Obama wins both Hart’s Location, and Dixville Notch (in my wonderful New Hampshire). The ballot tally in Hart’s Location was 17-10 for Senator Obama. Dixville Notch gave Senator Obama a greater victory, 15-6!
The tally now stands at 32-16
John McCain is not expected to overcome this 16 vote deficit.
Sarah Palin sometime just before, and just after saying something completely asinine
Celebrities are notorious for saying some of the most outrageously asinine things that can be imagined. Tom Cruise, the master of glibness, has a streak of about 20 years of this, as does Jon Voight. These aren’t sane men, at least not if their silly comments are a peek into their actual worldview, and not just moments of confusion in front of the cameras. It doesn’t matter what their political views are, bat-shit insane extends throughout the whole spectrum. We expect this from them, and the other people famous for memorizing lines of dialogue, but Sarah Palin? She has a special place in the bat-shit insane category–a place reserved for those that should know better, but are just far too dumb to understand.
Politicians seeking the highest offices of the nation are supposed to be intelligent. They need to have the wherewithal to analyze and solve problems of such magnitude that history is affected by their decisions. A sound base of understanding and capability to piece together the various doctrines set forth by the forefathers and the preceding great administrators of our democracy is absolutely mandatory to make such decisions. One of the most basic of these doctrines is the Bill of Rights.
We should be able to expect that someone put forth as a major party candidate has a firm understanding of the Bill of Rights. It’s only twenty seven amendments that need to be understood, and one of those was repealed, simplifying the task. With sixteen years in politics, no matter the level she was serving at, one could reasonably expect Sarah Palin to have a firm grasp of these simple concepts. However, she has fallen far short of reasonable expectation, and her latest insight into the Bill of Rights leaves us no doubt as to the level of idiocy she has attained.
For those that have refused to read, or even take a quick gander at the Bill of Rights, here’s the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
There’s six main points within the this amendment, so let’s just take “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…”
Sarah Palin, in all of her glory, stated today:
If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations, then I don’t know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media.
How monumentally idiotic is this statement? Not all of the marble quarries, in all of the countries on earth, could possibly provide the material to celebrate this idiocy with a monument fittingly large enough. It’s that convoluted, that moronic, and that far off from what the First Amendment deals with. We expect more from a major party nominee for Vice President.
Let’s just deal with her First Amendment right to free speech, for the time being. She has the right to say a lot of things–there is no denying this–and she’s speaking very, very freely. Some could argue that she’s even riding a fine line between free speech, and speech that is slanderous (per se). I won’t go into that here, as slander is tort law, and we’re just dealing with the First Amendment in a more pure state.
She hasn’t been stopped, by any party, from speaking. Many, if not most, of her speeches are televised, broadcast around the country, and the world, for billions to hear. There has been no speech filter placed between herself and the masses huddled in front of the evening news, and no attempt to stop her from spouting off what she wants to on the stages constructed for that purpose. Her freedom of speech has not only not been denied, it has been amplified far beyond the common person’s ability.
Her assertion that the the press is threatening her ability to exercise her freedom of speech is ludicrous. She cites the “fear of attack” by the ‘mainstream media’ as that threat to her freedoms. Nowhere in the First Amendment does it state, nor in any precedent, that the press cannot examine and analyze the speech made by an individual to the point of making that person fearful to speak freely. On the contrary, the press is guaranteed to do such things, right there after the individual’s right to the freedom of speech.
The press needs to be free to criticize Sarah Palin’s various opinions and statements put forth in order for our democracy to function well. It’s not a matter of getting her to stop speaking, or to dissuade her from do so, but to inform the general public of the veracity (or lack thereof) and implications of the various statements she makes. The freedom of the press, especially in disseminating information and opinion contrary to that which is put forth by our politicians, is not only in the best interests of the public, it is mandatory for the continuation of informed voting.
This cockamamie argument that the press labeling some of her speech as ‘negative campaigning’ is abridging her freedom of speech is not only wrongheaded, but a dangerous mischaracterization of the First Amendment. Her speech has not been infringed upon in the slightest, and to posit that criticism of her statements by the press is harmful to her First Amendment rights is laughable. That same press, that ‘mainstream media’ that she is attacking is the same press that gives her hour upon hour of coverage…in her own words. She could have even more camera time, if she so chose, but her ineptness as answering even the simplest of questions has made the McCain campaign limit the outlets of her free, and mind-numbingly foolish, speech.
