The Curmudgeon has been wondering the last couple of days how the Grumpy Old Man (a.k.a. John McCain) has become the leading candidate for the Republican Party. ( Not that the Curmudgeon doesn’t appreciate a certain amount of grumpiness in an old man. If fact the Curmudgeon would argue that once you reach a certain age grumpiness is the only reasonable view on life.)
But how did this Grumpy Old Man become the leading candidate? Most Republicans disagree with him on nearly all of the issues. They hate his amnesty for illegal aliens (McCain/Kennedy). The hate his campaign finance reforms (McCain/Feingold). They are almost apoplectic that he believes there could be man-made causes for global warming. He actually voted against tax cuts!! How can he be leading?
The one thing Republicans seem to agree with him on is the war. Of course, he is dead wrong in his enthusiasm to continue Bush’s War On Iraq. One in which the Grumpy Old Man expects we will be involved in for 100 years, but all the other Republican candidates are warmongers too. (Sorry, Ron Paul still doesn’t count.) Which makes me wonder something else:
(DISCLAIMER: The following is NOT politically correct. For those of you with tender sensibilities, it is suggested that you skip ahead a couple of paragraphs.)
Why is John McCain considered a natural for Commander-In-Chief? The Curmudgeon realizes that he was in the military, but it appears he wasn’t particularly good at it. He didn’t lead any successful wars (i.e. Colin Powell & Norman Schwarzkopf). He got captured and spent five and a half years as a prisoner of war. Although he apparently behaved in an heroic manner while a POW that does not really mean he would be a great military leader. Getting captured is not generally defined as successful.
The same pitch was made that George W. Bush would bring his business experience to the White House as the first president with an MBA. No one seemed to care that W. was not very good at business and managed to lose a great deal of money in the process. They didn’t call his oil company ArBUSTo for nothing. Sorry but I just don’t see the Grumpy Old Man as a naturally great military leader. Maybe he will do for the military what W. has done for the economy. Whoopie!
(Now back to the rant at hand. Don’t tell me if I hurt your sensibilities. You were fairly warned.)
The only explanation for the Grumpy Old Man to win in Florida, where only registered Republicans could vote in the primary, was that it was Florida’s attempt to apologize for 2000. It is mostly their fault that W became president and we are now stuck in a 100 year war on innocent people and a failing economy at home.
They are sorry and are trying to make it up to the rest of the country. If the Grumpy Old Man had won the Republican nomination in 2000 things would almost certainly be better today than they are. So even the Republicans in Florida feel so bad about what they did in 2000 that they voted for the anti-Bush in 2008.
Nice try Florida, but you are not forgiven.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Friday, January 25, 2008
Can't You Just Feel the Excitement?
The Curmudgeon had the “pleasure” of spending a few days this week in the lovely cities of Sugar Land and Beaumont. Bet you’re jealous.
There is no good way to travel from Austin to those exotic locales except to just hitch up the team and head out over land. That resulted in just over a 500 mile round trip. Luckily for you readers I was able to spend some quality time thinking deep thoughts. I’ll begin sharing some of them with you.
Realizing it was going to take quite some time for the Conestoga wagon to cover that distance it became apparent that there needed to be something to do to provide a distraction. I wanted to measure the excitement in the hinterlands about the upcoming Presidential race and then I remembered something that Lyndon Johnson once said.
President Johnson said that if you wanted to measure the commitment that a candidate for office had you needed to look at the bumper stickers on the cars passing by, because in Texas a person who will put your bumper sticker on their car is certainly going to vote for you. So I set out to keep a record of the bumper stickers I saw once I left Travis County.
Results: Zip, Zero, Nada
Maybe one or two slipped by me, but I kept my eyes out and the only presidential bumper sticker I saw was on a old beat up pickup with a gun rack. It said Bush/Cheney. I’m pretty sure it was from 2000.
Additionally not a single person I talked to mentioned the race without prompting. They were fairly evenly split between Hillary, Obama & McCain when I pushed them, but virtually all would have been willing to vote None of the Above.
Can’t wait until our turn to vote.
There is no good way to travel from Austin to those exotic locales except to just hitch up the team and head out over land. That resulted in just over a 500 mile round trip. Luckily for you readers I was able to spend some quality time thinking deep thoughts. I’ll begin sharing some of them with you.
Realizing it was going to take quite some time for the Conestoga wagon to cover that distance it became apparent that there needed to be something to do to provide a distraction. I wanted to measure the excitement in the hinterlands about the upcoming Presidential race and then I remembered something that Lyndon Johnson once said.
