On healthcare reform, the Iran election and free speech

It’s been an interesting summer.

Obama and his Democrats are busy trying to convince America that their brand of healthcare reform is a necessary solution to a major problem. The President has held press conferences, held televised town hall meetings and tried his best to convey the importance of making sure Americans have a quality healthcare system. In the past few days, his fellow Democrats have tried similar town hall meetings with their own constituencies as they’re currently on recess.

Judging from the media’s portrayal, they’re being met with the same gush of fury we saw during the election. It’s the kind of fury that results in images like this, no doubt further provoked by weirdos like this. They DNC has gone as far as calling this extremely vocal group a “mob”, which is all fine and good except what the DNC has done is further alienate and provoke the Republican party’s fringe elements. It’s worth noting that not every town hall meeting is probably resulting in furious shouting matches where little quality discourse is occurring. Also worth noting is the likely possibility that few people actually know the full details of the proposed healthcare reform bill (myself included), which is why it’s important that facts are actually being shared instead of quelled by loud indignation.

But that’s not what this post is about. It’s about something I heard during the course of one of these town hall meetings. Something about having free speech itself attacked by those holding the town hall meeting. Something about not having constitutional rights honored. I passed it off as just some lady not feeling her voice was being heard and figured it was probably how a lot of people felt. And then I read this.

Nevermind that the article doesn’t address free speech at all, it’s the headline that has me alarmed. I’m pretty sure our freedom of speech is secure. People are voicing their opinion, are being heard and filmed, loud and clear. You can find plenty of clips to back this up. When individuals are asked to leave a town hall meeting, it seems like it’s because those individuals are not allowing the actual purpose of the meeting, the exchange of free and wide-ranging ideas, to occur.

We’re not witnessing this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7yxzbEiIDU

As Iran’s youth fight to establish their rights to  free speech and a free democracy through a free election, we should perhaps take a moment to note something very important. Our Democratic politicians are making an effort to convey their thoughts on healthcare reform via a town hall meeting. They’re also, I expect, looking to hear from their constituents. Constituents should also have the ability to hear from each other. It’s a meeting after all.

You can’t find this kind of interplay in Iran, or China or likely anywhere else where free speech and free thought have been pushed to the wayside. Let’s not be so hasty to say free speech is under fire just yet.

What is Apple’s “Brick”?

The tech world is buzzing about Apple potentially releasing a new product come October 14th internally being referred to as “Brick”. What this could mean is not entirely clear, but there’s the usual talk about a Macbook/Macbook Pro refresh (needed), a newer Mac Mini Pro and of course, the oft-desired Mac Tablet/Netbook. The theory I like best though comes from Macenstein.com:

…it is now our belief that The Brick has nothing to do with the device actually looking physically like a brick at all. Rather, we feel it is likely that it is simply a name for an upcoming product (or group of products) that Apple thinks will be sexy enough to pull a huge marketshare away from Microsoft. After all, how do you break “Windows”? You throw a brick through them!

Bit violent, sure, but I think they’re on the right track. So what would Apple have to do to break Windows? Well, in the past 6 or 7 years, Apple laptops have risen to the top, their desktops have become increasingly popular and that gorgeous operating system we know as OS X is easily the best of the best. But as far as market share goes, they’re not really there. Microsoft still owns and controls most of the market thanks to deals with PC makers and a large customer base. If we take all of this this into account along with the fact that the past few Apple keynotes have been somewhat lackluster for speculators (I’ve actually found the last few to be just fine, it’s just that expectations have gotten a little out of control), then we’ve got the perfect recipe for figuring out what “Brick” might actually be:

Apple OS X for PCs

That’s right, if you want to smash Windows you better compete on their turf. You’re never going to deal a heavy blow to your primary competitor if you don’t actually leave the friendly halls of Macdom. Keep in mind this has been tried before with Mac clones, something Steve Jobs quickly killed upon his return to the company in 1996. But unlike last time we’re not talking about Mac OS 7. We’re talking about the high-powered Leopard and if it ever got a real chance to go up against Vista, it would crush it.

