Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Holy, Shit, It's Finally Over

Last night, Senator Barack Obama unofficially captured the nomination of the Democrat Party, finally getting enough delegates to declare victory, and he did so. More on that in a bit. However, Senator Clinton has yet to withdraw, which is bound to give Rush Limbaugh a full-on chubby.

Most of the talking heads think this is just an attempt for Hillary to milk as much as she can from the jaws of defeat. It makes sense. Although I think Dee has the best YouTube clip posted that illustrates this point.

So as I did with Huck-a duck as he clung on I now say to Senator Clinton: Suck it up, Hil, it's over. Live in the now. Go back to the Senate and dream of opportunities lost:

(I'm going straight to Hell for this pic. But if I don't use it now, I never will, as Hillary really can't last any longer.)

So Senator vs Senator. Barack Obama vs McCain. Screaming liberal vs lite liberal. Where's my rat poison?

So after her non-concession speech, Barack Obam took to the stage and outlined CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN. I noticed that every change he proposed involved expanding government in some way. Again, I listened to his speech, but it was late, so correct me if ye possess the grapefruits. Here's what he's going to change (by piling on the bureaucrats):

Create Jobs - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Make Wages Fair - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Fix Schools - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Rewarding Work - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Fixing infrastructure - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Fixing energy - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Renewing our Commitment To Energy - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Making Cities Prosperous - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Fixing Health Care - Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Stopping Corporate Pollution and Profits -Yes He Can (let the government do it).
Reduce Debt - And how is he going to do this and everything else?

So that's change (is all) we can believe (will be left) in (our pockets).

Oh, and John McCain made a speech too. I'd say more if I cared.


Dee said...

Yes, while reading this post I'm listening to Obama's speech in the background. Gag me with a spoon!!!!!!!!!

I also heard part of McCain's speech earlier tonight and I think his speech making abilities are pathetic.

I was talking to 2 men at my karate studio the other night and they both were talking about how they couldn't stand Bush. I was doing my best to defend him. The one guy was saying how poorly Bush spoke. I am often so inspired by Bush speaking and McCain just makes me cringe. Granted some of that is because I despise McCain but he just isn't inspirational or well-spoken at all, IMHO.

I don't know about going straight to hell for that pic, just a little politically incorrect ;-).

George Will was on Hannity's radio show today saying that whether Hillary wants to accept it or concede or not, its over!! I'm not saying it as eloquently as he did but it was a great point. There was some merit to her staying in until now but at this stage she just looks spiteful and pathetic.

I was wondering this morning why Obama doesn't give her a gracious way to bow out and then I realized there is genuine animosity between the 2 camps and Obama isn't going to help her out AT ALL. He's going to leave her flapping in the wind, you can't really blame him after some of what Slick Willy has said about him. This whole election season has just been mass chaos.

Dee said...

Oh, and I'm glad you liked the Young Hillary video ;-)).

Name: Soapboxgod said...

I am not exagerating when I say this:

I watched about 10 minutes of his speech (hell it was in my own flippin' backyard for Pete's sake) and I literally felt something not quite right in the pit of my stomach.

You hit the nail squarely on the head Patrick. How is exacerbating everything that is/was wrong with the Bush administration a prescription for "Change"????

I know you have that little blurb about jokes with respect to Ron Paul on your page. And, for the record I was never a Ron Paul supporter. He went overboard obsessing about the cost of the wars without putting any emphasis on the real meat and potatoes.

But, when it came to monetary policy (save for his insistance of returning to a gold standard) and domestic issues, this guy was really the one advocating bold change (getting rid of the IRS, getting rid of the Department of Education, getting rid of the Department of Homeland Security, etc.)

Seems to me that "Change" would be taking a sizeable chunk right out of government and stripping it down to its bare bones.

Expanding it on the other hand (as Obama is wont to do), is the furthest thing from change.

It's more akin to putting gasoline on a raging fire.

Patrick M said...

Dee: As I listen to what Obama prescribes for this country, everything seems to require a government program. To his credit, at least McCain pays lip service to the free market (as in free market global warming legislation (ick)). And I have yet to hear the Obama people explain how expanding the government on every front will help this country.

It may be over, but at least Hillary will play the Huck-a-duck card to the convention.

