Friday, August 31, 2007

T-Bone

I was nearly T-Boned last night. I was returning home on Duke Street, after a lovely evening that included sailing and Indian food. So what if I did some of the cooking, a good time, for a good cause, was had by all.

I'm stopped behind an SUV, and the light turned green, he proceeded through the intersection. But I noticed another SUV, who was about to make an illegal left turn, so I waited at the light. Had I proceeded per normal, he would have T-Boned me. As it was however, a police cruiser was only a few lanes to my right, had been traveling at a normal rate of speed. The cruiser had to take evasive action, turning a hard right, onto the sidewalk and hitting a pole, putting out the traffic light. The wrong SUV, stopped for a moment, the officer then got out of his cruiser. The SUV in the wrong, left. The officer shouted for him to stop, and gave him a little foot chase, but he was gone. I didn't get a plate number, so I left too. He'd already radioed for help, and I passed his back-up en route

I'm a defensive driver. But if I die in an "accident" I want somebody to have a tantrum.

Hillary Clinton was on Letterman last night. She isn't funny.

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Money, money, money

The Clinton camp is having money troubles, again. Yes, again. Do we remember Peter Paul? He's still suing them. He got some convictions against a Clinton employee. I know, just because the Clintons employ people who break the law, on behalf of the Clintons, doesn't reflect on them in the slightest. The Clintons have decided to give Mr. Hsu's contribution to charity, Donna Rice, check your mail. I know it seems like nothing, but considering how painful it is for any Clinton to part from a dime, anyone's dime, it's pretty fair. Besides, Hsu is still hosting a fund-raiser for Hillary next month. Are we finished talking about the creative bookkeeping practices that enabled a struggling family, whose only breadwinner brings home 47k per annum? How did that family contribute so much to the Clinton fund? And even more importantly, WHY?!? Personally, I could have mocked the Clintons no matter who laundered those funds. The fact those involved are of Asian decent, is a disapointment. When something is this easy, it removes much of the joy. I'll still do it, of course, but it won't be nearly as much fun.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

unions

So Hillary is picking up the support of the unions, relationship to the Penn the union buster is apparently not a problem. I’m wondering, as the unions have supported one Clinton or another for such a long time, and we cannot know about Hillary’s time in the White House until after the election, is there a connection? That is to say, even though we’re supposed to believe that Hillary did stuff while having an address in Washington, but we’re not to know of her accomplishments, if there were any. If there were accomplishments, I’m surprised that they aren’t touted. The Clintons often tout accomplishments. Granted usually they are other people’s accomplishments, but still…

The question I am asking, are there records of Hillary Clinton speaking to those who held sway with the union responsible for going out on strike, or whatever it was that enabled Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky to come into contact? I am asking if Hillary Clinton made arrangements for her husband to be in the situation that helped get him impeached. I do realize most rational people would not have gone through that, had they had a choice, but Hillary Clinton has frequently been obligated to publicly face her husband’s unfenced eye. She’s often punished un-established women. What if she was able to chose whom to put in front of her husband? She’d know his type. Hillary’s not shy about loading the deck, when was the last time you had a chocolate chip OATMEAL cookie? She would not be in the position she is now, had he not been impeached. Be angry all you like, it deserves an answer.

Monday, August 27, 2007

Armstrong debate

Lance Armstrong is hosting a debate on cancer, that’s nice. Nicer still if he wears a jacket. Remember, the other option is all the candidates dressing in his gear…it was good to see Hillary wearing a shirt in Iowa. The men wear suits according to the color of the day, she doesn’t have to do that. She’s a girl.

Democratic candidates should go after Hillary Clinton, assuming that they would like a Democrat in the White House. Bill Maher said that he was for Hillary Clinton, but was sure that the Republicans would beat her. His reason was that the Republicans would come up with something, probably about Bill, and that would make her lose, but he added it wouldn’t be Hillary’s fault. I disagree. It will be Hillary’s fault. It will also be the fault of all the candidates who don’t go after her. We only know, what we know, and some of us have put it out of our minds. It’s so distasteful, why are we willing to go through all of that again?

Even if the Republicans don’t have anything, I know it’s unlikely, but go with me here, it’s possible with all of the early primaries, that the Clinton machine will shove Hillary down our collective throat, she’ll have the nomination in February, and do a public washing of their own laundry, by March we’ll be so saturated that we’ll believe them when we’re told that the news is old. When November rolls around, we’ll consider it a given, and therefore not important. Either way, we’d still have to hear it, still take part of those uncomfortable conversations. Ugg.