So whaddya say Apple? Wanna let me put OS X on my PC for real? Maintaining a hackintosh can just be so nerve-wracking…

No holds barred

As I talked about in my previous post, the amount of disinformation being thrown about in this election cycle is not even close to respectable. But last week took the cake and all the respect I once had for John McCain and his Straight Talk Express is officially departed. Even Karl Rove thinks the campaign has crossed the line (something the Obama campaign has more than willingly pointed out). Here’s a laundry list of things I was trying not to explode over:   

1. Lipstick Lies – Last week’s distortions started with a McCain ad pointing to Obama at a town hall meeting stating the following phrase in reference to McCain and Palin’s claim of bringing “change,”: 

“You can put lipstick on a pig, It’s still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It’s still gonna stink. We’ve had enough of the same old thing.”

Seeing an opportunity to blow right past reasonable, the McCain camp took that soundbite and clipped it with Sarah Palin’s RNC speech labeling herself as a pitbull with lipstick.

Slate Magazine points out, the phrase itself might be somewhat new, but it’s hardly the first incarnation:

…”lipstick on a pig” has spiced up the political verbiage of everyone from Charlie Rangel to Dick Cheney. John McCain himself used it last year to describe Hillary Clinton’s health care proposal. And even though the folksy expression is one that sounds old (and connects back to genuinely old proverbs), it’s not quite the vintage of anyone’s grandfather’s grandfather.

Oh yeah, Katie Couric and Co. over at CBS weren’t too keen either on being misrepresented.

 2. Sex-ed for Kindergartners – This one really hurt. McCain’s assertion that Obama’s one accomplishment in the realm of education was to encourage the teaching of “comprehensive sex education” to kindergartners is so off-base that it is quite frankly disgusting. If John McCain is all about family and all about values, he should know better than to brand another family man with a dishonest charge.

FactCheck.org thoroughly trashes the piece and I particularly liked journalist Steve Chapman’s response to the ad in which he was both misquoted and misattributed: 

 … the ad itself doesn’t bother explaining how the candidates differ on school vouchers, the subject of my column. Instead, it insults our intelligence by expecting us to believe that Obama thinks kindergarteners should be taught how to use condoms before they’re taught to read. Right. And Joe Biden eats puppies for breakfast. 

3. FactChecking the FactCheck ad – Speaking of FactCheck.org, they were none-to-pleased on being the subject of another McCain ad in which their own findings were mangled: 

Announcer: The attacks on Governor Palin have been called “completely false”…”misleading.”

On screen: Photo of Obama, FactCheck.org banner, “‘completely false’ .  .  . ‘misleading’ 9/0/08″

And, they’ve just begun.

The [Wall Street] Journal reports Obama “air-dropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers” into Alaska to dig dirt on Governor Palin.

As Obama drops in the polls, he’ll try to destroy her.

FactCheck.org on the FactCheck ad:

Our article criticized anonymous e-mail falsehoods and bogus claims about Palin posted around the Internet. We have no evidence that any of the claims we found to be false came from the Obama campaign.

The McCain-Palin ad also twists a quote from a Wall Street Journal columnist. He said the Obama camp had sent a team to Alaska to “dig into her record and background.” The ad quotes the WSJ as saying the team was sent to “dig dirt.”

Update, Sept. 10: Furthermore, the Obama campaign insists that no researchers have been sent to Alaska and that the Journal owes them a correction.

I’ve paid attention to a lot of campaign ads in the past and I can’t recall attack ads ever sinking this low. I mean it’s flat-out lying; it’s not even like they’re trying to hide the level of deception. I hope I’m not the only one who sees through this. We deserve better.

Separating the wheat from the chaff

If Election ‘08 hasn’t gotten you down yet, consider yourself fortunate.

These days I’m finding I have to make constant trips to any number of sites around the Internet to figure out what’s true and what’s false and even then need to make sure that those sources are legitimate. It’s not an easy task and it’s not even something I should have to be doing. But with all the distractions of Obama being a Muslim and who the real mother or father of Palin’s newborn is, it’s making me increasingly more winded to keep ahead of the lies. We’re far enough now that someone else can do this for us and so I humbly present to you the following resources should you find yourself wondering whether or not Joe Biden is an alien or if John McCain crashed his Navy plane 5 times (untrue: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_mccain_crash_five_planes.html):

1. FactCheck.org – My personal favorite. From wikipedia:

FactCheck.org is a nonprofit website^[1] that describes its own goal as “[reducing] the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics“. In its efforts, FactCheck claims to be nonpartisan.^[2] It is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, and is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation.^[2]

2. Snopes.com - These guys have been crushing urban legends since the early days of the ‘Net so generally a good place to go.

