Palin Jolts the Republican Heart into Action

I just read an article about how Palin is apparently jump starting a new craze of Republican support across the nation. It’s an interesting read. Check it out:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080831/pl_politico/13016

National Organization for Leftist Women

NOW, or as I actaully call it NOLW, has posted an article against Sarah Palin on their website.

They make this statement:

“Gov. Palin may be the second woman vice-presidential candidate on a major party ticket, but she is not the right woman. Sadly, she is a woman who opposes women’s rights, just like John McCain.”

Since you call yourself the “National Organization for Women” that would arrogantly indicate that you speak for all women. Since you apparently don’t speak for Sarah Palin and since she so ardantly disagrees with your “Women’s rights” wouldn’t this raise a red flag to consider why she disagrees? Because, she is a woman, not matter how much you might want to fight against that fact. Doesn’t she also have a say on the issue? Or, do you only speak for leftist women and their leftist women’s rights? Because, frankly, I need some clarification. If you only speak for leftist women (which you obviously do) then you should change your name and stop your generalizations as if you speak for ALL women (because you most certainly don’t). Back to my original point, since Sarah Palin is a woman, and she does disagree with you, where does that bring us with the whole “feminist” movement? Could you actually be wrong? (Wow, that’s a shocker!)

Finally, as the chair of NOW’s Political Action Committee, I am frequently asked whether NOW supports women candidates just because they are women. This gives me an opportunity to once again answer that question with an emphatic ‘No.’ We recognize the importance of having women’s rights supporters at every level but, like Sarah Palin, not every woman supports women’s rights.”

The term “women’s rights” seems rather vague. What are “women’s rights”? If you mean the ability to have an abortion done, than yes, Sarah Palin (like most Republicans) wouldn’t agree that women have the right to get an abortion. However, if you mean women equality, then wouldn’t her being a governor and wanting to become the Vice President even indicate in itself that she is striving for what all women want in equality? The ability to do and be anything they set their mind to without limits or boundries. I am sure she is for non-discrimination against women in the workplace, etc… She just draws the line at abortion. Saying, “she is not for women’s rights” is just saying that she is not for your version of women’s rights.

Let me bring this back to my original point. Not every woman supports women’s rights. Think about that for a second. It insinuates that all women should be for women’s rights. Why wouldn’t they be? Right? I mean every woman I know has goals and wants to pursue their dreams. Ask yourself, maybe there is a chance that NOW has taken women’s rights way too far. They have pushed it to a point of madness, immorality, and militancy.

Posted by Alcamadus

Palin and Experience

Obviously, the first target the Democratic liberals choose when going after Sarah Palin is her experience. And I’ll admit that she is limited in experience. BUT SO IS OBAMA!

I don’t know how many times I have to make that clear to people who use the experience argument against Palin. They need to look at their own candidate. Are you just ignoring the fact that he is practically experienceless because he gives a good speech and makes you feel fuzy inside? Or, is it because you are just so rotten to the core bias that you can’t see past the wool over your eyes?

Let’s do the math.

Obama = No Experience and running for President.
Palin = No Experience and running for Vice President.

Personally, wouldn’t you consider Obama’s equation the worse of the two? But, no, I have read tons of excuses about why Obama’s lack of experience doesn’t actually matter. Does this not apply to Palin? Because if it does, then you shouldn’t chastise her for experience, and if it doesn’t then you are a two-faced hypocrite.

Being that both Obama and Palin have little experience, lets analyze their records, shall we? What has Obama really done in the Senate? He’s voted for things so die-hard liberal that even Pelosi wouldn’t vote for them. He is considered the most liberal senator in Congress, and in his 4 years he really didn’t accomplish that much. Palin on the other hand cut her own salary for the Alaskan budget, she went after senators and representatives in her own party because they were corrupt, she reformed and radically cut spending in Alaska, and has done much more gutsy stuff than Obama would ever dream of doing. She’s tough, smart, and has proven to be an all around good leader. It would seem that she would be a better candidate for change in the corruption of Washington than Obama.

I have a great idea. Let’s stop this nonsense about Palin being so little experienced, especially since everyone is expecting McCain to die any second. The guy has a full bill of health and is more vibrant than ever. He isn’t going to die, and you know what? Even if he did, I would vote for Palin against Obama anyday of the week. Obama has talk. Palin has the walk.

See I can make fun sayings like the Democrats too

Posted by Alcamadus

Palin Pisses Off the Feminists

I have read many a blog today. I have also read plenty of articles on Sarah Palin with comments from feminists and Hillary supporters. It would seem for the most part they are pissed. And, I’ll be honest, that makes me smile.