President Johnson said that if you wanted to measure the commitment that a candidate for office had you needed to look at the bumper stickers on the cars passing by, because in Texas a person who will put your bumper sticker on their car is certainly going to vote for you. So I set out to keep a record of the bumper stickers I saw once I left Travis County.
Results: Zip, Zero, Nada
Maybe one or two slipped by me, but I kept my eyes out and the only presidential bumper sticker I saw was on a old beat up pickup with a gun rack. It said Bush/Cheney. I’m pretty sure it was from 2000.
Additionally not a single person I talked to mentioned the race without prompting. They were fairly evenly split between Hillary, Obama & McCain when I pushed them, but virtually all would have been willing to vote None of the Above.
Can’t wait until our turn to vote.
Damned Writer's Strike
Because of it there was absolutely nothing on TV last night so I actually watched about the last 45 minutes of the Republican debate.
Impressions:
Mr. 9/11: He is the scariest candidate I can ever remember. He just looks and sounds scary. Those glasses that magnify is eyes are too much. If he is inagurated on January 19th he will nuke somebody by Feb. 1.
Ron Paul: Three words: Bat Shit Crazy!!!
The Mormon: Too slick, too made-up. He is most likely a robot of some kind. I don't think he is an actual human being. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't make the best President of this horrid bunch.
H*ck the Hick: I believe he was probably quite at home when he lived in the trailer house on the lawn of the Arkansas Governor's Mansion. Goober Pyle should not be President of the U S of A.
Grumpy old Man: Does he really think he is funny? Nobody in the Republican Party likes this guy. They certainly don't trust him because he usually votes against them. But when he tries to be funny he comes across like the Great Uncle that you won't let be alone in the same room as your children.
The Lazy Actor Guy: I'm not sure if he was there or not. It is always so hard to tell with him. Has he officially dropped out, or is it too much effort to pick up the phone and tell somebody?
Is this really all the Republicans have? I heard an NPR story (with lovely musical interludes) this week where they were interviewing Republican voters in Florida. One of the voters was hoping Mr. 9/11 would win Florida because he thought that might bring them closer to a brokered convention where the Gray-Beards of the GOP could choose somebody else as the nominee.
Wishful thinking, but looking at this motley crew you can't blame him for hoping.
Impressions:
Mr. 9/11: He is the scariest candidate I can ever remember. He just looks and sounds scary. Those glasses that magnify is eyes are too much. If he is inagurated on January 19th he will nuke somebody by Feb. 1.
Ron Paul: Three words: Bat Shit Crazy!!!
The Mormon: Too slick, too made-up. He is most likely a robot of some kind. I don't think he is an actual human being. But that doesn't mean he wouldn't make the best President of this horrid bunch.
H*ck the Hick: I believe he was probably quite at home when he lived in the trailer house on the lawn of the Arkansas Governor's Mansion. Goober Pyle should not be President of the U S of A.
Grumpy old Man: Does he really think he is funny? Nobody in the Republican Party likes this guy. They certainly don't trust him because he usually votes against them. But when he tries to be funny he comes across like the Great Uncle that you won't let be alone in the same room as your children.
The Lazy Actor Guy: I'm not sure if he was there or not. It is always so hard to tell with him. Has he officially dropped out, or is it too much effort to pick up the phone and tell somebody?
Is this really all the Republicans have? I heard an NPR story (with lovely musical interludes) this week where they were interviewing Republican voters in Florida. One of the voters was hoping Mr. 9/11 would win Florida because he thought that might bring them closer to a brokered convention where the Gray-Beards of the GOP could choose somebody else as the nominee.
Wishful thinking, but looking at this motley crew you can't blame him for hoping.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Perry Hides Perry's Million Dollars
Bob Perry has long been known as the primary financier of the Forces of Evil. And he has long been known as the primary financier of Rick Perry. So why try to hide the fact?
What is the point of Bob Perry giving $1 million to the Republican Governors Association so that the Republican Governors Association can give $1 million to Rick Perry?
There is only one possible explanation; they were trying to hide the fact that Bob Perry was giving Rick Perry $1 million more. Why would they try to hide that?
It is certainly no secret that Bob Perry has contributed tons of money to Rick Perry and to such notable groups as The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and Texans for Lawsuit Reform.
And it is no secret that Bob Perry has gotten virtually everything he has wanted from Rick Perry and the Republican led Texas Legislature. Tort reform and a pro-industry Texas Residential Construction Commission come to mind.