Old phrases in New England

I had a Nantucket Nectars (Pomegranate Pear) fruit juice today. It was quite tasty and offered the following tidbit on the bottomside of the bottlecap:

“The old Nantucket term for extravagance was ‘Two lamps burning and no ship at sea.’”

Not being from Nantucket, I sort of missed the meaning. Lucky for me Voice of America was there to fill in the gaps:

“Here’s the meaning: Coastal dwellers used to burn a light in a window to help ships navigate, or to welcome someone home from the sea. So if there are two lamps burning and no ship at sea, it means you’re a foolish person, wasting your time and wasting good fuel.”

Favre wants to be a coastie

Throughout this drama, one thing has become crystal clear: I’m more of a Packers fan than a Favre fan.

I might even be more of a Packers fan than a Bears fan. Yikes.

3,065 hits on Digg…

The kids at Digg may be on to something.

read more | digg story

Kicking, beating and maiming a dying horse

It is with some trepidation I attempt to blog about Britney Spears for fear I might be branded as actually caring about her personal matters or that I might be beating an already, quite dead horse. Or worse, I might look like this guy. But, I’m tired and miserable and you, misguided and worthless national media outlets, are most responsible for my suffering. 

How did we get here? To the point where I am actually sympathetic with the pop starlet who started off as an “innocent” 16-year-old dressed in Catholic school uniform to 24-hour around-the-clock coverage of her death spiral. I honestly have only cared about Britney Spears twice in my life. Once, when I was 14, and, well, you know… And now, 22, because I care about the state of the national news media, I watch with a sense of revulsion.  

It’s one thing for the People Magazine’s or Us Weekly’s of the world to be following Spears around like haws, but it’s another thing altogether when CNN, ABC News, MSNBC, CBS News and Fox News are following her around as well. Type in the search terms “CNN” and “Britney Spears” at Google News and you get up-to-the-hour coverage of her sucking at life, not just in the last few weeks but going back over a month. You kind’ve expect stalking from the celebrity mags, but I didn’t realize the news was running dry enough that our already mediocre news outlets had to bow at the chance of helping kill Britney Spears.  

 That’s right. In the end it’s not going to be Britney’s early start as pop princess, or her zany family or random marriages or even the pressure of dealing with all this at once. What will break Britney Spears is the major news outlets.  

I argue the news outlets ( and celebrity mags) have now moved into dangerous territory, to the point where their actions are cruel. In effect, they’re beating a mentally ill woman with a hatchet and no remorse.   

But then again, the point really is that the American public really eats this up, right? Or did the American public become celebrity-hounds because the American news media failed to live up to the principles they once championed? Better question, does the question of Britney Spears speak to the possible deterioration of the American moral system? Why the hell are Bratz popular?

Chicken or egg, it doesn’t matter: either the American news media needs to get its act together or the American public had better start turning off their television sets. 

Analyzing the Republican CNN/Youtube debate

I have never written a post that long. And I’m about to follow it up with another post.

Well, there were good questions, bad questions, good answers, bad answers, useless banter of all kinds and a lot of unnecessary booing. I could probably write a book on everything I took from the debate but I’ll keep it to what I found interesting or disagreed strongly with:

1. Giuliani’s remark to Romney regarding his hiring of illegal immigrants was ridiculous. Frankly, I don’t see how Giuliani has not hired an illegal immigrant himself at some point. Either way, that discussion was going nowhere the second it started.

2. What was with all the talk of the hypothetical overturning of Roe v. Wade? It’s not going to happen, move on. Not only is it not going to happen but we really do have bigger issues. I’m even more concerned with anyone who is considering going with the single-issue voting approach after the debacle of 2004.

3.  We spent 3 million dollars to study the DNA of bears in Montana?! What.

4. It’s time to get something straight: Iraq and Afghanistan are not like any of the following military conflicts–>WWI, WWII, The Korean War or The Vietnam War. Hell, Iraq and Afghanistan are themselves dissimilar. So, when John McCain starts preaching to Ron Paul that by backing out of Iraq we would be committing the same sin Europe did when it pulled away from Nazi Germany during WWII, he is in fact lying. There is no Hitler in Iraq or Afghanistan. Even if you wanted to consider Osama bin Laden a Hitler, you’d have to start making some very dubious statements. I understand that it’s important to look to the conflicts of the past to help resolve the modern ones, but it’s just as important to realize that this conflict is especially unique.

