Kos has a new entry discussing the whys and hows of there being multiple candidates proceeding on in this race after NH. I'm cool with Clark, Edwards, Dean and even Lieberman staying in the race. God knows I think its unconscionable how the media is giving Kerry the title of nominee already with so few delegates determined.
Hey CNN, MSNBC and Faux...let the PEOPLE decide!
And people...this is not a beauty contest nor a Miss Congeniality contest. Examine the issues. Examine their records. Decide for yourself who you want to be the nominee.
Knowledge is power...use it!
The link above says it all. John Kerry is just as immersed in the politics of greed as George Bush. Electing him would only be minimally better than having another 4 years of Bush. Electing Kerry doesn't solve the problems this country is facing.
My brother's email says it all:
We all know already that reporters are generally stupid, but I swear
these last couple weeks have just plummeted my faith in news
organizations.
I went to foxnews.com last night to check election results and these
boneheads keep saying that Kerry was going to get all 22 delegates from
New Hampshire just because he came in first. I think I'm going to write
those #%$%^ bozos an e-mail this morning letting them know how the
political process actually works so they can get it right for a change.
They're trying to tell people who's winning the race before the race has
barely begun. If we're going to let the media decide who the $^%^#
President is going to be, then we might as well go back to letting Senators
vote for the President and repeal the 12th amendement for God's sake!
Ok, I'm done venting now. On to the Super Seven. By the way, I checked
CNN.com and according to their numbers, the "front-runner" Kerry still
trails Dean in total delegate votes pledged even after "winning" two
states. Dean has 113 pledged votes (15 in CA alone) and Kerry only 94.
Edwards and Clark are still in the 30s as far as pledged votes go.
I'm sick of how most of these ABB (Anybody but Bush) people are contorting themselves to figure out who's the most "electable". One day they like Dean, the next Clark, then Kerry, now Edwards.
Can we pick a friggin' candidate based on the issues? Personally I believe we could run a chimp against Bush and win. But having a chimp run the country would only be minimally better than Bush. (I'm not saying beating Bush is necessarily a sure thing...but people who want Bush out certainly are proving to be not terribly concerned with who's running.)
I want a guy who is going figure out a way to get us out of the hole financially. We only have a few years left before the baby boomers start collecting off of Social Security and Medicaid. Bush & Co chose their tax cut policies such that a) they gave a huge tax break to their rich buddies/contributors and b) so they could ensure there would be no money for any republican or democrat to expand or even maintain any social programs in this country. (Not only 'people' programs, but also maintaining roads and infrastructure.)
Since that is a major concern of mine I particularly like Dean, even after the "I Have a Scream Speech." The guy is gutsy and honest and his record as Governor shows he committed to balancing budgets and creating successful social programs such as Success by Six and healthcare coverage for all children. And this week he showed me he's not about to back away from a fight. Personally, I believe we need that kind of candidate since Rove will smear ANY one of the candaidates.
The media has just done such a bang up job portraying him as angry, etc, while leaving Kerry fairly untouched. One of the reasons why is because Dean has stated that he would break apart the media conglomerates since our news is only coming from a total of 11 independent sources. This makes guys like Rupert Murdoch (owner of conservative Faux..er Fox network) nervous.
These days I don't see MSNBC or CNN as much better than Fox News. They too are more about spin and sensationalism. They've been that way since the OJ Simpson trial.
Instead I'm finding myself gravitating toward C-span and PBS. I just want the facts ma'am. Not any of that spin and other BS.
Meanwhile the ABB crowd is being lead around by the media with this whole notion of electability. They are prepared to vote for who they perceive can win instead of picking the most qualified candidate.
Interestingly, the same sort of media hack job was perpetrated against John McCain. The Bushies went out of their way to use his service in Vietnam to suggest he was not stable. "Someone you should question whether he should have his finger on 'the button'". And hence Bush beat McCain and we ended up with him as prez.
We live in a country that lacks conviction. And one that takes democracy for granted. We let our news media decide the issues for us, since they have have our best interests at heart. *cough* *cough* (Think of all those consumer reports, household tips, etc., that promote the lack of common sense and creativity that is so prevalent in this modern age. LOL.)
When I meet folks that are committed to another candidate and can state reasons A, B, and C, I respect that, even if their support is for a different candidate. But these ABB who are waiting for the rest of the country to decide for them just irk the hell out of me.
If you know me at all, you'd know that I'm not particularly a leader, but I sure as hell ain't a sheep. (I like to think of myself as GDI--God damn independent)
Now granted I will vote in the general election for whomever the candidate may be. But I'm concerned that we will be stuck with Kerry who wouldn't know how to make a tough decision to save his life. Here's a guy who has made a career of bouncing from issue to issue, going with what's popular at the time. Including voting for a war he didn't believe just because it was politically expedient to do so.