Did either Perry do anything illegal? Maybe not. Did the Republican Governors Association violate Texas election law? Maybe, probably not. Does Chris Bell’s lawsuit have a chance? Nope. (Hope there is no way for it to wind up in Sharon Keller’s court or Bell might get the death penalty.)
Was it stupid to try to hide the contribution? Absolutely.
Didn’t Craddick and Bill Hammond teach you anything? Didn’t you learn anything from Nixon? It is never what you did that really gets you; it is when you try to cover it up that you get into trouble.
Another $1 million from Bob Perry would have been a one day story. Now let’s watch it play out.
What is the point of Bob Perry giving $1 million to the Republican Governors Association so that the Republican Governors Association can give $1 million to Rick Perry?
There is only one possible explanation; they were trying to hide the fact that Bob Perry was giving Rick Perry $1 million more. Why would they try to hide that?
It is certainly no secret that Bob Perry has contributed tons of money to Rick Perry and to such notable groups as The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and Texans for Lawsuit Reform.
And it is no secret that Bob Perry has gotten virtually everything he has wanted from Rick Perry and the Republican led Texas Legislature. Tort reform and a pro-industry Texas Residential Construction Commission come to mind.
Did either Perry do anything illegal? Maybe not. Did the Republican Governors Association violate Texas election law? Maybe, probably not. Does Chris Bell’s lawsuit have a chance? Nope. (Hope there is no way for it to wind up in Sharon Keller’s court or Bell might get the death penalty.)
Was it stupid to try to hide the contribution? Absolutely.
Didn’t Craddick and Bill Hammond teach you anything? Didn’t you learn anything from Nixon? It is never what you did that really gets you; it is when you try to cover it up that you get into trouble.
Another $1 million from Bob Perry would have been a one day story. Now let’s watch it play out.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
They really, really do have WMDs
What should the leader of the free world do to the country that is harboring the terrorist who directed the attack on America on 9/11?
What should the leader of the free world do to the country whose military dictator suspends the constitution and cancels free elections?
Clearly the answer is he should give them $150 million a month. Forever.
That must be the right answer, or why else would George W. Bush be doing so. There has been little doubt that Osama bin Laden has been hiding in the mountain areas of Pakistan for years now. But our “friend” Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf has made only half-hearted shows of searching for him and has not allowed US troops into his country to search on their own. But he has been such a good “friend” we have sent him $11 billion since 9/11.
Funny that on 9/10 we were enforcing economic sanctions on Pakistan for such transgressions as testing a nuclear weapon in 1998 and our “friend” Gen. Musharraf taking control of the country in a coup in 1999.
And what have we gotten for our $11 billion? Not Osama bin Laden. And now not democracy.
Dick the Butcher’s famous line in Shakespeare’s Henry VI Part II has been taken to heart in Pakistan.
“First thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
In fairness we don’t know that Musharraf has had all the lawyers killed, yet. But he has had something like 3500 of them arrested. Why? So there is no one left to protest the fact that he has suspended the constitution and disbanded the courts.
But don’t worry our government is taking stern steps. George W. has already stepped forward with stern words about how they should have elections over there. Condoleezza Rice has gone so far as to say that if this activity continues we may even have to review our aid package.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/04/AR2007110400463.html?nav=rss_world
Really? We’re going to let little things like harboring the most wanted terrorist in the world and suspending all efforts at democracy come between us and our “friend.”
Well, no not really. We’re just going to review it. The $150 million will be given again next month, and the next, and the next, and…….. Who knows, maybe the review will determine that we just need to send them a little more. Maybe $200 million a month would help them more. After all, we can afford it. We’re only $9 trillion in debt. That’s $9,000,000,000,000.00. Our grandchildren’s grandchildren will be paying for this.
But it could get worse. Much worse. Remember the sanctions we imposed in 1998? We did that because they developed nuclear weapons. Not that somebody named Curveball said they wanted to develop nuclear weapons. But because they really did. We saw the explosion we they tested it. It works.
Pakistan is on the verge of becoming highly unstable and there are known terrorists there. What could possible go wrong?
“Send lawyers, guns and money. Dad, get me out of this.” Warren Zevon
What should the leader of the free world do to the country whose military dictator suspends the constitution and cancels free elections?
Clearly the answer is he should give them $150 million a month. Forever.
That must be the right answer, or why else would George W. Bush be doing so. There has been little doubt that Osama bin Laden has been hiding in the mountain areas of Pakistan for years now. But our “friend” Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf has made only half-hearted shows of searching for him and has not allowed US troops into his country to search on their own. But he has been such a good “friend” we have sent him $11 billion since 9/11.
