America’s Next Bill Clinton!


Bush fucks over children with veto

If you’re not angry, you should be. If you’re unaware, you should teach yourself a thing or two about the Bush Administration.

Bush, just earlier today, vetoed a bill that would dramatically expand the lives of children – a bill which would have subsidized health insurance costs for, in total 11.5 million children in America.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hNXrAi_Ib2A351jjnXx26VjgGeqwD8S1Q5JG1

I am all for playing politics. However you want to market your political products, and whatever political decisions you make, is your own, no matter if you’re Republican or Democrat. There is a need to politick and shake hands and cut deals.

But draw the line at children!

I guess it’s okay to send billions of dollars overseas for Hali-Burton and Blackwater, in a war we’re not supposed to be in, but to take care of children in our own country is out of the question, huh?

Compassionate my ass.

I knew the Bush Administration was fucked up and backward, and stops at nothing for social justice – but this is over the top.

And to have the audacity to proclaim, just two days ago, to be Children’s Day? It’s unethical, it’s heartless, it lacks compassion and it’s everything I expect the Busg Administration to be.

If this doesn’t fuel your fire, very little in the world will. This is a perfect example of why I am devoting my life to fighting for social justice. We are the lucky ones in life. We’ve been given a voice. Now, we must use that voice to speak for others, who – for too long – have been denied a chance to speak.


Good news (although it’s sad that it should happen this way)¬†for us, this might be the last straw that’ll break the camel’s back. Come 2008, the White House is ours.

Advertisements


“Need to get laid, go to a political rally

I found this article extremely amusing http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2007/09/27/2007-09-27_singles_will_check_out_eligible_candidat-2.html

Essentially, political campaigns that are aimed at a younger demographic (think Barrack Obama) are aiming at a younger crowd with promise of getting laid or finding a like-minded date.I have two really jumbled up thoughts of it. One: it doesn’t work. Traditionally, the 18-29 demographic is great for straw polls, but it doesn’t always translate into a political victory. Like it or not, our crowd is pretty fickled.While our mindsets are in the right place, we don’t actually go to the poll. Then there are those who are truly committed in that age bracket who doesn’t need to go to a political function to get laid. They are actually doing this for the right reasons and are committed to voting for a certain candidate anyway, so it’s pointless and a fiscal waste to spend money on them. You can see it now, election day comes around, two people are in bed cuddling after their fuck fest at around 7 p.m.

“You know, I had a feeling we were supposed to do something today?”
“We did — each other.”
“No, something else — something important.”
“Oh, shit! We’re supposed to vote for Barrack Obama. Hurry! Precincts close in an hour!”
They throw on their clothes, speed down the road only to find a traffic jam. Barrack Obama comes in third.

My second thought is this: there might be some truths to the article. In my experiences, as a liberal, Democrat and feminist, the women whom I’ve met and fallen for (and those who’ve fallen for me), been out with and dated and whatnot, are always a much better experience at political/feminist events, than drunk and throwing up under a bar.

Perhaps it has to do with the fact that deep down inside, rather than a quick lay, we all want someone with whom we share values and convictions, and a desire to see the world the way we want it.

In the end, for me (and I would say “liberals,” but I don’t claim to speak for all liberals), love isn’t about what the person can do for us, but rather, what that person does (and potentially can do) for the world. Maybe it’s just the little hippie in me (without the long hair and drugs) talking. I don’t know.

Thirdly, (I know I promised two thoughts, but I lied), I was kind of offended by the article and the “liberal chicks are easy” line in the article. It’s not that they’re easy, it’s perhaps that they’re more comfortable with their sexuality.

It also offends me because it gives the idea that we’re supposed to stand up for a cause just to get laid. It offends me even more that the person quoted is seeing women, once again, not for their character and values and beliefs (in this case, as liberals and feminists), but as a piece of meat, there for his pleasure.

Sex is greatly appreciated and awesome, but it ought to come with respect and equality – and there is no respect and equality in a statement like, “liberal chicks are easy.”



Republicans: for the love of blowjobs

bathroom_stall.jpgOkay, first of all, is “blow job” one or two words? I’ve seen both versions. Can I get an English major to help me out here?

And secondly, add Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) to the long list of Republican politicians who have gone down – and almost literally, for sexual misconducts. According to CNN reports, Craig was arrested early June (and this has now just came out, but don’t expect Craig to do the same anytime soon) at a Minneapolis Airport for attempt of lewd act in the airport’s bathroom. Story is here: http://idahostatesman.com/eyepiece/story/143517.html

Does anyone want to tell me what’s going on here? Craig is the third Republican this summer to have been arrested for sexual misconduct in public places. Worst yet, all three of these politicians (and don’t forget David Vitter of Louisinana who was named in the DC Madam case, too) were involved in SAME SEX acts.

All three have track records of speaking out, and quite passionately, against homosexuality or even sexuality in general. I guess if you spend your entire life fighting against something, it kind of “grows” on you, or you “grow” on the idea, and the next thing you know, you’re doing it.

But being a Republican politician, you don’t want to use your privilege for sex, as you are very moral, so you try to solicit sex in public bathrooms, or go down on an unsuspecting guest sleeping at your house, instead, as national Young Republican Chair Glenn Murphy (http://www.news-tribune.net/breakingnews/local_story_219210228.html) did this summer. So, we’ve got David Vitter who visited a prostitute. Bob Allen who offered a cop money to give the cop a blow job, Larry Craig who made a pass in a public bathroom at a police officer who was undercover (and apparently on the toilet) and Murphy, who decided that the best part of waking up, for a Republican, is with a cock in your mouth.

So focused on blowjobs, these Republicans are failing to do their jobs, and that’s not a good thing – at least for Republicans anyway. Is it It seems Republicans are either on vacation at their ranch or in the bathroom or some other shady places looking for a quick BJ. True?

I can’t help but laugh about it, but at the same time, it makes me wonder about people who are so “moral” and “ethical” about sexual issues, yet are so ‚Ķdepraved (and deprived) for sex. But, hey, political capital is political capital. As a Democrat, I’d take it however I can. How about the Republican Party start a social network just for gay Republican politicians. It’ll be as sort of a facebook type thing. If one Republican felt a need for let off a little steam (and we all do now and then), he can just log on to GOP (Gay Officials and Politicians) and “poke” another Republican he has his eyes and possibly mouth on.

If the guy feels the same way, he pokes back, and they can meet in some Congressional bathroom, specially designated for Republicans, and do all the poking their long-neglected little Republican bodies desire. That would help with a lot of the problems they’re facing. Besides, blowjobs are greatly appreciated and all, but would you want to get one from a bathroom looking like this? Ewww!

In fact, I think Ted Haggard can be their chairman.And you know what, if push comes to shove, they could always go to a private prostitute-for-hire. I here some guy named Roberto is out of a job.Thoughts?