No No No NO

Washington Wire - WSJ.com : Political Perceptions: Sarah Palin for 2012? Sure, why not.
I swear, if she becomes a legit candidate in 2012, I'm going to kill myself.

Sarah Palin Supports the Aerial Hunting of Wolves
And a hundred other reasons.

She makes me sick.

Decline of American Power

SPIEGEL ONLINE - Druckversion - The End of Arrogance: America Loses Its Dominant Economic Role - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International
Oh dear. We are in trouble.

Bush is a broken record stuck on the word 'terror' and that's not the main concern anymore. Or at the moment, anyway. The UN wanted to hear about what we're going to do about Wall Street and all Bush42 could talk about was terrorism.
An important issue, surely, but that won't mean a damn thing if the financial world comes down around our ears.

Our allies in the UN have nothing but contempt for the poor man* and we need them. We need them to help us out, just as they need us--we're the biggest economy on the planet but they're all tied into us. We need them if we're going to face the future on stable feet.

I honestly don't know if we'll ever recover our status as an economic super power. Only time will tell, but if we don't, who's the next in line? India? China? A European nation? That's a power vacuum that will have to be filled.

Somebody called this a post-America age. I'm think that's right, which scares me as part of the next generation of people to inherit the country. I'll be footing the bill for the Me Generation's folly. I've been mortgaged and my grandchildren might pay that off. I don't know if I ever can.

On the other hand, as the author pointed out, America was unjustifiably proud. Sure, we had some bragging rights, but this country went too far. We couldn't admit when we were wrong, couldn't adjust. The US displayed an awful lot of tunnel vision.

Bottom line is this:
Bush, by being out of his depth, fucked up.
Wall Street and the government fucked up.
The next president is fucked.
The next generation is fucked.
We're all fucked for the time being.

*At this point, I pity him. I really do. His puppeteers have found themselves a prospective replacement and his strings are all worn out anyway. He's faded. A faded man used as an illusion by people far smarter than he is. A man out of his depth for eight years who never seemed to even touch bottom. This crisis, the Iraq war, and torture are going to be the biggest smears on his already checkered legacy. He will go down in history as probably the worst president in American history.
He probably could have scrapped by as a care-taker president, handing off a mostly intact America to the next guy, but that's long gone. That died on September 10th. He could have given a cryogenically frozen US to the next guy if he had stuck with Afghanistan, but he allowed that to be melted with a blow torch when Cheney and his other handlers threw the Iraq war at him.

Perhaps a Silly Thought...

It seems to me that there's a flaw in the Republican view of, well, the world, I suppose.
With the lurverly collapse of the market recently, they blame the Democrats for forcing the government to offer loans to those who couldn't afford it. Allowing them to be irresponsible and that we--read all those with money enough not to worry about loosing the house--are to catch them. Part of being a true adult is having the opportunity to fail and be irresponsible, though I'd prefer that you didn't do it at my expense.

All right, it sucks that taxes are going to bail those Wall Street bastards out, but part of the deal is that the lenders CHOOSE to be irresponsible "(though, to be far, more than half the shit we're in was created by Wall Street). I'd like to let the chips fall where they may, but I dunno if we can do that.

Analysis of Ahmadinejad's chat with Larry King--for Deanna

Yeah, double standard all right. Israel's an ally, Iran's considered an enemy. Neither one are very open to inspection, though since Israel owes us, I doubt they'll use the nukes without provocation. That would look really bad for us.
He removes himself from the issue of hostility. BOTH countries are to blame for that (though I can see Cheney issuing some threats behind closed doors).
Lol, " AHMADINEJAD (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): No. We do not a preference of any sort... And it's not important to us either."
Disagree with him, but it's still funny how casually he brushes the election of one of the most powerful people in the world off.

I would really like to see Obama have a chat with Ahmadinejad, but that would be feeding into the hands of O'Reilly and Limbaugh.

