The dust settling on Iowa

August 12, 2007

  As the dust settles on  Ames, Iowa, Mitt Romney began making excuses, and embellishing on the impact his win would have.  Yes, it was hot, but heat never stopped a true believer from exercising his right to vote.  Yes, a few of the top contenders weren’t their, but that also was an irrelevent point.   I think what the perfectly capped, coiffed and smiling Mitt Romney was actually thinking was “why did I spend so much money here?  I’m still in fourth, and one of the guys ahead of me isn’t even running yet.”

   The turnout was atrocious.  8,000 less attendees than 8 years ago, and almost 10,000 less voters.  Mitt Romney, in search of good things to say came up with I received more votes than George Bush did last time he was here.  Yes, Mitt…good move…compare yourself to George Bush.   Get that visual working in peoples minds.  The fact remains if republicans stay mired in the malaise created by angst over the Bush administration, the democrats are going to experience a landslide not seen since Tricky dick kicked the crap out of George McGovern. 

    The big winner here was probably Mike Huckabee.  He attracted over 18% of the vote, and 3% more than Brownback.  Sam has to be contemplating quitting even though he says he won’t.  Mike on the other hand has the only real “mo” coming out of Iowa.  He looks more electable to the christian coalition, and he is likely to attract Brownback supporters even before Brownback cries “nuff.”

   Another huge winner has to be Fred Thompson.  The field has never looked weaker and he will announce in September.  All he needs is a common sense approach to the war on terror and the mission in Iraq and I believe you’ll have your future nominee.  The fact is McCain and Giuliani didn’t attend as Mitt correctly stated, because they were going to lose.  Where he was wrong is that it was because he is so strong.  The fact is he is incredibly weak.  Just like everyone else.  Again, look at the turnout.  Don’t spin it like Mitt has, look at it.  thats what is really going on for the right.  They act like they’ve already lost.

   Who can actually sway those voters not already firmly entrenched in the muck that is the Republican base?  wait for it….Ron Paul.  He at least espouses common sense values in regards to everyday life, and hasn’t come off as an extreme Republican retard.  As the other dogs pick over the meat remaining on the bone of ultraconservatism he has a golden opportunity to soften his message, and attract the center.  He already knows those parts of his agenda that he has no chance of forwarding if elected, so he needs to trim his already meager message down even further. 

    By the time the caucases are held in Iowa in late december or extremely early January, it will have all sorted out.  The Republicans have 5 basic options right now.  I’ve added what I think honest campaign slogans would be

Mitt Romney:  If I’m not a Mormon Running for president, what am I?  George Bush Light?

Rudy Giuliani:   I’ll be whatever you want me to be.  As long as you don’t forget I’m the real hero of 9/11.

Mike Huckabee:  Genghis Khan was a left wing nutjob, and I’m living proof of that.

Fred Thompson:  I’ll get in as soon as they are done teaching me how to be Ronald Reagan.

Ron Paul:  There is no way I should lose to these idiots.

    I could live with a Fred Thompson /Ron Paul ticket.  Nothing else up there is one degree of change from what we already have. 


oh man this is hilarious

August 12, 2007

  Sub-prime mortgages.  What a great idea.  HAHAHA.  There is no way this idea can tank.  No risk here.  I’m serious.  Every time I see this I start laughing.  So far, the stock market has gone nuts, foreclosures are through the moon, and the global economy is starting to feel the pinch.  How can you not laugh at mortgage brokers that sold homes to people they knew couldn’t afford them?  Or at those people that bought knowing damn well they couldn’t afford the mortgage payment?  It’s like not laughing at someone crying about credit card debt.  You spent beyond your means and you lost.  Tough shit.

George Bush doesn’t think the government should bail out the subprime market, but I don’t see how he’ll avoid it.  I agree though.  Let them swim in the cesspool they created.  Besides, it’s incredibly funny reading  Here are some links

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070812/ap_on_bi_ge/wall_street_s_angst;_ylt=AoUFvPlGoS_r0dx7e.k7eSJv24cA

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070812/ap_on_bi_st_ma_re/wall_street_s_angst;_ylt=AgoepOOTVZlDrhIT5M4c9oOb.HQA

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20218524/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20124694/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20212532/

here’s a tip….buy precious metals..this isn’t the end of the world, but I’m thinking it could get real ugly


Responsibility and search engines

August 12, 2007

  I read an intriguing defense of not regulating search engines, and by extension the internet today.  I disagree with it in part, because search engines are getting a free ride to riches, and ignoring their responsibilities in the process.  I’m not an expert, but it seems like a logical extension of current law to require search engine owners to ensure that they are not promoting stolen or plagiarized intellectual property.  I can hear the cries of foul already.  Can you imagine how much slower information would be placed on a search engine if you required them to ensure its authenticity and ownership?

