26 July 2008

david brooks is a lame old geezer

in his column, "playing innocent abroad", david brooks does what he typically does and missed the boat for the sake of trying to find something cleverly dismissive in obama's berlin speech,

and my letter to david:

"lame, really lame column... i guess it's easy to sit at the front of the crowd, hear the same speech over and over for a year and a half, and forget how much that american pride stirred in you the first time you heard it. or how much it might mean to those hearing it for the first time. to hear an american presidential _candidate_, not an american president, give a speech talking about uniting, as opposed to dividing, is pretty f'ing amazing. and for a foot soldier on the ground, i can tell you that the power of his speeches and the gift of empowerment obama's message gives goes a whole lot further in to downtrodden communities than your baby-boomer naysaying in the new york times. you just sound like a bitter old geezer, with low expectations for a brighter future. so lame..."

20 July 2008

the ny times is worth its weight in gold for the op-eds alone

sorry folks, sometimes i just find an op-ed that says it better than i ever could, and today i found two... in the same newspaper.

frank rich on mccain's economic stupidity (with a telling little bit about his interim economic advisor, carly fiorina): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/opinion/20rich.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin

and bob herbert on al gore's challenge to stop being a nation of pussies and get to work ending our dependence on oil and building renewable energy mediums:

yeah, i'm a liberal. the government already takes a fat chunk of my money and sends it to build roads and schools in a land atop a rich sea of oil. the thing is, i want my government to use my money here, to create jobs for americans, that will give americans the stability to keep their homes and educate their children. i want an america that's greatly admired and respected, that leads the world in innovative thinking and action. not an america that widens economic inequality (according to the harvard magazine, in only 40 years, the inequality of wealth has seen the ceo's of major corps go from earning 25 times more than the average worker to 250 times more than the average worker. "at the same time, the government is doing less to redistribute income than it has at times in the past." oh and it gets better, "income inequality has been rising since the late 1970's, and now rests at a level not seen since the gilded age..." (sidebar: the gilded age ended with the start of a major depression, called the panic of 1893, caused by railroad overbuilding, shaky financing, and bank failures. sound familiar?)).

i want an america that takes care of america first, not the fattest, richest, greediest fucks perched at the top, the ones who make 250 times more than the average worker while spending millions each year looking for loopholes to avoid paying taxes, instead of spending those annual millions to make america better, stronger, and safer. those same fucks who drive mom and pop out of business because they can afford to cut prices too low for competition to thrive (i mean, that's what happens when taxes are so low. the theory is that companies will use those tax savings to employ a larger workforce, but in reality, the jobs have been shipped overseas and the savings used to lower prices until competition is edged out of the picture).

okay, so this is my saturday night rant, following a day spent talking about obama and not understanding, at all, how any thinking american could possibly want another four years of the bush policies, another four years of disastrous leadership, poor judgment, and backward thinking. how any american could vote to move this country backward instead of forward. how anyone can think it's a good idea to vote for john mcsame...