It makes me smile because Palin is basically the anti-Hillary. Palin represents everything that liberal Hillary-supporting women want to silence and destroy. And that makes me smile. It makes me smile because Palin is living proof that there are successful women out there who don’t agree with the modern feminists movement. The feminist movement that arrogantly believes they represent all women. Unfortunately for them, a woman like Sarah Palin will represent a completley new form of woman. A woman who upholds family values, integrity, honesty, justice, fighting corruption, putting human life before selfish choice, and lets be honest, looking pretty freaking sweet with a gun. It drives them crazy. It drives them crazy because they know there is another perspective out there, one that has been silenced, one that needs to be awakened, and one that is traditionally and ultimately the stronger perspective. And, oh, how they hate it. Because, it isn’t progressive.

They can’t stand that other women don’t agree with them.

Obaminomics

Contradiction.

That is the best way to explain his economic plan. He talked about a lot of spending, but then cutting a huge chunk of taxes. He told people that when they get knocked down they have to get back up again, but then he chastised government for not helping people when they fall down. He talked about individual responsiblity but then said we have to be accountable to each other, and so on and so forth.

Personally, I think the taxes issue is the worst. It sounds great to cut taxes and also to start pumping tons of money into the economy, but that isn’t going to help right now. We don’t need The Great Society, but that is what people want to hear. I think we are really going to have to listen carefully to what Obama wants to do with our economy because I am definitely not sold by that speech. It will be interesting to hear the debates that they will have in the upcoming months.

Posted by Alcamadus

Change We Don’t Want to Believe In

It is pretty obvious the Democratic party is pushing the idea of “Change”. My even writing that sentence should make me “Captain Obvious”. Obama mentioned the different things he wants to change in his nomination speech, and several campaign workers and Joe Biden have been quoted saying, “That’s not change, that’s more of the same”.

The first question I have to ask is, “What audience are they speaking to?” It is obvious that it’s a largely liberal, Democratic party audience. This audience wants any scent of the Bush Administration out of the White House. Thus, all the “McCain/Bush Administration” statements that Biden and other campaign managers have been throwing out. They are trying to link McCain and Bush together. However, it would seem they are also trying to convince Independents (and maybe some on the fence conservatives) that Bush’s policies have been bad and that change in Obama is good. However, a lot of what Obama had to say for change isn’t actually change at all. It is just change to the Democratic policies. So, let’s be clear, this isn’t some kind of perfect, beautiful, and universal American change that everyone agrees with, this is the Democratic parties version of change. I am sure that Ralph Nader wants to create lots of change too if he became President, but that doesn’t mean it is the change we need. And even McCain mentioned that he wants to bring about change as well (and has criticized the Bush administration) but he says we need the right kind of change.

I suppose I  am just tired of the Democratic parties brainwashing rhetoric about change as if their change is some awesome, all-powerful change from on high. And let’s just get down to the basics here, if you like Obama’s policies and the Democratic parties policies, then vote because of that, don’t vote because they are brainwashing you into believing in some universal change. If you like McCain’s policies than vote for McCain. We are a divided nation; a large part of the country doesn’t actually agree with Obama on what he wants to change. There are a lot of people out there that don’t think we need a lot of change. And make no mistake, there will always be things to change, but once again not necessarily in the way that Obama is plotting.

So, when you read articles about people saying, ”Governor Palin shares John McCain’s commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush’s failed economic policies. That’s not the change we need, it’s just more of the same,” he [Burton] said.” Just ignore it and focus on the issues. Vote not on change alone, but on what candidate will actually bring about a better focus and goals for the country, because in the end this is what they are really telling you:

“We don’t agree with anything that the other side says and you need to agree with us that those things are wrong. Thus, it will never be the ‘change we need’.”

I could find a whole lot of people that would say that the above issues that Burton mentioned is exactly the change we need. Once again, we are a divided nation.

Posted by Alcamadus

Speak for Yourself Obama Campaign

“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency,” Burton said in a statement.

This is a quote from a Obama campaign spokesperson. And everyone replies, “YOU DID THE SAME THING WITH YOUR OWN CANDIDATE!”

How ignorant and hypocritical is this guy? Obama has NO foreign policy experience either and he is running for President! I think they might want to change their attack playbook if they think that jab is actually good.

Also, congratulations to Sarah Palin for her recent nomination as Vice President.