Funny that on 9/10 we were enforcing economic sanctions on Pakistan for such transgressions as testing a nuclear weapon in 1998 and our “friend” Gen. Musharraf taking control of the country in a coup in 1999.
And what have we gotten for our $11 billion? Not Osama bin Laden. And now not democracy.
Dick the Butcher’s famous line in Shakespeare’s Henry VI Part II has been taken to heart in Pakistan.
“First thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”
In fairness we don’t know that Musharraf has had all the lawyers killed, yet. But he has had something like 3500 of them arrested. Why? So there is no one left to protest the fact that he has suspended the constitution and disbanded the courts.
But don’t worry our government is taking stern steps. George W. has already stepped forward with stern words about how they should have elections over there. Condoleezza Rice has gone so far as to say that if this activity continues we may even have to review our aid package.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/04/AR2007110400463.html?nav=rss_world
Really? We’re going to let little things like harboring the most wanted terrorist in the world and suspending all efforts at democracy come between us and our “friend.”
Well, no not really. We’re just going to review it. The $150 million will be given again next month, and the next, and the next, and…….. Who knows, maybe the review will determine that we just need to send them a little more. Maybe $200 million a month would help them more. After all, we can afford it. We’re only $9 trillion in debt. That’s $9,000,000,000,000.00. Our grandchildren’s grandchildren will be paying for this.
But it could get worse. Much worse. Remember the sanctions we imposed in 1998? We did that because they developed nuclear weapons. Not that somebody named Curveball said they wanted to develop nuclear weapons. But because they really did. We saw the explosion we they tested it. It works.
Pakistan is on the verge of becoming highly unstable and there are known terrorists there. What could possible go wrong?
“Send lawyers, guns and money. Dad, get me out of this.” Warren Zevon
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Recommeded Reading
“Exile” by Richard North Patterson
Although a work of fiction it is clearly very well researched. The story line is that the Prime Minister of Israel is assassinated in San Francisco. A Palestinian woman is arrested as the leader of a conspiracy to carry out the assassination. She is defended by a Jewish attorney.
Most of the book is a search for the root cause of the assassination, which is obviously the root cause of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The author, a NY Times Bestseller several times, is a wonderful story teller who goes to great lengths to examine the issues from both the Jewish and the Muslim points of view, with a couple of Christian Arab characters thrown in.
The primary question of the book is “When does history begin?”
How one answers that question is the key to how one views the Israeli/Palestinian conflict (and probably most others as well.)
As Americans, it is difficult for us to relate to people who are still caught up in the past. There are people all over the world who are constrained by the history of their ancestors in ways we do not understand. We believe history started either at our birth, 1836 if you are a true Texan, or 1776 . Maybe at 1492, but nothing much happened for nearly 300 years after that.
And we don’t worry much about what happened in the past either. We don’t hold a grudge against the British. We Texans don’t even hate Mexico. But other people are obsessed by history and the land of their forefathers. They are consumed by hatred for wrongs perpetrated generations ago. That is difficult for us to understand, but important for us to realize.
The only war Americans can’t seem to get over (other than the one we can’t currently get out of) is Vietnam. We don’t hate the Vietnamese, but we are obsessed with the Vietnam War and its reason and its outcome anytime we consider another conflict.
Of course, Vietnam is also the only war we didn’t win.
They say that history is written by the victors, but it seems it is perhaps remembered more by the losers. They remember and it festers, for generations. Understanding that is hard, but it is very real.
The lesson is likely that Muslims will hate our great-great grandchildren because of George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq. We are not winning “The War on Terrorism.” We are creating a feud that will never end.
Although a work of fiction it is clearly very well researched. The story line is that the Prime Minister of Israel is assassinated in San Francisco. A Palestinian woman is arrested as the leader of a conspiracy to carry out the assassination. She is defended by a Jewish attorney.
Most of the book is a search for the root cause of the assassination, which is obviously the root cause of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The author, a NY Times Bestseller several times, is a wonderful story teller who goes to great lengths to examine the issues from both the Jewish and the Muslim points of view, with a couple of Christian Arab characters thrown in.
The primary question of the book is “When does history begin?”
How one answers that question is the key to how one views the Israeli/Palestinian conflict (and probably most others as well.)