She’s easy to beat. All anybody has to do is make a little contact. That will bring out Wolfson, and his condescending tone “I can’t believe you’re not willing to live up to your own standards?!?”

You reply, “My candidate is running for president, not princess, there is no royal whiner in our campaign.”

Wolfson, in a painful expression, “Your so inexperienced, so naïve, it’s a travesty that you’re even in the race.”

You, “You’re candidate has been “fooled” by the president for 16 years. Eight of those years the president was her husband, of course he’s been “fooling” her for their entire marriage.”

Wolfson, “She wasn’t fooled, she handled it. What a shame it is that you brought that up.”

You, “You’re candidate’s experience is frontloaded on punishing women who’ve had her husband. This country does not want to go through another Impeachment of a Democratic president. That would surely break the back of this nation.”

Wolfson, “Whaaa, that was a low blow”

You, “So is cock-stopping those to whom you’re not married!

Right now, it looks as if the fix is in. If we Americans are not entitled to an honest race, at the very least, give us a decent show.

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Swipe at Hilary?

Did Michelle Obama take a swipe at Hillary Clinton? Some say yes, others say no. I say, if it wasn't a swipe, it should have been. If we as a nation return the Clintons to the White House, all of their baggage also returns. We need to know that, we need to own it. It will be our own damn fault. Bill Clinton has been screwing around on his wife since before they married. It's one thing when a president screws around, is it a different thing when a president is screwed around upon? It's worth some thought. Hillary Clinton is not an innocent. She brutalized her husband's girlfriends, and everybody, including feminists let her do it. Often, she was aided in this endeavor. What happens when Bill chooses a women who has a little weight of her own? What international problems would that create? Bill Clinton could have gotten out of being impeached, he brought that onto the nation himself. All he had to do was settle a case, a case that he did settle. He chose instead to make his shortcomings the problem of the nation. Now the Clintons want the nation to be responsible again for their conduct. We need to consider their conduct, and decide if that weight is worth us bearing.

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Scoldings

I scolded Hillary just now. Sent emails to her campaign, complaining about her disloyalty to somebody we both know. As her website would not accept emails from my personal account, I tried twice, I sent it from this account. It went through, without restarting, so I snitched her out about screwing with my emails to her campaign.

I don't care how arrogant it is, I'd like to upgrade my enemies please.

Trades?

So Warren Buffet is bargain shopping...good thing those French banks made that so easy, not that Steven Kluger had anything to do with that of course...

It does make more sense than the sex industry people rallying around the least sexual candidate running for president, unless they're just courting her husband's patronage...

Monday, August 20, 2007

Papers

Hillary Clinton's papers from her days as first lady will not be made public until after the election, what's up with that? If her experience as first lady is something we should all be impressed about, why can't we use that information to make our decision? Sounds dirty to me...

What about John Kerry advising the Clinton on how to win Arkansas? Are the Clintons new to Arkansas? Are they unknowns there? Good thing football season is coming, Hillary's got some reading to do, maybe she'll take a book the a Razorback game...

I'm still confused why HRC didn't read the Iraq study group report, well I'm not confused about laziness, just about the point when a person refuses to understand, and then takes their ignorance as a license to act without considering the consequences...

I guess I'm just not smart enough.

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Proverb

For Bill Clinton to call his wife "the most prepared, the most electable" is almost on par with Ann Coulter calling Bill Clinton gay.

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Who is she?

Jennifer Jacobs, of the Des Moines Register, does anybody know her? Her name is on an article, "Clinton, no stranger to state fair food" that makes me wonder. Is she picking a fight with me, or is she a graduate of the Steven Glass school of journalism? Is she smart enough, or just another of those mindless drones that the Clintons use to draw fire? Please read the article, and let me know your thoughts, I think she writes like she's 12 years old, Hillary probably did it for her. Let's hope her penmanship is better.

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

AD

Why would the White House pick another fight with Hillary Clinton? You don't suppose that Republicans are helping Hillary Clinton to do to the Democrats what George Bush did to the Republicans? Let's face it folks, Bill Clinton MIGHT be able to make to the primaries without getting caught with a woman not his wife, remember, he has Secret Service to protect him, but what's the likelihood of him making it, through to the general?

Hillary Clinton stole the invisibility concept, and I know from whom. I used to be angry about that sort of constant thievery, but now I'm looking at it with fresh eyes. I always thought the Clintons and the Klugers stole because they felt entitled, but now I wonder if they are just frightened. If they were as smart as they pay people to tell others, their egos wouldn't allow for anybody else's copy? Maybe somewhere inside those conceited people, they know that they're just plain old nasty posers, who could get found out any moment. It's really very sad. Also, a possible explanation to the dirty way they compete.

