Ralph Nader on Hillary + Obama

However, aldactone sale this person could not receive an LVAD, as it would buy cheap viagra online usa not have supported their heart's right side. Endometriosis is a buy free cialis best price jelly condition in which cells from the lining of the uterus cheap clindamycin from usa attach to other organs or tissue outside the uterus. The order generic viagra prescription and alcohol absence of warnings or other information for a given drug colchicine without prescription does not indicate that the drug or drug combination is order dexamethasone safe, effective, or appropriate for all patients or all specific cheapest augmentin uses. People may benefit from talking with a qualified healthcare methotrexate prescription professional about their hepatitis B immune status, whether they are cheapest zyprexa protected, and what they can do next. If a person where to order viagra is experiencing symptoms of atypical migraine such as vertigo, autonomic triamterene for sale symptoms, and recurring headache episodes, they should contact a doctor order amoxicillin cheap online who can help work out the underlying cause of the compare erythromycin prices online symptoms. Your doctor will also likely monitor your condition to determine.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyfSN7B4lYI&feature=related[/youtube]

Nader brings up some good points that need to be addressed – particularly by Obama, who Nader believes is being too cautious in his policies [particularly in defining his differences with Hillary].

::via DemocracyNow.org::

Thoughts on Nader

I understand why he’s doing it. I think. I just wish he wouldn’t. Who is going to vote for Ralph Nader? I assure you that the majority of these voters would vote democrat if he weren’t in the race. Nader is pretty much responsible for Al Gore losing the 2000 election. He had over 10% of the popular vote, ninjas. And what if he wasn’t there? Those were all would be Gore voters. I feel like he is doing the republicans a huge favor by gaining the support of a decent size niche of the populous who would otherwise vote for (fingers crossed) Obama or Clinton. Thanks for nothing Ralph Nader. You have no realistic shot, you’re trying to make a point and your costing us major support for the best prescription to American politics in recent memory.

He’s got a good heart, just bad politics.

For a more stinging version of this line of thought click here.

Hillary Blasts Obama

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivkHVlVtlFQ&feature=related[/youtube]

Shame on you!

Sorry Hillary, but angry or not – and ‘in the right’ or not – you need to not be on camera looking all angry like that. AND you sound like an old lady…

Senator Clinton’s latest attempt to derail Barack Obama comes after his camp released ‘campaign literature’ that Clinton claims is spreading lies about her positions on healthcare and NAFTA. Namely that she thought NAFTA was a good idea/success, and that her healthcare plan will require you to pay for coverage [statements which both appear to be true].
Clinton is using this as an attempt to fuel her campaign going in to another debate against Obama – coming up in Ohio in March – saying she wants to meet in Ohio ‘to have a debate about [Barack's] tactics and [his] behavior in this campaign’. Funny, I thought debates were supposed to be about policies, plans for the country, international relations, all that ‘leader of the free world’ junk…

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said his campaign looked forward “to having a debate this Tuesday on the facts, and the facts are that Sen. Clinton was a supporter of NAFTA and the China permanent trade treaties until this campaign began. ”

“And she herself has said that under the Clinton health care plan, she would consider ‘going after the wages‘ of Americans who don’t purchase health insurance, whether they can afford it or not,” he added[via CNN].

And then Barack responded:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg2bnZwZuGY[/youtube]

Seems a lot like Hillary has realized that in a race that basically comes down to ‘who does the American public LIKE better’ [since their political stances are so similar], she’s losing the popularity contest. Funny thing about that – this is where Obama’s promise of ‘change’ holds true, as he doesn’t reduce his campaign to political mudslinging and name calling. I mean, c’mon Hil – you’re really comparing him to Karl Rove because his campaign released a flier that describes your healthcare plan the same way that you do? And reports your stance on NAFTA? You’re giving him too much credit – and forgetting your own positions.

[via CNN]

Nader Enters the Race

nader_2004_cartoon.jpg

[Image: Cartoon by Gary Markstein, via Hereinstead]

Not to be left out of this presidential election, Ralph Nader has announced that he will be entering the 2008 contest for the oval office.

Viewed by many as a spoiler in the 2000+2004 elections, Nader thinks of himself as a serious candidate who will push issues that the Republicans tend to marginalize, and on which the Democrats are ‘too cautious’ to take a serious stance.