5.  Fred Thompson’s decision to run an attack ad, rather than an ad supporting himself was an exciting turn of events. It did absolutely nothing for him or his campaign, but still, it was an exciting turn of events. I especially liked it because it elicited the following response from Mike Huckabee, “When they’re kickin’ you in the rear, it’s still proving your out front.”

6.  Should citizens be required to pass a written exam before being allowed to legally handle firearms? It is staggering to me, why this could be such a difficult or controversial question. More importantly, anyone who thinks the 2nd amendment is some sort of God-sent absolute has another coming. The Constitution was written by man, no doubt there are corrections to be made. I think the very fact that we have amendments is clear enough sign of that.

7. The almost immediate response to the Yasmin’s question about improving American image in the eyes of Muslims was almost immediately, “we need to make sure that we’re sticking to the war.” I think everyone understands what you think about the war, but I was actually curious about what solutions they might truly have for improving our image. It worries me that these candidates might remain somewhat oblivious to what’s actually going on outside of our borders.

8. Waterboarding is torture. Move on.

9.  So it seems like the general response to why we should keep “don’t-ask-don’t-tell” in place is that if we didn’t the military would fall apart, “cohesion” would be an issue. Hunter’s response was particularly horrid, that the reason we can’t get rid of weak policy is because most of the people in the military are conservatives, hence “Judeo-Christian” background, blah blah. I was this close to running down to Florida and decking him, I’m not kidding. I’m offended because I have friends in the military, they’re quite liberal, and more than professional enough to handle the removal of “don’t-ask-don’t-tell.” You’ve got to make the change sometime, and I can understand why now might not seem like the right time for the discussion, but I’d argue it’s times like these that are most important, especially when you are letting of translators, doctors, and other types of support staff, not even counting combat staff.

Liveblogging the Republican YouTube/CNN debate

6:55 p.m. – Well, it’s 5 minutes before the showdown and I’m ready to roll. My expectations? Low. Mood? Excited at the prospect of seeing the largely liberal YouTube audience ask hopefully pointed questions. Also, I dig Anderson Cooper.

7:00 p.m. – It’s Anderson, it’s Anderson! Two-thousand more questions than those sent to Democrats. Jim Greer is introduces Gov. Charles Christ. Christ is introducing the candidates. I’m confused about why they needed an introduction for the introducer.

7:03- Candidates are coming out. I’m not a fan of most of the candidates, but if I had to pick one I was at least interested in or excited by, I’d point to Ron Paul.

7:04 – All lined up, guffawing at each other. Waving to cameras, blah blah.

7:05 – Here we go, they’ve moved to the podiums after the photographers have had their shots. Anderson is pointing to the type of questions that could be offered tonight. He’s made a reference to the snowman from the last debate.

7:08: First question: Chris from Washington is singing an acoustic bit. His song highlights each of the candidates, and is basically showing the state of the race so far. It’s cute, kind’ve pointless, but cute. Ope, here’s an actual question for Giuliani, if he becomes president will he aid and abet the flight of illegal aliens into the country. Giuliani is saying New York was not a “sanctuary city”. New York allowed the 70,000 children of illegal immigrants to go to school, makes sense. “The policies we had were necessary because the federal policies weren’t working,” damn straight. Tamper proof ID card is not a good idea.

7:12 – Mitt is harping on the “illegal” portion of “illegal immigrant”. Giuliani points out how illegal immigrants were even hired at Mitt’s home. “Sanctuary mansion, not just sanctuary city”

7:14 – Rudy and Mitt are just back and forthing here, about who had or didn’t have, or even if it mattered that you had illegal immigrants. They’re really not even talking about the central issue anymore. “They were under your nose,” Giuliani says. What exactly does that mean? Mitt is explaining what he did as governor, no to driver’s license, no to schools, enforcing immigration laws, Mass. is not a sanctuary state, the policies of the mayor are “frankly wrong.”

7:16 – Where is the booing coming from? Question 2: Regarding amnesty, will you pledge tonight to veto bills allowing amesty for illegal immigrants? Thompson says he will pledge that. A nation that does not protect it’s borders cannot remain a sovereign nation, he says. Punishing employers? I don’t agree with that.

7:18 – Thompson points to Romney’s flip-flop on the Bush immigration plan and then points to Giuliani’s holier-than-thou attitude about hiring illegal immigrants. Again, this banter about whether or not New York City was a sanctuary city. I’m with Giuliani on this, I think his fellow candidates are just being silly.

