On McCain

Did you know:

• John McCain was a P.O.W?
• John McCain's P.O.W. experience makes him uniquely qualified to lead?
• John McCain is a Maverick?

I was unaware of these important facts as well, until they were beaten into my skull on an hourly basis for the past half year. Apparently, this is all the election centers around.

I, for one, have reservations about how being a prisoner of war makes you ready to lead the country (notice how its no longer 'lead the free world'? thank dubya for that). Correct me if I'm wrong, but one of the goals of most military operations is, quite simply, don't get caught. So, McCain's capture amounts to mission failure - which is the opposite of 'Mission Accomplished'... well, at least before it was put on a banner. I'm not trying to say it should be held against him, but he needs to quit waving it in everybody's face.

I also find it quite interesting that all the Republicans place so much stock in McCain's POW cred and how he trounces Obama in readiness to lead, but couldn't have given two shits about it 8 years ago when McCain ran against a reformed alcoholic who used his daddy to avoid real military service for the Republican nomination. By historical Republican priorities, Bush > McCain; seems like they're changing their system of measurement.

One of the problems I have with modern republican campaigning in general is how they use situations unwillingly thrust upon a candidate as proof of their character. John McCain did not tunnel himself into a Vietnamese prison - he was captured and placed there against his will(to be fair, he did refuse special treatment as the son of an admiral after capture), just like Bush and Giuliani were sworn into office before 9/11, and shouldn't be revered for handling the crisis, since it was part of their job description.

A good Democratic parallel is Joe Biden, whose wife and infant child died in a tragic automobile accident. If you were forced to choose either 5 years imprisonment or losing your spouse and baby, which would you choose? I don't think I'd go casket shopping. Yet despite the fact that Biden's tragedy was the greater of the two, he doesn't milk it at every available opportunity like it was an accomplishment.

I'm not trying to denigrate military service, nor do I believe its a requirement -or even a plus- for anyone who seeks the presidency; the military is run by our government, and not the other way around. So, to you POW cheerleaders: until you have evidence that McCain's room in the Hanoi Hilton was stocked with books on global economics, multinational diplomacy and constitutional law...

...shut the hell up.

Ding dong! the witch is dead (or gravely wounded, at least)

The Dems take the house, the majority of governorships, the senate once Virginia calls it - AND Rumsfeld steps down? Holy fucking shit! I'd type more, but I'm too busy doing cartwheels.

And thus the light at the end of the tunnel appears...

Yet ANOTHER dirty trick...

Republicans obviously don't want voters to vote their conscience or vote the issues - after all, they want to win. Hence the following scheme: setting up automated calls to voters, especially those on the 'do not call' list, and having them begin as follows:

Hi, I have an important message from [Democratic Candidate name here]

Obviously, most people hang up as soon as they hear that, with a bitter taste in their mouths over the Democratic candidate. If they kept listening they would have heard an attack on the Democratic candidate's positions. To make matters worse, they set these automated calls up to repeatedly call in order to further irritate voters.

Just what we've come to expect from the party of honesty and values, huh?

Taking the military back...

I found this extremely interesting: Out of the dozen Iraq War veterans currently running for Congress, a whopping TEN are running as Democrats (that means only two Iraq veterans are running as Republicans, for those of you who are math-impaired). Wow. That means five times as many veteran candidates are aligned with the Democratic Party than the Republican Party.

But how can this be? The Republicans claim to be the party that represents the military - after all, who coined the phrase "defeatocrat"? Who's been advocating that we should "stay the course" and not "cut and run"? What are these veterans thinking? Here are my three guesses for the Democrat's lead in veteran candidates:

1. The situation in Iraq is so doomed to failure that out of all the Iraq veterans in a position to run for public office, those who are Democrats feel the need to speak out against the Bush Administrations handling of the war, while most Republican-leaning vets are having a hard time trumpeting the mantra of "stay the course"
2. Most modern Republicans who'd ever be in a position to run for office would never actually serve in the military to begin with.

Just remember that ratio: 5 to 1. Think about that the next time the Republicans, a party led by:

• A President who only served 4 years out of 6 in the Texas air national guard
• A Vice-President who received several draft deferments to avoid Vietnam
• A speaker of the House, a Senate Majority leader, a House Majority Whip and a Senate Majority Whip who DID NOT SERVE IN THE MILITARY

a party that forced a resolution through the house budget committee to take $844 million out of funding for veterans' medical care, try to wrap themselves in the flag and claim that voting FOR Democrats is voting AGAINST the military.