop) Zazzle (ties & keychains,) ArtsNow (supplemental shop for TONS of products per design,) E-shirt (just a handful of test designs,) Greeting Card Universe (just a couple of test designs) and Skreened (the inspiration for this post.)

As I went about the traditional preparations for my annual December gift-giving Holiday - sorting the gift bags and boxes I re-use, each year, by whose tag is on them -- a win-win-win tradition that saves trees, money AND landfill space -- my mind wandered to what I'd most like to have in a POD fulfillment service.

My wish list was as follows:

Tie-dye base apparel
Magnetic Bumper Stickers
More "Made in America" products
Sweat-free apparel
Hemp products
"made from recycled..." products
More "Organic" cotton apparel


Not expecting to find any of them, I went searching for the first two things I listed -- magnetic bumper stickers and Tie-dye base apparel. I did't find them, of course. But, I found a number of POD services I was previously unaware existed, including one, Skreened.com, which I was most surprised and thrilled to find because they're an American owned, American operated business, located in Ohio, that offers two of the things on my list, exclusively: a small assortment of sweat-free shirts all made in the USA, in a variety of colors.

I had to pinch myself to make sure I wasn't dreaming! I wasn't -- they're real and some more digging turned up their blog, which includes some indications that they share some of my own business philosophies. I couldn't sign up fast enough! This is a service I can feel REALLY good about each and every thing I sell through them... or buy through them.

It's a little late in the Fred (sometimes referred to as "Christmas") Shopping season to suggest that you check them out for December Holiday gifts you can feel particularly good about giving, but there are lots of good designs to choose from and I highly recommend checking them out and bookmarking them for the next time you're shopping for yourself or a loved one -- help keep American workers employed and earning a living wage, by buying sweat-free American made:

www.skreened.com
or, if you just want to check in on my slow progress in building a presence there, Click Here

(Those who are interested can find most of my other shops by punching "Melhi" and the name of the service into a search engine.)

Oh and it's a couple of days early, but... Merry Christmas.

Io Saturnalia - 2007

It's probably not pre-printed on your commercially produced calendar, but Dec. 17 kicks off the week long Saturnalia. Of the ancient December holidays and its modern variants, Saturnalia is my personal favorite and many of the trappings of a modern Christmas -- whether secular, religious or a mix of both, were taken from the traditional trappings of the Saturnalia celebration.

Amidst all the ruckus, in recent years, about the imaginary war on Christmas, there have been calls for a move away from the traditional greetings of my secular December holiday and a simultaneous return to even older, more traditional December holiday greetings.

Life is a series of choices and each of us gets to choose how to react to the world going on around us. As such, I can either allow the joy to be sucked out of my holiday by being incensed that anyone would have the audacity to ask me to give up traditions I hold dear and that trace back through several generations of my family while, at the same time, accusing me of waging war on their traditions simply by having and practicing my own or I can acknowledge that while the war is imaginary, the pain is real and make peace with those who've mistaken me for their enemy by taking this suggestion to heart and at face value. I've chosen to do the latter.

So, it is in the spirit of forging a lasting holiday peace, celebrating kinship, friendship, vitality & life and sharing my seasonal joy with those whose treasured company and presence on this Earth makes my own time on this orbiting rock seem to pass far too quickly, that I extend to you and yours a most joyous and heartfelt, ancient and traditional Saturnalia greeting....

Io Saturnalia!! Cast off your toga!!!

Mitts Off My Country, Romney!

Mitt Romney wanted to make 3 things very clear tonight.

1. His religion shouldn't matter to any voter. (I'll agree with that. Render unto God what is God's, unto Caesar what is Caesars... Pray not in the streets.... )

2. If he's elected President, he won't be representing just ONE religion. (Could have been worded better... the President isn't supposed to represent ANY religion, but the President is supposed to represent ALL Americans... and that means people of many different religions or even no religion... )

3. Our religion or lack there of DOES matter to Mitt -- because if he's elected President, he absolutely will NOT be representing the secular humanist scourge that has infested America. (WTF?!?!)

Mission Accomplished Mr. Romney. Message received loud and clear!!!

You have no intention of representing me. I'm not American enough for you. I'm everything that's wrong with everything everywhere. You're better than me and better than several generations of my secularist American forebears. *cough* You also suffer from delusions of grandeur, you bigoted f**Ktard. *cough*

Actually it's good that Romney doesn't want to represent me -- doesn't look like he's going to get the chance to represent anyone, anyway... and that gives him less to be disappointed about.

I hope low-budget "who the Heckabee" wipes the floor with Mitt Romney in Iowa.

Whole Lott-a Speculation Going On

Seems like everybody's all a-twitter since Trent Lott announced, just this last Monday, that he'll be retiring five years before his six year term is up.