7:20 – McCain’s talking amnesty. He’s lacking his old fire. “We must secure the borders first…We must sit down as American people and realize these are God’s children as well…”

7:22 – Question for Tancredo: Guest-worker visa program, wants to know whether he’ll keep guest-workers coming to U.S.? He’s not going to aid anymore immigration into this country, massive immigration makes it difficult to assimilate, he rejects the idea that there are jobs no American will take. Hunter: It’s nice to listen to a lot of statements, he says he built the border fence in San Diego and that it does work. Riiiiiighht, so you think Hunter, so you think. 854 miles in 6 months, he says he could build.

7:26 – Question: I think I missed the gist of this question. From what I understand she’s asking whether the bill allowing illegal immigrants a discount to go to college, would be offered to those children of veterans. Something’s missing, I don’t think that’s accurate, ope Huckabee is confirming this. Romney sucks, he’s arguing that trying to turn the children of illegal immigrants into citizens is not right. I’m again missing something, or Romney is just full of it. I’m with Huckabee. Romney says we’re not punishing children for the illegal act of their parents. I would argue otherwise.

7:31 – Question for Ron Paul: Conspiracy theory regarding joining of north america into North American Union. Ron Paul is saying there’s a move toward a North American Union (just like EU), these are real things not a conspiracy, there’s been money spent on it, the Texas legislature put a hold on it. This sounds familiar. He’s saying are we going to further move in the direction of international government and it’s not a good idea, he’s arguing our national sovereignty is under threat. I’d agree, but I think he’s making a bigger deal about it then is relevant at this point.

7:33 – Question: What measures will you take to tackle national debt. McCain: We’ve forgotten how to control spending as Republicans, we spent 3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana, we’ve presided over great expansion of government (the S-chip), I fought Abramoff, vetos every porkbarrell bill, “I know how Washington works, and I look forward [to curbing spending].” Note: I hate the term pork barrel, I have no idea why. Giuliani: Across the board spending cuts the way Reagan did it, don’t rehire, use technology to do what more men could do.

7:36 – Question: Limited government. What are the names of the top 3 federal programs you would reduce in size? Thompson: “It’s a target rich environment” Thompson wants to save Social Security, Thompson would take out all 100 programs in the OMV (I don’t know what this is), reform medicare, medicaid, reindex how benefits are calculated. Ron Paul: “Washington did not change me, I would like to change Washington and we could Department of Education, Energy, I missed the third. Sounds libertarian, this is why I like hearing fresh ideas from him. He’s not necessarily right, but he’s got great ideas.

7:40 – Huckabee: revamp Homeland Security, IRS. I dig Huckabee, he’s funny.

7: 40 – Do you support the elimination of the federal income tax to be replaced by the fare tax. McCain says no, “If Congress can’t fix the tax code, give it to me I’ll fix it.” Uh oh, he’s pointing to Paul’s comment about bringing the troops home, he’s saying that kind of thinking cause WWII. I think that’s wrong, clearly Iraq is not Nazi Germany. It’s not even Vietnam. That’s no way to think about the Middle East.

7:43 – Question: Would you promise to the people watching this any effort to raise taxes? Tancredo: Yes Huckabee: yes Romney: Yes Giuliani: yes Thompson: yes -everyone is going to say yes, blah blah. Man, Ron Paul rocks.

7:45 – Question: Ope, I missed the question, farm subsidies-related. Romney: Believes the best sources for renewable energy come from the farm, supports programs, we are competing with European and Brazilian farmers who are subsidized. Rudy: It isn’t a level playing field, subsidies throw everything off, we have to have our own supply of food at the same time.

7:47: Okay, going to take a quick break here, while they do their stupid video pieces. I need to heat pizza.

7:52: Woah, we’re not going to break because Fred Thompson was being a jerk! Romney is saying he’s not going to apologize for becoming pro-life. Huckabee is also defending himself against Thompson’s very aggressive tactic. “When they’re kickin’ you in the rear, it’s still proving your out front,” Huckabee finishes.

Special note during the commercial: Thank you dear friends who joined me in the comment section below. Namely, Christian and Emy. Who is Argentina?

Also, liveblogging is really really hard. Props to anyone who has ever done this more than once.