By the way, HRC you might want to back off the 'back-bone' comments. Although I did find it laugh out load funny, you don't have my sense of humor, and you can shove your damn threats.

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

It's been good to know ya...

Brooke Astor and Merv Griffin each recently left us. They're probably sitting together, and wherever they are, I'm sure it's five o'clock.

Monday, August 13, 2007

Leading Democrats

The Clintons have done very well for themselves. Not nearly as well for anybody else. Why are so many leading Democrats afraid to speak about the Clintons? Are they afraid that Bill Clinton will punish them as he did the women who wouldn't have him? Are they afraid that Hillary Clinton would punish them, as she did the women who didn't refuse her husband's advances? Are they afraid that they will be professionally blocked by these people? Are they afraid they will be personally blocked by these people? Are they afraid that the Clintons will use their influence to promote erroneous rumors about substance abuse, prostitution, or arrange for their local police department to keep an unblinking eye on anyone and everyone,whom the Clintons think might possibly only pretend to drink the Kool-Aid? Do they believe that this hazard also extends to those who did not know that Kool-Aid was being served?

Leading Democrats, however anonymous, are smarter than they seem.

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Wedding

Did you know that the Clintons were not married in a church? I didn't. I know many people don't marry in churches, but those people don't use religion as an employment endorsement. An article in nwanews.com mentioned that another couple was recently married at the same house as the Clintons. It was reported, that the younger couple included the word "bug" in their vows. The entire article was a "rah, rah for the Clintons" fest. I wonder if they believe they're being clever.

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Dissection of a line…

HRC tells a Democratic crowd that a Democratic president would be good, to which they applaud. Then she hops on the applause, pretending that it’s for her and declares herself a winner. Using the words “right wing machine” she does a slight reference to the “vast right wing conspiracy” a contrived bogeyman she made up to trick the world, and or pretend that her husband was an innocent with tangible virtues. Also this provides the illusion that she’s in a defensive position. While using the word “machine” she dilutes the expression “Clinton machine” and throws it to the other side. The word girl is interesting for a number of reasons. First her audience is a bunch of blue collar men, many of whom have seen brighter horizons. Most men view woman to be pretty much an equal, not that we’d carry the heaviest items, but certainly manage our own weight. It’s cool to have a beer together, but there isn’t much else for them to do for us. A lady however is regarded as a bit higher maintaince, they’d have to put on a clean shirt, maybe even a tie, and some days, they’re just too tired to bother. A girl however, doesn’t really care much about a dress code, and they certainly could take care of her, making them feel manly.

Accomplished females under the age of 40 will be offended by the flirtation. But where else will they go? Middle aged females, who may feel that their most appreciated days are behind them, might feel tickled, but the educated and accomplished aren’t going to vote for her anyway. Older women will dismiss it as pandering.

But let’s talk specifically about black women for a moment. Most of us tend not to realize that within the black community that there’s a hierarchy beyond Al Sharpton. There has long been a lower, middle and upper class. Upper class had country clubs, nice homes with well kempt yards, coming out parties, and the expectation of success. Most have jobs, or trades or careers, and that’s been going on for generations. How a black woman will feel about the word girl, will have a lot to do with how she makes her living and how her parents made their living, and their parents made theirs. If she hails from a nuclear family, where higher education was the norm, and her father wore a jacket to work, while the mother stayed home, or had an interesting job, it’s likely she’d be less offended of the way that word has been used for a long, long time.

If however her life was harder, education not a consideration, or even an option, if they had to really struggle, there’s likely to be some resentment about the term. I’m sure the Clinton camp thought about that, but figured, as these are “women with needs” where else are they going to go? Surely they won’t “give a brother a break” or will they? I think it’s a bigger quandary than the campaign has so far assessed.

There’s nothing wrong with the word. People do speak more intimately with intimates than is appropriate with the masses. I just don’t think trying to be a coquette is a smart tact for a cuckold to take.