Speculation abounds and there seem to be as many theories as to why he's getting out of Dodge, barely a year after asking voters for the privelege of another six year term, as there are people talking about it. Is he still confused as to why praising Strom's 1948 political campaign was political self-mutilation? Does it have something to do with recent raids? Is there some other scandal brewing? Did he suddenly remember, as so many Republicans have during the Dubya adminionstration, that he has a family? Is it just no fun now that the big red rubber stamp is gone?

In honor of Trent Lott's resignation, I'd like to suggest a moment of silence... a break from worrying about WHY he's resigning, to savor and enjoy that he IS resigning.

Ahhhh... now, didn't that feel good?

Trent... if you're reading this buddy... so long and don't let the door hit you on the way out!

(singing quietly to self: "...and another one's gone and another one's gone and another one bites the dust...")

Sick?

Bush has vowed to veto a bill that would increase funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program by $35 billion.

Does he hate children? Good question, but be assured dear reader, by vetoing the bill he's not keeping affordable health care out of the reach of children whose families make too much to qualify for medicaid, but whose hard work still isn't enough to put decent private health insurance within financial reach.

No. Bush is looking out for smokers (like me)and for all the middle class children (like mine) who might suddenly find themselves potential victims of government run socialized medicine (as opposed to commercially run socialized medicine aka private health insurance.)

Bush knows that we can't afford to waste money on something as trifling as health care for American children. We just don't have the money, without a tax increase that might impact on the wealthy, who can least afford such an increase. Why, just look at how much a billionaire's family pays each month for private health insurance compared to what a working class family without health insurance pays each month for their coverage!

So, those slimy liberals in Washington found a way they might be able to sneak a tax increase by Bush... tax a product it's popular to hate, right now and that more poor and working class people than wealthy people are likely to consume! Cigarettes! Foxy!

But, thankfully, as sharp as they were, George W. Christ was sharper! He saw right through their two-fold plot to put the hurt on wealthy tobacco industry families while, at the same time, condemning millions of working class children to the evils of non-commercial socialized medicine. ...and, like the mythical, messianic, comic book hero that he is, he sprang into action!

Hitting the airwaves, he quickly reassured the people that he would veto this vile piece of legislation -- citing the many dangers cleverly hidden within the legislation and reissuing the threat that began with Nixon, and which every Republican President since has vowed to make good on:
If any version of universal health care is passed in this country, they'll see to it that it's micromanaged to death by the government and doctors are so far removed from decisions concerning the care of their patients that it's even more impossible to get health care expenses covered than it is with commercial enterprise micromanaging it to death and removing doctors from decisions concerning the care of their patients.

If you're still not sure you want to support Bush on this... just look at how deeply in debt the big commercial suppliers of health insurance have become... at how destitute the CEOs at the helm of these sinking ships are. Is that the kind of expense and loss you, as a taxpayer and thus stakeholder in America's financial solvency want to be burdened with?!

As someone who's experienced chronic nausea, headaches and anxiety since late 2000 or early 2001 and might thus be tempted to support non-commerical health care for every American, I get chills down my spine just thinking about how lucky we are to have Bush watching out for us and our 35 billion in tax dollars... don't you?

Meanwhile, in other news...

"The year 2008 is likely to be the most expensive year of the Iraq war, if the Congress approves President Bush's request for an additional $47 billion for war funding"

Hey, maybe we can fund that increase with a 61 cent per quarter pound tax on fast food hamburgers!

My Next Prez...

From Russ Feingold:

Today we are launching the "My President Will Be…" online campaign. As you will see, we put a different – and some might say slightly humorous – spin on an old Bob Dylan video, aimed at engaging the progressive community in a conversation about the qualities we want our next President to have. So take a look, forward to your friends, and upload your photos at www.ProgressivePatriotsFund.com today. Thanks so much for continuing to help move our country in a better direction.

Sincerely,

U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
Honorary Chair
Progressive Patriots Fund

Here are my wishful thoughts... what are yours?


My next President will be...

on OUR side.

weilding OUR voices.

working around the clock to undo the damage that has been done.

above calling my love of country into question to draw attention away from his misdeeds.

honest and ethical.

the first to admit when (s)he's made a mistake.

actively and agressively putting Americans first.

rebuilding our gulf coast, instead of rebuilding Iraq.

bringing our troops home from Iraq.

making sure we repay the debt we owe our veterans and the loved ones our fallen veterans have left behind.

deeply respectful of the sacrifice our troops have volunteered to make for us.

bringing jobs back to the U.S.

well informed, intelligent and thoughtful.

aware that he is our peer representative and that he represents all of us, not just those who voted or who voted for him or who come from a specific state or make a certain amount of money, etc.

a man (or woman) who counts the phrases "We the People...," "Of, by and for the People..." and "E Pluribus Unum" among his/her most cherished pieces of the foundation of this country -- and who fully comprehends, embraces and incorporates into his/her job, the meaning behind those phrases.

well spoken.

adaptive.

honored to have been granted the rare privelege to represent us.

a Democrat with a spine... and a mouth... like me, like Senator Russ Feingold... like most of us.