7:57 – And we’re back. McCain’s video, what the hell is this. That was really bad. Wipe that shit-eating grin off your face, McCain.

7:58 – Question: Yes, Jay Fox of the NRA, great. Wow, that was scary on several levels. What’s your opinion of guns? I find it somewhat appropriate that Hunter gets to respond first. You gotta be safe, Hunter says, he’ll strongly enforce the 2nd amendment.

8:00 – Question: Pointed to Giuliani, why should citizens be required to pass an exam to have a gun? This question doesn’t even warrant a response, jeesus, why the hell do you think?! Giuliani: You have the right to bear arms, the government has the right to give reasonable expectations (booing <you gotta be kidding>), Supreme Court is going to decide this within the next 6 months, is it a personal right, he says yes.

8:02 – Thompson: The 2nd amendment is not a choice thing, it’s in the Constitution. I’m a constitution fan too, but that doesn’t mean it’s absolute by any means, buddy.

8:04 – Oh jeesus, gun collection question. I am officially ashamed to be an American. And annoyed. And now, I’m frightened. Hunter calls it a “family tradition”.

8:05 – Question: black on black crime, inner city crime, what are you gonna do about it? Romney argues family values? I’m confused. Romney: better inner-city education, better policing. Giuliani – Violent crime went up during Romney’s term, says he on the other hand had a strong record. I’m not sure either of these guys answered the question so much as defended their records.

8:08 – Question: What should the women be punished with if she has an abortion in the hypothetical land where Roe v. Wade is overturned?! I’ve moved from ashamed to disgusted. Paul doesn’t think it should be a federal crime, but he’s against abortion but says there has to be a criminal penalty for the person committing the crime, namely the doctor. Hmmmm, you got it wrong there Paulie.

8:11 – Question: Again, a Roe v. Wade overturn question. Giuliani would not sign, would leave it to the states. Hmmm, interesting answer. “Roe v. Wade took the answer away from the states.” Romney would welcome a circumstance where we don’t want abortion in this country at all, but that’s not where America is today, he’s arguing America is in ready to overturn though (eh, I don’t think so).

8:13 – Question: Death penalty, WWJD? Good question. Huckabee: toughest decision I’ve ever made, only person to make this decision on this stage, he believes there is a place for a death penalty, the only response for a most uncivil action is to try and deter that person from committing that crime and deterring. Anderson: WWJD? Huckabee: “Jesus was too smart to run for public office.” True. Tancredo: God would give me the right to do what I want. Ass.

8:16 – Question: Do you believe every word of the Holy Bible, King James Version? Rudy: I believe it, I don’t believe it literally. “I think it’s the greatest book ever written, I read it frequently…” Romney: “I believe the Bible is the word of God”…believes it’s the word of God, doesn’t disagree with it, tries to live by it. Huckabee: Word of revelation of God. “No finite person is ever going to understand, and if they do their God is too small” (OR, their religion is considerably more straightforward…?)

Commercial Break No. 2 – Response to Emy: I own 0 guns, but have 5 swords, and at one time owned a ninja star. I have contemplated owning a gun-sword, but have not found a suitable model. I think so far the debate has had a few good questions but has been largely substance-less. My pizza is excellent.

8:23 – We’re back, Rudy’s video was entertaining and bad at the same time. AC is a stud. Yasmin asks what would you do as president to repair America in the eyes of the Muslim world. Rudy’s response: Kill more Muslims. But that the vast majority of Muslims are good people. Rudy: we should not engage in group blame, we shouldn’t blame an entire group of people for the small group that has turned a religion into fundamentalism. McCain: Continue the surge (Kill more Muslims), we’re going to fight democrats on withdrawal, only one on stage that said Rumsfeld’s strategy blows, if we continue the surge we can succeed, al-quaida would be telling the world ‘we won’. Hunter: I will never apologize for the USA.

8:27 – Question: Waterboarding. Romney: As a presidential candidate opposes torture, doesn’t think it’s wise to express which practices would be right without counsel, wants to make sure people are kept at Guantanamo (…right, i’ve got a sweet NPR documentary for you, snake). McCain: waterboarding is torture, it is in violation of Geneva conventions, if we’re going to get the high ground in this world, we’re not going to torture people we’re not going to be Polpot. They’re going back and forth without getting anywhere. McCain: “This is a defining issue…take a definite and positive position, we will never allow torture to take please in teh United States.”