Posted by Alcamadus

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080829/pl_afp/usvotemccainobamavp

Obama on Lost?

Ok, not really. But, I had so much fun matching Barack Obama and Joe Biden to two characters of 24, that I couldn’t help but think of the possibilities of this on other shows. And, it struck me like Mr. Eko with his, as Charlie so wonderful coined, “huge Jesus stick”. LOST! Who from Lost looks like Barack Obama and Joe Biden? I came up with my answer. Look below:

It’s a match! Michael and Christian Sheperd are perfect for Obama and Biden look alikes! Obviously, I had to find a picture with Barack Obama with a beard, and I didn’t think it could be done, but thank the stars I found one! (And yes, I said “thank the stars”)

I had considered getting Mr. Eko or Matthew Abaddon for the role of Barack Obama, but Michael seemed the best fit out of all of them. Christian Sheperd was a shoe in for Joe Biden. They could be brothers if not twins.

So, there you have it ladies and gentlemen. I have wasted your time once again. But, you enjoyed it. I just know it.

Posted by Alcamadus

Millionaire Gives Secrets to Us Poor Folk

More! More! More! Muahahahah!

I read an article the other day from Yahoo.com that read “10 Things that Millionaires Won’t Tell You”. The writer of this article, obviously a millionaire, tried to talk down to his readers with the most snobbish tone I have read in years. Here he is talking about how he became rich by shopping at Wal-mart and not “skimping on lattes”. It got to the point where he was actually trying to get us to feel for him. Oh, those rich folk, they have it so hard, and just think a million dollars isn’t anything in this day and age! Golly!

Give me a break, I mean I am a pragmatist in that I know there will always be rich people and there will always be poor people, but it is almost laughable how “in their own world” these millionaires are. Do they even realize they come off as snobbish prigs? Yeah, we get it, you’re rich. Good job.

Then he rubs it in at the end by saying, “Money does make you happy”. Please, anyone who actually believes that garbage is the most greedy, self-centered, narcissist in the world. Money may guarantee certain things, but the last thing it does is create happiness. Just as my favorite tv character Michael Scott from the Office says, “Mo Money. Mo Problems”.

In the end, I got sick reading this pathetic display of an article. Humanity never fails at being the most greedy and selfish piles on the planet. The rich will always get richer (and want more wealth) and the poor will always be poorer, and the middle class gets to pick up the economic tab.

Posted by Alcamadus

The More People in a Room the More Stupid they Become

Conventions and parties are for sheep. Created to get the sheep to elect the wolves into office, conventions and parties serve their purpose well and effeciently. I see thousands of them, the sheep that is, following their candidates with blind adoration unwilling to ever believe anything bad about them. They wave their banners high, screaming loud with hope and adoration in their hearts that change will come, that peace and harmony will prevail, that the wolves will be triumphant. The parties know that this will happen and they know by utilizing the sheep they can gain a stronger base of power.

Lambs to the slaughter, they probably don’t think twice about the possibilty that the wolves wouldn’t actually keep their promises.

In the political world, parties are a nescessary evil. Thomas Jefferson soon learned this when he ran for office at the dawn of the 19th century. Initially, he believed that parties were against the ideals of democracy, that they would create a divide, and do much more harm than good in a democratic nation. But, once he ran against the Federalists, he soon realized that there would be no way to gain enough power to be elected President without a party. So, he created the Democratic-Republic party and found the value in their benefits. The wolves began the hunt.

I believe this is part of the reason why I am an Indepedent. I value critical thinking, free thought, and political freedom. I have no intention of being a mindless sheep following the herd, and will evaluate my options come November. I give both candidates a listening ear and I hear what they have to say about the issues. I evaluate their history, their voting records, their arguments, and their character. I evaluate the chances they are lying, the chances they are going to make decisions based off of reason rather than idealism. I evaluate their experience. I want as well rounded of a perspective as I can get before voting.

Being part of a party already makes you susceptable to bias and limits your ability to evaulate the situation critically and with an open mind. It makes you initially want to vote for your party memeber, and that is a natural decision when you are in a party, but once again I have no intention of sitting in a situation like that, nor do I want to be dragged around like, yes, a sheep. So, I obviously don’t believe that being in a party makes you stupid, but if anything it makes you bias, and that bias more often than naught turns into anger and hartred for the other side, and that clouds your judgement. For all you know, your candidate could be a crook (i.e. Nixon) or weak (i.e. Carter).

There are other reason why I am an indepedent, but I will save those for another day.