So has anyone else noticed that the birthers seem to be concentrated in the same areas as those who are the most religious?

It's almost as if religion trains people to believe what they want, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.

I have to note, however, that I have only seen correlation, not causality.  But I wouldn't be surprised to find a causal link, would you?

I noted on the GOP website today (http://www.gop.com/news/NewsRead.aspx?Guid=e619d8ab-cbcc-454f-ad99-6f410307b4fb) that Barack Obama has broken one of his campaign promises:

Obama Promises Not To Raise Any Taxes On Anyone Making Under $250,000 Per Year:

Obama: "If you are a family making less than $250,000, my plan will not raise your taxes - not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks On Taxes, Kaukauna, WI, 6/12/08)

But Obama Raised The Tobacco Tax, A Tax That Disproportionately Affects The Poor:

"This is one tax that disproportionately affects the poor, who are more likely to smoke than the rich." "This is one tax that disproportionately affects the poor, who are more likely to smoke than the rich.

It's nice to see that the Republicans are still so caring and loving for the least fortunate among us that they are able to distort reality in such an unambiguous way.

They love the downtrodden so very much.

It's amazing - I'm calling folks in Virginia, many in rural areas, as part of the Obama campaign's calling spree.  I find myself slipping into a bit of a drawl as the day goes on.  I've spend some time near the West Virginia border, and I am really enjoying the chance to talk to the people that were under the radar when I spent time there.

There is a big surprise on the way, and I have my own prediction.  Please note that there's no way they can win with her, and they are learning this.  And they can't win if they drop her, because it shows that JM has horrible judgement.  So how will they solve the problem?

She will be ill.  Very ill.  Gravely ill.  Her doctors will come out to the press, and they will tell the world that Sarah has some horrible sickness.  Cancer?  MS?  Atrial fibrillation?  I don't know.

She will be very sick, and although her doctors will predict a complete recovery, she will be unable to undergo the rigors of a campaign and the stress of an administration transition during this trying time.

It is possible that the illness will strike one of her children, but that's not so likely, in my opinion, as it harms the "Country First" argument.

Out steps Palin, in steps another VP candidate.  Romney is my guess, but it could very well be Rudy.

You heard it here first.

It's really disheartening, the more I think about it.  All I have to do is listen to the conservatives with whom I work.  Some are spontaneous statements, some came in the context of conversations, but all are sickening:

"I think that she has the cutest family!  You know she totally loves them."

"They keep trying to make her seem like she doesn't know what she's doing.  I think that's wrong."

"She obviously stands up for what she believes, I don't care if I agree."

"What is vetting?"

"I like the thing about the plane." [I tell co-worker that she sold the plane at a half-million dollar loss]  "That doesn't matter, it's the thought that counts."

"She was so funny!  I was totally lauging!"

"Being a mayor is obviously better than being a community organizer."

"She really tells it like it is." [I ask, "how is it?"]  "She is just truthful, you can tell."

...and my favorite:

"I don't care what her policy positions are.  I just like her!"

Oh man, we may actually be in trouble.  There are a lot of people like this in the world.  No wonder they see intellectual curiosity and ivy-league educations as a negative.

Alaska sure is big!  But it has a population smaller than the following cities, as of 2005:

New York, N.Y., Los Angeles, Calif., Chicago, Ill., Houston, Tex., Philadelphia, Pa., Phoenix, Ariz., San Antonio, Tex., San Diego, Calif., Dallas, Tex., San Jose, Calif., Detroit, Mich., Indianapolis, Ind., Jacksonville, Fla., San Francisco, Calif., Columbus, Ohio, Austin, Tex.,  and Memphis, Tenn.

It does, however, have a larger population than Baltimore.  So there's that.

Oh Fred, oh Fred...

I was disenfranchised when we voted this month.  Let me tell you what happened:

According to all of the materials I got in the mail, voting happens on Tuesday.  The rules, as written, say that I was supposed to show up at my polling place on Tuesday.  I read these rules beforehand, and I understood them.

However, I decided that despite what the rules said, I wanted to vote on Sunday.  I wanted to get an early jump on voting, since I didn't like the schedule that had been established.  I showed up to my polling place on Sunday at about 1:30, and it was closed.  They wouldn't let me vote!  I wanted to vote on Sunday, but they said that I was too early, that I was trying to vote before I was supposed to!  I was disenfranchised!

In fact, there were a whole bunch of people hanging around the polling place, and they all wanted to vote on Sunday too!  We are being discriminated against - we are disenfranchised!  We wrote down all of our preferences on pieces of paper, and we were earnest and passionate about our preferences, but no one counted our votes!  I'm incredibly angry about this.

I have to admit, I knew what the rules were.  I was informed of the rules beforehand.  I was told specifically that if I showed up on Sunday, my vote wouldn't count. 

I want them to now retroactively change the voting rules so that my voice can be heard.


PS.  I hope that this allegory doesn't need to be decoded.