Sarah Palin, spare us your horrifically idiotic interpretations of the First Amendment. Your ignorance knows no bounds. Your freedoms have not been threatened, but if you get elected all of our freedoms will be threatened by your idiocy.
The Republican dominated Alaska State Legislature has found that Governor Sarah Palin has abused her powers as governor. What does this mean for the ‘Straight (Hate) Talk Express’? If she is not off the ticket by tomorrow morning, Sarah Palin and the Republican Party will be doing a disservice to the electorate, and her potential position as Vice President.
They will, no doubt, attempt to further rebuke the investigation by cries of partisanship, but the partisanship was toward the Republican side. A full 56 percent of the Alaska Legislature is Republican, so any attempts to call the findings into question is fool hardy and dishonest. There is a coalition between the Senate Democrats and some Senate Republicans, but it only because of Governor Palin’s despicable abuses.
She is now another corrupt Alaska politician, just like Ted Stevens (whose PAC she was the Director of), and should be turned away from ever holding and disgracing an office of public trust ever again. Wake up America, she is not a hockey mom, but a beast of deception and hatred. Blind, immoral abuse of power is not the stage of regular Joe six pack, but of those who wish for only their own ambition to be fulfilled.
William Milliken, the former governor of Michigan, made comments in today’s Grand Rapids Press about the tenor of John McCain’s campaign. “He is not the McCain I endorsed,” Milliken stated. He went on to scold the campaign for attacks that are far out of line in a civilized political discourse.
“I’m disappointed in the tenor and the personal attacks on the part of the McCain campaign, when he ought to be talking about the issues.”
I’m glad there’s one Republican that understands the dangerous waters that McCain is guiding his supporters into. When crowds at a political rally yell for the death and torture of the other candidate, you’re no longer living in the United States that is the beacon of freedom for the world, but rather a scandalous nation that is willing to allow death threats into the debate of issues.
I am, and have been, appalled at the hate baiting and implicit defining of Senator Obama as a foreign terrorist. It’s time that this conversation left the blogs, and starts on the TV screens. It’s time that it leaves our held tongues, and starts thundering in the atmosphere. No longer can we allow the McCain campaign to incite hatred and violence. No longer can we allow their rallies to double as White Power gatherings. It has got to stop, and to do so, we must start this conversation at a more visible level.
This is sure to be a controversial post, and I fully understand why. I don’t wish to wander into the deep, dark waters of intrigue and hatred, nor do I want to think of anyone on the national stage as having such naked and blind ambition as to take such a harmful tact. However, the events of the past weeks have come to pass, and they have not been imagined–they are as real as the throaty calls for death from McCain’s and Palin’s audiences. This is an unfortunate post to have to write, and I loathe the mere thought of my question being answered in an honest manner.
The day after the Vice Presidential debate, a new direction was given to the battered and languishing campaign of John McCain. They were awash in bad news on their most vulnerable issues, and this necessitated a move to refocus the electorates attention. Instead of confronting the issues at hand, or finding another legitimate issue with which to fight, they decided to use an old, haggard issue that had been beaten in to its grave months upon months ago. The Bill Ayers connection.
Hillary Clinton had used it, or tried to, anyway. It hadn’t worked. What was found out by hundreds and hundreds of reporters and opposition researchers was that no actual connection existed. Bill Ayers had been part of an educational challenge board supported by a grant by the Annenberg Foundation, a board on which Barack Obama sat. The connections ended there. There were no secret meetings, no ties to each other beside an interest in giving awards to children who performed at high levels in academic pursuits. Not exactly a smoking gun.
This couldn’t dissuade the conspiracy theorists and the rabid extremists. They knew there had to be more to it, something sinister and anti-American. After all, his middle name is Hussein. Such people are not rational. They don’t use Occam’s razor, or pose questions that may dismantle their theories, they only create more and more intricate reasons why something must be true. This has been going on for almost a year, and the cult of John McCain was ready to be exploited with the theory.