8:32 – Question: Pushing for staying in Iraq, which presidential candidate will make a permanent or long-term commitment to the region? Thompson: We will be there as long as it takes to complete our mission (I’m confused by what the exact nature of that mission is), Islamic terrorism has declared war (kind’ve), too many people are vested in a scenario of defeat. Ron Paul: the best commitment we can give back to Iraq is there country back, in the south, the british are leaving the Iraqis are in charge, let the people have their country back again, Vietnam as an example, when we left, things worked out correctly, it’s time for America to take care of America first. McCain: We never lost a battle in Vietnam, terrorists want to follow us home (interesting point). Paul: shortly after Vietnam War ended, American colonel said we never lost one battle, but it was irrelevant, why do they want to come here (YES), they come here because we’re occupying their country, just as we would object if they were occupying our country (that’s part of it, not a complete answer).

8:37 – Question: How does Rudy respond to the accusation of taking advantage of his role in Sept. 11? Eh. Giuliani defends himself, yada yada.

8:40 – Question: Would you have a vice-president with as much power as Dick Cheney? Thompson: A vice-president ought to have substantial authority especially in national security areas, but certainly some expertise in the domestic, legal training, one of the most important things, selection of SC judges (he’s not answering the question) McCain: this president came to office in a time of peace, and then we found ourselves otherwise, he had to rely more on VP, I wouldn’t need that.

8:42 – Duncan Hunter’s video stinks.

Commercial Break No. 3: Hey Jason!

8:47 – Here we go. Question: Brig. Gen asks why American men and women are not professional enough to serve with gays? (Nice) Hunter: believes openly-home sexual militaries would hurt cohesion, most of them ar econservatives, goes against their principles (I am vomiting in my mouth, Hunter is essentially arguing Americans aren’t professional, period). Huckabee: conduct could put at risk cohesion. Romney: this is not the time, middle of war, looks forward to day end of don’t-ask-don’t-tell, but says it apparently works, looks foward to hearing form the military (dodging the questions, booing). General who asked question stands up, with all due respect didn’t get an answer from the candidates, american men and women are professional enough to serve with gays and lesgbians, for 42 years wore uniform, today don’t-ask-don’t-tell is, (he’s being booed, by the incompetent in the back) McCain: almost unanimously military leaders say the present policy is working

8:52 – Would you allow support of log cabin republicans? Huckabee, disagrees with idea of same-sex marriage, would accept support, wouldn’t change position (noticing at the moment, Huckabee has especially lengthy ears).

8:53 – Mini-break missed the question on overspending and the national debt.

8:55 – Question: Space exploration, is there a candidate willing to take a pledge of sending a human to the surface of mars by 2020? Huckabee: Whether we go to Mars, intersted in expanding space program, notes the importance of space program on modern technology (hallelujah microwaves), makes a foolish joke about sending Hillary to Mars. Tancredo: this is it folks, that’s why we have such incredible folks because everyone’s trying to everything to all people, we can’t afford to go to mars

8:58 – Question: why don’t African Americans vote Republican? Rudy: We haven’t done a good enough job of reaching out to the African American community. Huckabee: they voted for me because I asked them to vote for me, i met their needs , i was the right candidate, and i’ll be the right candidate again, “our party had better reach out”

9:01 – Question: the confederate flag hangs in the back, what does it represent? Romney: we do not fly that flag, we can go beyond that stuff, there aren’t two americas (refers to Edwards), there is one america, argues democrats are tearing down country. Thompson: knows that it is and is not a symbol of racism, as far as a public place is concerned he is glad people have made the distinction that it is not part

9:03 – Ron Paul’s video. Libertarian.

9:03 – question: infrastructure. Rudy: New York’s infrastructure is awesome because of a long-term planning, calls for long-term budgeting for infrastructure, partnership with state and local governments Paul: this country is going bankrupt, we need to take care of ourselves, we do not need to sacrifice one thing more, get the government out of our wallets McCain: veto every single pork barrel project (there’s that word again)

9:07 – Question: Ron Paul, are you going to let America down by not running as an independent? Paul: has no intention of dropping out of Republican race, he is talking about how he is kicking ass in fundraising, this country is in a revolution. He’s inspiring, he really does have potential.

9:09 – Stupid baseball question for Rudy. Red Sox v. Yankess, Romney v. Rudy.

9:11 (erie) – And that’s that. I’ve got things to say. Stay tuned.