Here are the inner thoughts of a wiley Republican:

Hmmmm.  There seems to be a movement of Hillary supporters that are not going to go easily to the Obama side.  I have seen their websites, the hillaryis44.org, and the PUMA PAC site.  I wonder if I could use this to my advantage.  Hmmm....

I know!  I will post some blog entries and comments over there to fan the flames!  Ah-HA!  I am a genius!  God knows that I hate Hillary more then anyone else in the public sphere, but that doesn't matter.  I will post over and over about how wronged I feel that she was treated so badly (tee-hee!), and insist that all of her supporters band together to support McCain!

I am so smart!  So evil, so manipulative, and so incredibly, sublimely, deliciously smart!

I hate women, or at least I don't believe in treating them as equals.  Who is the best president we could elect to make sure that women stay subject to the will of men?  McCain, of course!  And there is no better way, no deliciously and ironically evil way to get him into office than to convinve women to vote for him!  Ha ha ha!  Ho ho ho!

"Gosh," I'll tell them, "It's so unfair that Hillary isn't the nominee!  Obama must really hate women!  You must not vote for him!"  Women are such suckers!

"Gee whiz," I'll say, "we must now switch our allegience away from Hillary, and despite her plea, we should not vote for the Democratic nominee!  The only possible reason she could support Obama now is because she has been forced by the strong-arm tactics of woman-hating Democrats!"  I know that women will buy this, because they are so stupid!  Ha Ha!

Gosh, this reminds me of the olden days, when we convinced Christians to vote for us by exploiting their fear of gays, while helping them ignore their Christian obligation to help the poor!  Or when we convinced the poor in the south to vote against their own economic interests by scaring them with the prospect of gun control.

Heh heh heh, I am so deliciously eeeeevil!

Many of our once and future friends over at hillaryis44 (please note my opitmism) are making a fatal flaw.  There seem to be a number of 44ers that are angry about votes that weren't counted.  Many are upset about the sexism that Obama supporters have levied towards Hillary, and by extension, them.  And they are angry enough about the situation that they are willing to vote for McCain in protest.

What is important now is not the primary - the primary is officially over - but the future of our government.  The 44ers are placing more importance on the election than they are on the governing.

It reminds me of people who spend so much time and effort and money worrying about a wedding, that they never take the time to think forward to the marriage.

The wedding is over in a day.  The marriage lasts well beyond that.  Sometimes the marriage suffers when there is too much attention placed on the wedding.

Please, 44ers, look ahead to the marriage, because the wedding will be over soon.

I got a real kick out of Senator McCain's speech.  Specifically, I enjoyed the 30 seconds after he finished speaking. 

First of all, it was hillarious to watch Mr. Cottage Cheese walk off the stage after a corpse-like speech, and the PA starts blasting "Right Here, Right Now" by Van Halen.  Seriously?  Right Here, Right Now? 

Woo-HOO, Cottage Cheese ROCKS!

Then, it was a true study in contrasts to watch his crowd after the speech to Obama's crowd.  Take a look at following clip, at 7:25.  Everyone waves their signs for about five seconds, then they all stand motionless, looking around like meerkats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpQnJfElZvo

For reference:

http://www.noelkingsley.com/blog/meercat.jpg

Now, watch Obama's crowd.  

I wrote a paragraph about the contrast, but I deleted it.  There's no need.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCeXbYFHJsY

1.  A brief play in one act:

Me: "Don't make fun of me."
Girlfriends:  "Because you're crying?"
Me:  "Not crying.  But close."

2.  I'm wishing I had the foresight to get myself a big pitcher of Kool-Aid to drink during this speech.  I'll have to settle for 2 big martinis and a bottle of expensive wine.  Wow, what will I be drinking in November?

3.  My lady is expecting.  There is a 12 week old fetus in her belly.  I know that the birth, in December, will be the greatest day of my life. I suspect that today is good training.

4.  I have already admitted to being a Kool-Aid drinker, so bear with me on this.  Could I make money selling t-shirts that say, "I'd switch teams for Obama."...?  I can't be the only one.

5.  The last time I felt like this:  I was 2 months short of being allowed to vote, but the sight of Bill Clinton, standing in the snow, voice hoarse, telling us that the future was better was enough to make me feel that there was hope for our nation.  I'm glad to feel that way again.

I will start with a disclaimer:  I am a white male.

I watched a video today about the sexism that Hillary is facing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke64670GkZ8&watch_response), and was disappointed at the broad (pun actually not intended at all) brush that was used, and is being used by many of those crying foul on the sexism issue.

The spectre of sexism is getting a lot of attention in this primary.  Obama is sexist!  His supporters are sexist!  The media is sexist!  Generally, the rebuttals I see can be distilled to, "Oh yeah?  Well, Hillary and her supporters are racist!"  This is not a fulfilling answer to the issue.

Granted, there are real, genuine, bigoted sexists out there.  I know, as do you, that there are people who WILL NOT vote for a woman, simply because she is a woman.  I have no tolerance or respect for these people; these folks have a problem, and are a problem, and we'd be better off freezing them in carbonite. 