It was Sarah Palin who was first ordered to make the tactic official. She stood silently by as introductory speakers emphasized Senator Obama’s middle name, a reference meant to convey only one image—Arab terrorists. Make no mistake, there is no other reason to do it, and if you think the speakers did it on their own, well, you’ve never been involved in a federal campaign at any level worthy of mention. The crowds were prepped to think of only one thing while Sarah Palin spewed her hateful diatribes over the massive speaker systems, and it wasn’t hope, and it wasn’t change–it was a vehement wrath.
It’s not the mere connection they are trying to push between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers, it’s the words they are using, and the psychology they are misusing. Bill Ayers is referred to as a domestic terrorist, and Obama as ‘Barack Hussein Obama’, these aren’t disconnected ideas, not in the minds of Americans still fearful and mourning seven years after the tragic events of September 11, 2001. These words and ideas are intimately connected, Hussein, as in Saddam, and terrorist, as in the evil men who guided those massive planes to crash into the soul of every American that fateful morning.
The McCain campaign isn’t just wondering whether Barack Obama has larger connections to Bill Ayers, they are provoking people into something else. They are provoking Americans to be afraid of a man who hangs out with terrorists named Hussein, and to be scared for their lives because of this man. They are provoking audience members at their rallies to shout “Kill him!” and “Traitor!” They are provoking something greater than merely curiosity. They are provoking a violent reaction to a manufactured fear.
What is it that the McCain campaign wants those that feel this imminent terror to do? The conservative pundits would have you believe that they are only looking into to who Barack Obama really is, but some of us know this isn’t true. Some of us are scared they want something else to occur. Something outside the bounds of decency and patriotism, something outside any civilized democracy’s limits.
By inciting fear, a fear of a terrorist named Hussein taking control of their lives, the McCain campaign may very well be inciting action on that fear. What are those that believe McCain and Palin supposed to do? They cannot stand around and wait for the terrorist named Hussein to win the White House, they must act…
The question is whether that action is only a vote on November 4, or whether the act they want to occur should happen before that time. I never would desire to question the intentions of a man or an entire campaign in this manner, but the events of the past week have left us no choice but to wonder as to the true intentions of John McCain.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Declaration of Independence
I hereby dissolve any political bands that I may have with the people in the following video. I don’t want to be in the same country as them. I don’t want to think that they live on my block, or go to the same supermarket as me. These people are mindless zombies, devoid of reason, and angry for only the sake of another’s will.
John McCain and Sarah Palin have incited this type of mindset, this proto-violent wrath toward a fictitious Manchurian Candidate. They make claims that excite the fear within their constituents, a fear more base than elicited by those that speak of trilateral commissions, and UN world governments. Both parties, and also independents, have portions of their base that are vulnerable to such fear mongering. But this fear mongering isn’t a distant ill that one can stew over, this fear that they are promoting is immediate–only 20 some odd days away.
They know what they are doing, there is no ignorance in their accusations. They know that Republicans, as well as Democrats served on that educational board with Barack Obama and William Ayers. They know that William Ayers turned himself into police, and all of the charges against him had been dropped. They know that Wallis Annenberg, as well as the Annenberg Foundation (founded by Walter Annenberg, an Ambassador from the Nixon Administration, and life-long Republican), were involved with that board and educational challenge.They also know that they could be inciting violence–and they seem not to care.
Without further ado, the video of the hatred being instigated by McCain and Palin’s campaign:
68% Sen. Obama (55% before debate)
48% Sen. McCain (41% before debate)
Who understands voters needs and problems?
80% Sen. Obama (59% before debate)
44% Sen. McCain (33% before debate)
Who would bring real change?
63% Sen. Obama (51% before debate)
38% Sen. McCain (23% before debate)
Now committed to a candidate?
15% Sen. Obama
12% Sen. McCain
I think the numbers indicate something that the question “who won the debate” has trouble answering–who won the debate. People want to be ‘fair’ for some reason, but when asked more in depth questions, you see the disparity between the ‘who won’ question, and all the actual indicators of who actually came across better.
(please excuse my following use of very academic language)