"AHMADINEJAD (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): Our country of Iran has a historical presence that extends to 7,000 years. And never has the Iranian nation taken a misstep against another nation. Throughout history, it has demonstrated that." ORLY? I seem to remember the Iran-Iraq war(s) being instigated by both sides.

Love the sideswipes he makes periodically. "But this defense does not mean that we must infringe on the rights of other nations, not at all."

This is new, "You are aware that in the course of the U.S. attack on Iraq, we were
asked, in fact, to enter into the coalition or the war, to some extent
-- not the coalition, but the war -- just to make up for the war that
Saddam launched against us that went on for eight years." Hadn't heard that before.
This one's new, too, "But let me tell you, 118 member states of the NAM, the Non- Aligned
Movement, have actually supported our peaceful nuclear pursuits.
Fifty-seven member states of the Organization of Islamic States have
also given their support to us in this regard. And there are many other
organizations -- multilateral organizations that have supported our
endeavor and efforts."

He's right, certainly, about Iraq. It's the keystone to the Middle East. Been wondering recently if the Iraq Invasion was a power play, too. Showing bin Laden who's the boss and everything (not that the invasion actually took much effort).

He sidesteps a lot of questions--typical from what I remember of him. And is right about the bomb as a purely state-oriented political threat. States want to be around in the long run, after all.

Focuses a lot on Israel, which will not reassure most Americans. We like Israel, we like having an ally in the region besides Turkey, we like the feel-good of having given the Holocaust survivors a homeland again.
And just as a note, the division of Palestine isn't America's fault--that was Churchill. Whatever you can say about Sharon, he was moving people out of the occupied territories, which was good. Olmert started movin' 'em back in after Sharon became a veggie. And Arafat had the opportunity to have a homeland again through the Oslo peace talks under Clinton, but refused it because it wasn't the old borders again. And Palestine DOES have free elections--that's how Abbas got in power much to the concernation of the US.
Wish he'd give a definition of a Zionist. Does that include someone who lives in Israel, oe just those that support it as a State. What about the people in government or in the army? They don't have a choice about being in the army, you know. Required for all 18 year olds.
Denying the Holocaust doesn't help his case in not being a threat.
"Or in Alaska, perhaps." LOL, chase out the moose! And they can have Palin--nobody will miss her.

"AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I have no concerns in that regard
because they aren't able to do that, because the worst thing the U.S.
government can do would be an attack. I think that in the United States
there are enough reasonable people, smart people, who would not allow
the U.S. government to make a mistake."
Hope so. We can't do a three-front war.
"Iran is an extremely big country and very developed and powerful, too. With big people." Nearly died. Sounds like a little boy describing a fish he caught. If he were to be more explict in what he means (big hearted, he said later), iinstead of sounding like a blaggart, that would be good.
Makes a silly arguement about homosexuality. And ignores some gruesome hangings (hung by a crane until dead).

"AHMADINEJAD (through translator): If it an, it would be the best
scenario. But I think that it needs a timetable. That's what I think. A
clear timetable so that it allows for their withdrawal in the shortest
a period of time. Because the presence of the United States there has
not reduced tension and it has not limited terrorism, either. In fact,
it has increased terrorism."
Agreed. There's blog by an Iraqi woman called Neurotic Iraq Wife who says we need to get our asses out, because it would be best for Iraq (the September 2008 archive, "The Blatant Neurotic Iraqi Truth..." if you're interested).

"...wherever we can meet with the American people and to learn about them
and their lives. We think that having talks is the best way." Dunno if LA is the best place to learn about American culture (it's such an anamoly!), but he's right. If you understand a people, you can communicate effectively with them, and if he wants to convince us Iran is not a threat, he need to do that better than he has. He's also right about saying we need more contact with Iran, because if we understand a country, we can deal with it effectively. And despite being friends with you, I don't know too terribly much about Iranian culture.

NOW . Poll | PBS

Why?

My decision !

Not that you probably care.

Politics - News, Opinion and Analysis from CNN.com

This should not be! McCain is not going to be good for the US and is coniving! >:(