   Why shouldn’t that be a requirement though?  We require newspapers, televisions, private foundations, et al to ensure that anything they use of an intellectual nature be vetted, and credit be given to the original authors of that material.  Further, there are a host of laws on the books that punish those who steal intellectual property or plagairize the work of others. 

   It occurs to me that the defense must be, well, we are only listing it.  Well, that makes you a conspirator, and open to every statute under the RICO act.  You have knowingly entered into an organized venture to defraud others of a valuable commodity that they own, and you should be punished.  If you list stolen proerty that has value on a search engine you own, then you have profited from that listing, and have damaged the original owner of that property by not ensuring he recieves the renumeration for the work.  

   Seems to be sensible to me.  If something I own causes damage to something else, I am liable for that damage.  My example is if my dog bites you, it’s my resonsibility.  This plays out all over the country everyday as dog owners are punished for damage their animals perpetrate.  Why not search engine owners when their search engines are used to profit off works stolen from others?


Iowa Straw Poll: Winners and Losers

August 12, 2007

  Well, the numbers are in, and it was an underwhelming event for a lot of people.  I’m going to make everyone happy, and everyone mad with this one. 

winner: Mitt Romney.  He took over 31% of the vote in an 11 horse race. Obviously the front runner.

Loser:    Mitt Romney…right…Giuliani and McCain had withdrawn,  and Fred Thompson isn’t in yet.  He took 31% against a field thinner than last Years Preakness.

Winner:  Ron Paul took 9.1% of the vote.  This wasn’t a New Hampshire picnic poll.  This was the IOWA STRAW POLL. This is a campaign that is probably running somewhere between stoked And euphoric right now.  His wife is going to be ok, so Dr. Ron ad a real good day.  Congrats Pauliacs.

Loser: Ron Paul.  Holy cripes, what are you thinking.  He finished behind “I’m one nut shy of being a fruitcake Tom Tancredo,” two jokers bucking for televangelist status,  and Mormon Mitt, “friend to big business, politics as usual, but I look great in this suit” Mitt.  This isn’t half as impressive as a three legged cow that can jump rope.This was about as damning a shot across the bow of the Ron Paul no organizational skills whatever campaign juggernaut.  To many buffoons talking about stealing bus rides, and diebold voting machines, and not staying on message.

Winner:  Mike Huckabee pulled over 18 percent with a serious conservative christian platform.  He can obviously inspire the base, and he beat Brownback.  This was a two horse race for Mike, and he beat the horse he had to beat.  He’ll be around for awhile.

Loser:  Mike Huckabee.  He can convince the base, but the far right base is smaller than squirrel testicles.  This guy couldn’t beat larry Flynt in a race for the white House.

Winner: Sam Brownback  His wife loves him, jesus loves him, and he probably has a dog that loves him.

Loser: Sam brownback.  This is horror story stuff.  Turn out the lights when you follow the rest of ’em out the door.

Winner: Tom Tancredo 4th…you’re kidding right.  Great job getting out the vote Tom.

Loser:  Tom Tancredo took 13.1% of the vote.  There are a lot of whacko’s in Iowa.    The guy belongs in a straitjacket and should seriously consider some electroshock therapy.  13.1?  thats just incredible.  Are there really that many deaf, mute blind people in Iowa?  Who knew.

The Field:  By guys…go home, have sex, get fat and contemplate how it feels to be beaten in the most mediocre field of candidates the Republican Party has ever fielded.

Republican party:  Wow, did you get a poor turnout.  you wanted 38,000, claim 30,000, and had about 14,000 vote.  Niiiiiiiiice.  Would you like to concede now or should we have the Democratic candidates tie their frontal lobes behind their backs for the rest of this  trouncing?


Take 2 Minutes To See How Wrong You Are

August 12, 2007

  Yes, you the incredibly bright American people are wrong.   All of you anti-war types, and bring home the war types have no idea what you are talking about.  You think the administration is stupid for walking into this mess without a plan.  I say, “yeah right”

They had a plan, because they knew exactly what we were facing, and what the outcome would be if we took down Saddam Hussein.  They knew we’d be in it up to our ears for years, and would be virtually alone in the endeavor.  they knew every pitfall and pratfall on the road to a democratic Iraq, and Dick Cheney at least has known since 1994.

So why really, if what he says here he knew all this time, did he recommend the current course of action?  What possible reason could there be for him to advocate opening the Pandora’s box that is Iraq?  Don’t say oil or money.  He needs neither, and they don’t make sense.  Thats just easy leftie answers.