Thursday, August 9, 2007

Polls

I still don't know what is with the jump in Hillary's popularity. I've found a lot of polls, but I still don't get it. Sure, the media has been critical of the wives of the Republican candidates, and calling other women cheap, and worse has always elevated Hillary, but still? Who did Mrs. McCain think she was, wearing whatever she damn-well pleased, in her own home? Older women do tend to wear more make-up than younger women, but so what? True, Hillary's not young, and her make-up is pretty good, but it's probably time time to summon back the botox fairy. Especially if she wants people to stop snickering about the "I'm your girl" crap. It's probably a good idea not to tell other candidates how to run their campaigns, at least not in public. Aside from bringing back unpleasant memories of the Elizabeth Edwards vs. Ann Coulter, I don't think there are any telegraph offices still in business. She dates herself that way. If a 23 year-old can be referred to as "that woman" a 59 year-old isn't anybody's girl. No matter how much big money is donated.

By the way, did I miss the question, or wasn't Clinton asked about Mark Penn, the union buster, at the union debate?

What about the market? I knew it would be volatile. Of Course Hillary gave Steven Kluger of GE (roommate to Rick Lazio) time to sell of GE's sub-prime bad loans, before she called for the billion dollar bail out, but does anybody know if Steven Kluger and BNP have a history? Don't know, just asking. Has Warren Buffet weighed in on the mortgage thing? Just asking.

I wanted to buy a bottle of Beefeaters tonight, but the liquor stores close at 9pm. If you're coming by, you'll have to bring some, or drink vodka.

Overstuffing an email account is very low, very cheap. I believe that I need a better class of enemies.

Wednesday, August 8, 2007

Poll Jump

How is it possible that a candidate with a popularity rating in the mid-twenties can jump in a week to the high forties? Hillary Clinton did that, and without any kind of defining moment that I can see, so how did it happen? Who commissioned this poll? Who performed it? Were the participants pre-screened? It's a lousy question, but I don't know of any other way these numbers could be as they are being presented. A twenty point plus is statistically unlikely. I don't believe that being a bad guest at a progressive (although extremely accommodating) convention explains the enormous rise. If this is a fix, it isn't a smart one, far too obvious. Is there a way to verify these results? As they stand, they don't make sense.

Monday, August 6, 2007

Hillary's Headstart

I think you can tell a lot about a person, depending on how they behave as a guest. Hillary Clinton was a guest at the YearlyKos convention, but in order for her to attend, she needed special arrangements. All of the other candidates had their private talks after the group conversation, not Hillary, she got to be her own warm-up act, better positioning herself, and inferring that she's more important than anybody else.

"Whether you like it or not..." I think that is an inflammatory phrase. Just rude. She's not particular about those from whom she accepts money, i.e., Wal-Mart, which does employ a lot of people, it also pays very little, and expects its employees to get their health insurance elsewhere. By the way, there are no non-real Americans. There's just us, if you were born here, or passed the test, no matter what your zip code, no matter you're tax bracket, or education level, you're in the club. The pocket full of lobbyist, well, that's a premium.

Friday, August 3, 2007

gonzo

It seems Alberto Gonzales is still employed. Congress is on vacation now for a month, right? Looks like he's staying. Anybody catch that little scene where the Dems got cute with a vote, and the Reps all walked out? What was the vote on, does anybody know?

Does anybody know why Hillary Clinton is too busy to give the YearlyKos crowd 45 minutes of her time? She's in Chicago anyway, why won't she do as all of the other candidates are doing? Is it because nobody wanted to hear her speak, and the campaign was afraid word of that would get out, or didn't she want to keep her private jet waiting? And she wonders why nobody likes her. Tsk, tsk.

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

Little Spat

A few months ago, the Clintons got into a little thing with the president of Jet Blue Airlines, but I thought it was over. Jump cut to drama at Yearly Kos...Jet Blue had agreed to sponsor some travel for the conference, then Hillary Clinton agreed to go and speak. Well, a bunch of blogger said some snotty things (we bloggers sometimes do that you know) about Jet Blue, and some nice things about Hillary Clinton. Jet Blue responded to the snottiness with a WTF kind of communication, and asked that their companies name be lifted from the site. They never planned nor threatened to pull the travel support, there was a back and fourth kind of thing, and the long and the short, everybody, except the Clintons have some bad feelings. Nice.

About Bill Clinton's comments about the spat his wife started with Obama, to me he seemed to be siding with Obama. I guess that's really his talent, no matter what a person thinks is reasonable, Bill Clinton makes you think that that is what he said. But the guy lies often, so what really is the difference.

Any comments about Bloomberg moving the 9-11 tribute away from Ground Hero? He says it's dangerous. Why wasn't it dangerous before? Is he trying to deflate Rudy? You don't think he's falling for the Unity08 hustle? The guy's a billionaire, he really should know better.