As Americans, it is difficult for us to relate to people who are still caught up in the past. There are people all over the world who are constrained by the history of their ancestors in ways we do not understand. We believe history started either at our birth, 1836 if you are a true Texan, or 1776 . Maybe at 1492, but nothing much happened for nearly 300 years after that.
And we don’t worry much about what happened in the past either. We don’t hold a grudge against the British. We Texans don’t even hate Mexico. But other people are obsessed by history and the land of their forefathers. They are consumed by hatred for wrongs perpetrated generations ago. That is difficult for us to understand, but important for us to realize.
The only war Americans can’t seem to get over (other than the one we can’t currently get out of) is Vietnam. We don’t hate the Vietnamese, but we are obsessed with the Vietnam War and its reason and its outcome anytime we consider another conflict.
Of course, Vietnam is also the only war we didn’t win.
They say that history is written by the victors, but it seems it is perhaps remembered more by the losers. They remember and it festers, for generations. Understanding that is hard, but it is very real.
The lesson is likely that Muslims will hate our great-great grandchildren because of George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq. We are not winning “The War on Terrorism.” We are creating a feud that will never end.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
The Boogey Man's Going to Get You Too.
If nothing else you have to give Tom Craddick credit for his ability to spin.
Headline in today’s Midland Reporter-Telegram is “Craddick says trial lawyers want new speaker to remove malpractice caps.”
http://www.mywesttexas.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18954138&BRD=2288&PAG=461&dept_id=475626&rfi=6
While that may be true, it is certainly not the reason that his leadership is being challenged. But trial lawyers are the right wing boogey man, so if you can paint any issue with their taint then you can get the wingnut base to rally around. The headline could just as easily read:
“Educators Want New Speaker to Ensure Adequate Funding for Public Education.”
“Child Advocates Want New Speaker to Protect Children’s Health Benefits.”
“Open Government Advocates Want New Speaker to Access Public Records.”
But those don’t have the same cache as “trial lawyers.”
This headline is the same as Bush saying we invaded Iraq in order to bring them freedom and democracy. Sure those things are on the list of things that could be accomplished, but he sold the war on WMDs. The real reasons were ousting Saddam and oil. Freedom and democracy were afterthoughts.
Just as tort reform is at best an afterthought to those seeking to oust Craddick. Sure maybe Dunnam and some of his cohorts would like to change the tort reform laws that have been passed, but they don’t have the ability to oust the Speaker. No, the Speaker is getting ousted by members of his own party who have little or no affection for the trials. It is being done because of his autocratic leadership style and his disdain for the will of the House.
But if Rove & Co. have taught us nothing else, we now know that if you say something long enough and loud enough some people will start to believe it and repeat it over and over on the radio until lots of people believe it. Cynics call it “drinking the kool-aid.”
If you believe Keffer, Pitts, McCall etc. want to overthrow Craddick because of tort reform and the trial lawyers, the Curmudgeon has got a bridge for sale.
Headline in today’s Midland Reporter-Telegram is “Craddick says trial lawyers want new speaker to remove malpractice caps.”
http://www.mywesttexas.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18954138&BRD=2288&PAG=461&dept_id=475626&rfi=6
While that may be true, it is certainly not the reason that his leadership is being challenged. But trial lawyers are the right wing boogey man, so if you can paint any issue with their taint then you can get the wingnut base to rally around. The headline could just as easily read:
“Educators Want New Speaker to Ensure Adequate Funding for Public Education.”
“Child Advocates Want New Speaker to Protect Children’s Health Benefits.”
“Open Government Advocates Want New Speaker to Access Public Records.”
But those don’t have the same cache as “trial lawyers.”
This headline is the same as Bush saying we invaded Iraq in order to bring them freedom and democracy. Sure those things are on the list of things that could be accomplished, but he sold the war on WMDs. The real reasons were ousting Saddam and oil. Freedom and democracy were afterthoughts.
Just as tort reform is at best an afterthought to those seeking to oust Craddick. Sure maybe Dunnam and some of his cohorts would like to change the tort reform laws that have been passed, but they don’t have the ability to oust the Speaker. No, the Speaker is getting ousted by members of his own party who have little or no affection for the trials. It is being done because of his autocratic leadership style and his disdain for the will of the House.
But if Rove & Co. have taught us nothing else, we now know that if you say something long enough and loud enough some people will start to believe it and repeat it over and over on the radio until lots of people believe it. Cynics call it “drinking the kool-aid.”
If you believe Keffer, Pitts, McCall etc. want to overthrow Craddick because of tort reform and the trial lawyers, the Curmudgeon has got a bridge for sale.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)