This morning while in Fargo, ND, Obama (looking especially dashing in the above photo) said that he would be open to "refining" his withdrawal strategy after his visit to Iraq at the end of the month. Sounds totally logical to me. However, the world of politics has decided this choice of words make him a "flip flopper" and have said he now shares the "same position as Sen. McCain." WTF?! In what world does this make sense?! It is amazing how people get paid ridiculous sums of money to dissect semantics and we call them advisors, newscasters, pundits, etc. Obama is simply being proactive. He is not in the military and therefore cannot make brash decisions about an exit strategy without consulting the people on the front lines. He has made clear that his intention is to pull all units out in 16 months, but he would be insane to claim that this is a promise. Is this flip flopping? Or is it perhaps just level headed leadership that the American public has not experienced in 8-20 years? Here's to hoping the general public can see through all the bull that is the media and appreciate the true meaning of what Obama meant!
Is politics synonymous with semantics?
Supreme Court ruling today...WTFFFF?!
Today the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty "unconstitutional" for child rapists! Let me repeat that, today the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty "unconstitutional" for repeated child rapists. OH WAIT THERE'S MORE...the direct ruling:
"a death sentence for one who raped but did not kill a child, and who did not intend to assist another in killing the child, is unconstitutional"
The most offensive part of this ruling is that the Court left the death penalty open to crimes involving: treason, espionage, terrorism, and drug kingpin activity. Isn't there a problem when the judicial system can choose to take the life of someone who threatens so-called national security (which many would argue is oftentimes a rule of the game when in war), but ruining an innocent child's life isn't considered that big a deal. When the ruling first became public this morning I spoke with a few friends who felt the same rage, so I have to believe I am not hyper-sensitive or crazy. Here's to hoping this November brings us a NEW DAWN!
Clinton campaign debt...Obama's responsibility?
I will not pretend that I am Bill Maher or Chris Matthews but I have followed politics as closely as ever during this presidential race...there is one thing I simply cannot understand. Why is it the nominees responsibility to cover the debt of the loser? This is a question open to all, if someone could explain this to me I would feel much smarter. I have watched the reports, read the articles and I still can't make sense of it. We all watched Hillary go deeper and deeper into debt, going into her personal account to the tune of somewhere around $11 million...all this was done when it was clear that her chances of winning were slimmer than a supermodel. So WHY is it Obama and his campaign financiers duty to clean up her mess? I have nothing against Hillary, she's made history and that is wonderful but it seems to me she was aware of what she was getting herself into. Please post your responses, I beg of you!