SBG: I make fun of Ron Paul and his legion of retards because they're a bunch of myopic antiwar spambots. You can tell when a Paultomaton starts posting because it's usually a 1-paragraph runon sentence they pasted from somewhere else.

But Ron Paul, as well as Libertarian candidate Bob Barr, have an assload of fantastic ideers. And while it may require a more incremental approach than they advocate to enact them, it would give us a prosperity that neither party can deliver through their ever-expanding government programs.

The problem with both is packaging and stupid statements. I've covered the Paulaholic problem. Bob Barr would have my vote today, except he calls our troops in Iraq an "occupying" force. That's a really bad thing, and I can't vote for someone who's saying that.

You're right when you say Obama is not about change. When compared to Libertarians, he is really the status quo on steroids and crack.

Obob said...

the clip is a classic. I can't believe Vern from Stand By Me did that.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

The thing that I find truly amazing in all of this too is that Hillary wasn't deemed liberal enough for these guys.

I mean, I never thought I'd defend the Clintons, but let's be objectively honest here, they got railroaded by the left of the left (MSNBC, Vanity Fair, et al.)

They used to be the darlings of the Democratic party and now, they've been reduced to a mere flash in the pan really. And why??

It's because the Democratic party is so "progressive" that they'll latch on to the newest and shiniest thing regardless of the substance.

The only thing that could trump Obama (and trust me they'll kick him under the bus in a New York minute if it came to pass) would be something like a Transexual, Black, Jewish, Homosexual, who was into S&M or some damn thing like that.

It's that whole change for change's sake thing.

Patrick M said...

I have one thing to say about the Left's turn against the Clintons:


Toad734 said...

Jobs: You mean like the TVA and New Deal. Ya that was a terrible time for our country, the lax government intervention in the late 20s had no dire consequences

Wages: You think businesses are going do it? Do you think its right to pay someone a dollar per hour because you can? You think when Wal-Mart closes all US MFG and there are no more jobs left that they should be able to hire people for $1 because those people have no other options? Sounds like a great world for your children to grow up in.

Rewarding work: I think he means take incentives not to work away, such as Clinton did.

Fixing Infrastructure: That’s the governments job. Are you suggesting they not fix bridges?

Fixing energy: no one can do that, especially not Exxon and the private sector. In fact, they and the Auto industry have been fighting against it. I’m not saying Obama or any government can fix it but they can certainly keep people from cock blocking progress.

Making Cities Prosperous: Again, nothing the free market will do. Not sure really what you mean by this, maybe public works type stuff which, creates jobs.

Fixing Health Care: Again, nothing the free market will do. If the free market had their way you would pay $5000 for a cast and your insurance company would deny the claim. Does Obama have a good plan for this, no, but neither does Blue Cross Blue Shield.

No one wants to stop corporate profits. Are you saying that the river in Cleveland should be on fire if that is what industry wants?

Reduce Debt. Yes he can. You know a Republican can't do it.

McCain is kind of painful to listen to. I never realized that before until now. Not as painful and Bush but still rather painful.

Patrick M said...

Toad: This is where we have a fundamental disagreement. You, as well as Obama, believe that the greatness of this country comes from government. The rest of us seek to limit government's control over out lives, which mean solutions can and will come from the free market or from the individual.

But on debt reduction, if the government takes on everything I've listed, how the hell will he not run up more debt?

J_G said...

Patrick, libertarians have always been on the fringe. They do however come up with iders that useful every once in a while. Their prescription is to get government out of the way in every instance but that isn't always the right answer.

The right answer is doing the right thing for the country with the least amount of government interference and lowest amount of taxpayer funded soltutions. Businesses must have the freedom to do business but there must be oversight to keep businesses from becoming a detriment to a free society, this has always been the wish of Americans about the relationship of government to business. It is up to the American people to tell the government where to draw the line.

Sadly, since the government is charge of the schools the people have become less educated about the role of government and less involved in holding elected officials reponsible for their behavior. Only a handful of leftwing zealots turn out to vote for their candidates and conservatives have lost their voice because of their inattention and having Mccain as the republican candidate is no one else's fault more than conservatives for becoming lax and lazy. Freedom has always relied on vigilance.

Patrick M said...

J_G: That's why I haven't gone full Libertarian. I will, however if the GOP dies the death it deserves and all us conservatives flock to the party, as it's closer to what we seek than the Republican apparatus is now.