Yet the sheep think a guy with a military record will somehow makes him more qualified. The sheep think that the 'safe' candidate is the one they should pick. The sheep want to pick who every one else picks.
I'll repeat my mantra....I ain't no goddamn sheep.
[/rant] [/stream of consciousness]
After the disappointing speech in Iowa, I began to wonder if Dean could get beyond it. Until last night, I didn't think he could.
But after his the interview with Diane Sawyer and the debate earlier in the evening, I've decided it's too early to write him off yet. If there is a man who could turn things around, it's Dean. His heart is in the right place. He's got the right ideas. And he tells the truth.
Even my Dad of all people, after seeing the clip, said, "What was so horrible about that?" It's not like he lied or stole from anyone. As far as my Dad is concerned, politicians are all liars and cheaters, so to have that response to Dad was pretty positive, LOL.
And sometimes even bad publicity, is good publicity. Sometimes.
Combine PMS, lack of sleep, lack of sunlight, lack of warm weather and lack of time, and I become a royal miserable bitch. God, I hate when I'm like this. Thankfully, it'll not last too much longer. But I just gotta get through the next couple days and then I'll be myself again.
Of course, my mother will tell you that she never suffered from PMS. Ok, yeah, I buy that. NOT.
Looks like Chistie Whitman is coming clean as to why she resigned from the Bush Administration. Could it be she was yet another member who held moderate views that clashed with the right wing ideologues? What do you think? ;)
I'm disappointed. Here I was wishing for a Winter Wonderland and we barely got a dusting. What a letdown! LOL.
I can't believe we won.
I had such a queasy feeling as we were 4th and 26. It was sure to be the last play of the game. And yet McNabb threw the ball down to Freddie Mitchell for the first down and suddenly we were in the game again. And in OT, it look like we were sunk until Favre threw the interception.
I'm thankful we won, but I think I need some valium after the nail biting that was necessary to get through the game. LOL.
My Dad had pnemonia over Christmas. Bad enough to be laid up for two weeks at home. Because he had pneumonia last January as well, the doctor ordered a bunch of blood tests to see if there was something else contributing to it. Sure enough one of the tests showed my Dad's blood sugar was high indicating he may have the early stages of Diabetes. My Grandmother developed Diabetes around my Dad's age, so it's not all that surprising.
The doctor has ordered my Dad to go on a low to no carb diet and to lose 40 lbs. I think he could shed 20 no problem, but 40 may be a stretch. We shall see. But now the doctor called again and asked my Dad to come in for another talk. Mom and I are guessing his cholesterol may be high as well. Hopefully that is all it is--just the doc asking him to cut out the cholesterol or take a drug called Lipitor, which my Mom takes already. I guess we'll know soon.
Dad of course is whining that he won't be able to eat any of the foods he likes. Or any sweets. He especially likes Mike and Ike candies. Now we're gonna have to find him a sugar-free alternative.
While I was gone for just over 2 weeks, I had my mail held. Today I received all the backlogged mail. One item I received was a credit card bill for a card I just started using. It had crossed my mind before I left for my extended holiday that I hadn't received a statement for it yet. Since the card was new, I had no idea when the due date should be. But I figured that since I had not received it prior to my leaving, the due date had to be well after when I would return.
That was my first wrong assumption.
Upon opening the bill, I found the due date to be TOMORROW. My first reaction was WTF! My next reaction was to pick up the phone and plead my case to the credit card company. I have in the past been successful in having the card company waive a late fee after the fact. I figured I'd try to preemptively get this one waived or make other arrangements. (Yeah, I've been reading too many stories about Iraq...so sue me. ;) )
Talking to the rep I could get her to neither waive the late fee nor extend the due date. She informed me that the bill had been mailed by Dec. 12th. I informed her that I hadn't received it before Dec 20th. (Damn slow mail around Christmas.) When I offered to pay by phone she informed me there was a $12 fee for doing so. I then tried to get her to waive the $12 fee. She informed me that she could only do that if I was making a payment of $10,000 or more.
If I was making that large of a payment I sure as hell would not be worried about a $12 fee!!!!!
I informed her that I had had another card with her company for over 10 years and I might just have to consider taking my business elsewhere as a result of this inflexibility. She didn't bite. I ended up sucking up and paying the $12 fee rather than dealing with having to pay a $30 late fee and taking the chance they'd jack up my interest rate. But I was not happpy about it. Knowing my luck, my bank will charge me on top of the $12.
You damn well know I'll be writing to my credit card company in complaint and if I get no satisfactory response I will make good on my word. Granted they all are like that, especially if you have one that offers a low rate. But as long as people don't fight it, these credit card companies will charge exhorbinant (sp?) fees and rates AND get away with it.
Sure makes me want to use cash at all times. That may well be my resolution for 2004.
I'm back. I'm tired of driving. Hell, I'm just plain tired.
Had a great 2 weeks break. More details on that after I sleep. :)
G'Night Gracie.