Log in

No account? Create an account

Obama, circa 2020

Barack Obama.

[From Encyclopedia Britannica, 2020 edition]

Barack Obama, in full,  Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., American politician and 44th president of the United States (2009-2017).

A hero of the country's struggle with civil rights, Obama became the country's first African American leader in 2009 after a bitter primary battle with Hillary Clinton, and a landside victory over John McCain in the general election.

Wildly popular at the time of his election, Obama was quickly able to consolidate his rule over all aspects of American life.

The Obma administration was once revered for offering America the best education and health care in the world, but higher education soon became a luxury and the United States now has one of the lowest life expectancies in the world.

Part of the economic free-fall is traced to Obama's property redistribution policies, including his controversial seizure of white-owned property in 2012. Obama ordered the property distributed to African Americans he said were cheated under the racist Bush Administration.

Obama, in his memoirs, denies mismanagement and blames the country's woes during his tenure on the prior Bush administration.

The land the Times forgets

Wear that friggen button out

I realized a few weeks ago that John McCain is a lot more interesting (and tolerable) if you mute the volume while he's talking on TV.

If he gets elected, I'll have to keep my TV muted for 4 whole years. Or, maybe I'll just let my ears fill with wax. 

Hmmm .... better get a head start, as November's coming soon.

The land the Times forgets

a bloody mess


If Hillary and Obama are not going to be permitted to figuratively "duel to the death", why not settle the Democratic battle primary by literally having Bill Clinton square off in the octagon with Jeremiah Wright, Barack's big-mouth pastor, for a UFC-style cage fight? 

The event could be sold on Pay-Per-View for at least $100 a pop, raising hundreds of millions of dollars for the Democratic National Committee to promote the eventual nominee.

It's a much simpler and entertaining idea than redoing the Florida & Michigan primaries . . . or "negotiating" a settlement.

Heck, I'd pay more than $100 to watch it.

Go, Bill, go. 

The land the Times forgets

Hit 'em in the nads, Hill

I'm getting really pissed about all the "Hillary should quit" talk. While I thought I'd be the last person to ever defend Hillary Clinton, apparently someone has to do it.

Hillary is only 8% behind Barack Obama, which means that she has 92% of his vote total with several key states remaining . That's like a basketball team being down 50 to 46 with five minutes left. Who in the hell would quit under such circumstances? Who would encourage somoene to quit?

I've heard all the blabber about "uniting the party" and I don't buy it. A primary campaign is a contest where the strongest survives. Such a concept can't be hard for Democrats to understand . . . after all, 81% of the votes cast in latest American idol competition were from Democrats.

Also, many Democratic men (despite their feminine tendencies) do watch some sports. Would they watch those sports if the champion was decided by some means other than survival of the fittest? Would they give a rats ass about March Madness if the outcome of the Final Four was "negotiated"? Yeah, right.

Democratic leaders are concerned that Hillary and Obama are going to continue bloody each other so much that the ultimate winner will be too handicapped to defeat McCain. What those idiotic "leaders" don't comprehend is that a bloodbath creates more media attention than JohnMcCain could buy with all of Warren Buffet's money. Our Jerry Springer culture craves bloodbaths in every situation in life.

Heck, I'm living proof that the Hillary-Obama duel to the death is a bonanza for the Democratic party. After all, I hate the Democratic party, yet I'm sitting up late at night commenting on their primary race. Go figure.

So, keep fighting, Hillary. People love underdogs, and come-from-behind victories are the most glorious. And if a candidate doesn't have the gonads to fight to the finish line, America doesn't need that candidate being Commander-in-Chief, anyway.

The land the Times forgets

4,000 and counting


There's something President Bush doesn't understand.  Well, I'm sure there's many things he doesn't understand .... but I'm speaking abut one thing in particular.

Suppose the Mexican Army invaded the United States (I'd use the Canadian Army as an example, but that would be a pretty comical, as the only guys in Canada willing to fight are in the NHL.)  How would Americans react to foreign troops on American soil? 

Personally, if it was done to depose President Obama, I'd great the Mexican Army at the border with a plate of tacos.  However, my nationalistic pride would soon kick in and I'd grow weary of being ruled by foreigners.  I might tolerate foreign occupation for, maybe, 6 months ... tops.  Then, I'd say "adios amigos" and hand them a to-go bag of tacos to eat on their drive back across the border.

My point, is, why do we expect the folks in Iraq to feel (and behave) any differently?  Just as I'd tire of seeing the Mexican Army in San Antonio every day, I'm sure the folks in Baghdad tire of seeing us.  And, quite honestly, the Shite and Sunni militias in Iraq are behaving how I would after 4 years of foreign occupation. 

And, I'm not talking about Al Qaeda fanatics, hostage beheaders or suicide bombers that blow up civilians. I'm talking about your run-of-the-mill Iraqi "insurgent" trying to kill any American soldier he can find.

"Well," you might say, "if we depart Iraq, it's going to be a bloodbath."  While I agree with that statement, the truth is, a bloodbath would be better than the situation we have now. At least it would be an Iraqi bloodbath. 

I'm not saying that Iraqi lives are worth any less than American lives.  It's just that, if Iraqis want to fight Iraqis, there's going to be Iraqi deaths, period.  People will die until people get tired of people dying.  Then peace will ensue.  That's how the process works ... especially in civil wars.

However, it's a horrendous loss for 4,000 [and counting] brave, honorable American soldiers to die in an endless bloodbath ... all, while trying to avert a ... bloodbath.  While the American lives lost were not a waste, but their lives were wastedby Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld naively expecting Iraqis to behave any differently than we would, in the same situation.

I mean, President Bush offended the entire nation of Norway by displaying his Texas pride via the hook-em-horns salute.  While I'm not a native Texan, and don't feel such strong attachments to the Lone Star State, I have people all around me who do .... people who would not take kindly to being ruled by a foreign power.

We glorify the heroes of the Alamo, where a band of suicidal Texans stood up to the Santa Anna's "superpower" army.  Yet we label Sunni/Shite insurgents as being evil.

American and Texas pride are good . . . . even for President Bush.  Being a proud Iraqi, Sunni or Shite is horrendous.

What gives?

The land the Times forgets