What distresses me is that there are plenty of people who don't like Hillary because of her record, or because of her tactics, reardless of her gender, and they are being painted with the same brush as those who are genunie mysogynists.

1)  People who don't like Hillary, and choose to display their distaste in sexist terms.

Hillary lost me when she voted to go to war.  Her credibility was dashed.  She lost me more when she chose to stay in the race when it became evident that she couldn't win without changing the rules.  She is a sore loser,  and is willing to destroy the party out of bitterness, rather than exit with class.  These behaviors would turn me off of ANY candidate, male OR female. 

A lot of people agree with me on this one.  We have lost respect for her because of what she has done, regardless of her gender.

So people attack.  And the weapon that many people are using, in this case, is the word "bitch."  Some are calling her shrill, some are making reference to tratitionally (but not necessarily accurate) "female" characteristics, such as monthly instability or her pant suits.

I don't like it, and I don't approve.  But the fact is, many people out there turn to the nearest, most convenient weapon they have in order to demonize the opponent, and in this case, that weapon is sexist language and imagery. 

This is sexism not in its purest form, but in its laziest form (at least the real sexists have the balls to stand up for a prejudice they truly believe in).  It's dispicable, but it's a behavior displayed as a reaction to hating Hillary.  It's hating the candidate brings out a more latent or passive sexism, not being sexist that makes them hate the candidate.  It's not an excuse for acting like a total jerk, but I think that it's untoward to suggest that everyone that displays sexist attitudes towards Hillary opposes her because of that sexism.

I don't like Bush.  I think he is a dick.  The word "dick" is certainly not gender neutral.  Does the fact that I call him a dick suggest that I am sexist against men?  Of course not. Granted, if anyone could make me hate men simply by being a man, it would be Bush.  Despite the many opportunities I've offered, no one has yet accused me of sexism for saying that Bushy-Boo is a dick.

2.  People who don't like Hillary, and are branded as sexist simply for their opposition to her.

This one is what really chaps my hide.  Those who can't stand Hillary, and are intelligent and classy enough not to start slinging epithets are STILL being branded as sexist.  In other words, when you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  Some examples:

- Obama made a motion to indicate that he was brushing criticism off his shoulder, and Geraldine Ferraro said that it was sexist, because it belittled Hillary.  Seriously?  If he were brushing off the criticisms of McCain, would he be a racist?  Ageist?  Slimebagist?

- Obama said, "I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically, when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal."  His use of the word "periodically" with the phrase of "feeling down," has been called a reference to her menstrual cycle.  This is quite a stretch, methinks.  If you look hard enough, you can find anything.

How about Olbermann's comment about someone taking her into a room, and only he comes out.  Is he advocating violence against women?  I think he was more likely referring to violence against someone who is harming the greater good out of stubbornness and personal arrogance.  I don't condone violence, but it's ridiculous to assume that an allegorical refernce to violence towards someone who happens to be a woman has to necessarily be translated into violence against women as a whole.  I'd say he's more guilty of advocating violence against candidates than violence against women.  Bobby Kennedy, anyone?

Granted, it's out there.  Sexism is alive and well.  Look at advertising, pay scales, double standards.  We have a long way to go.  I believe that if we had a female president, it would go a long way towards decreasing the sexist attitudes in our society.  But let's call a spade a spade (will anyone call me out on my obvious racism on that one?).  Opposing Hillary does not a sexist make.

So.  A few months ago, my pit-bull-style Hillary-supporting boss and I were discussing the nomination.  I believe it was right around New Hampshire Time.

Her thoughts:  "Obama is an empty suit with no experience.  He is a buffoon."

My thoughts:  "Hillary is too polarizing, and the last thing we need in this country is a polarizing president.  Plus, she went to the dark side when she voted for the war"

Our thought that we had in common:  "If your preferred candidate wins the nomination, I will hold my nose and vote, because the worst option on the table is another four-to-eight years of a Republican presidency.

She and I made that pledge long ago, and although she is pissed as Hell, she's not so pissed as to cut off her nose to spite her face.

I know that if the positions were reversed, I'd be making my "Hillary Makes My Gall Rise, But I'm Voting For Her Anyway" T-Shirt right about now.

And believe me, when I consider the damage that Bushy-Boo has done to this country, and when I think of the compounded damage that McSame can do as Bushy-Boo's successor, you'd best believe that I will vote for a Democrat - ANY Democrat (thank God that Lieberman is not a Democrat) before I vote for McCain.

Do we want to continue to mortgage this war for our kids to pay?

Do we want 25 years of continued erosion of our civil liberties by an activist neocon Supreme Court?

Do we want to piss away what's left of our economy?

Do we want to suppress the rights of minorities and homoxexuals?

Do we want to increase the divide between rich and poor while continuing to eliminate the middle class?

I think that the answer to all these questions is NO NO NO.

So lets think about the future, not about hurt feelings.  If you have to plug your nose, so be it.  But get out and vote for a Democrat in November.