“I’d go after Bush even more vigorously as we are in the next few months in ways that the Democrats can’t possibly do because they’re too cautious and too unimaginative, but they can pick up the vulnerabilities and the failures of the Bush administration that we point out,” Nader said Monday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Nader rejects the spoiler label as a “contemptuous” term used by those who want to deny voters a choice. Declaring Washington a “corporate-occupied territory,” he accuses both Democrats and Republicans of being dominated by corporate lobbyists who care little about the needs of ordinary Americans [via MSNBC].

‘Contemptuous’ or not, in a tight political race such as the 2000 elections [when Bush lost to Al Gore], Nader was the deciding factor in a number of states – where Bush beat Gore by a narrow margin that would’ve been covered by those votes for Ralph. While Nader believes this election should be a ‘landslide’ for the democrats, I think we can all agree that after the 2000 elections we know that anything is possible.

Here’s a video, released after the NH primaries, in which Nader voices his opinions on the [then] remaining 2008 hopefuls:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f5yIxWsOns[/youtube]

Regardless of whether you believe Nader is right about Washington, and the problems with our two-party electoral system [and I mean, let's be real - of course he's right], the fact remains that this is a two-party country that barely bothers to learn about politricks – and instead simply choses a side. Those of us willing to consider candidates based on merit and actual policies/views instead of party lines are both in the minority, and [seemingly] a little too far left to vote republican [most of the time]. This effectively splits a democratic party, at some point – that the majority of republicans already believe is too ‘liberal’ – by providing an entirely valid candidate who responds to the needs/desires of many ‘liberals’ who would, by default, vote democrat. It’s a shitty reality, but the reality nonetheless – sorry Ralphie.

The Republicans, of course, will be backing Nader’s candidacy:

“I think it always would probably pull votes away from the Democrats and not the Republicans, so naturally, Republicans would welcome his entry into the race,” Huckabee said Sunday on CNN [via].

Check out CNN‘s and MSNBC‘s coverage for more.

Reagan says

I’d like start offering you ninjas some clips from the father of American neo-conservatism: Ronald Wilson Reagan. His legacy is remarkable. I think it is important to your ninja status that you understand what his administration stood for and what his aims were. He is the most important figure in Conservative thought as we understand it today. Think what you will of him, but understand his politics.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=lvg7lRsCVJ8[/youtube]

Commander in Chief

The folks over at TPM have done us a favor by compiling some footage of what the conductor of the “stright-talk express” has to say about being the head of the military and the importance of that role. This will be a large issue in November considering we’re occupying a nation with over 150,000 of our own troops, not to mention other potentially hazardous international situations.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tScqLhPaJEM[/youtube]

al-Sadr’s Militia to Continue Ceasefire

alsadr.jpg

A very powerful Shia cleric in Iraq, Maqtada al-Sadr, with a very powerful following has proclaimed that his militia’s ceasefire against rivals and the US will be extended for another six months. He will be a crucial figure in the future of Iraq.

Moqtada’s father was a very powerful and respected Shia cleric throughout the Muslim world. He was murdered along with Moqtada’s two brothers, supposedly on the orders of Saddam Hussein. In 2003 Sadr’s creation of the Mahdi army gained much support in Sadr City, a neighborhood of Baghdad, and beyond. It has a reported following of thousands of Iraqis. This is the force that recognizes the ceasefire.

Since the new Irarqi governmnet has been formed al-Sadr has not lent to its credibility, denouncing it’s legitimacy and refusing to get involved. He invisions a cleric run state (a la Iran). He says the purpose of this new ceasefire is so that his group might further an ideological stance within the Iraqi system. 

One thing that both candidates left out of the debate last night when talking about the sucess of teh US military surge in Iraq is that it has coincided with this ceasefire. This has been a huge reason why there has been such successful surge results. al-Sadr knows that the longer he holds out of taking his own action, the more he can contribute to temporary stability and, hopefully, the withdrawl of foreign troops. 

The Debate Discussion

t1homeapplausegi.jpg

So the debate tonight between Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama was interesting. It’s hard for me to say who won. They both performed well. I think it was crucial for Hillary to at least keep up with Obama. Of course, she succeeded at this because she’s stronger in debates than at giving speeches. She had some very positive moments, or at least moments the public wanted to see tonight. I thought she was trying to cry when she started talking about seeing those soldiers walk out to her with their injuries. It seemed a little forced. When confronted with having to stir up the thought of a struggle she immediately referenced to her public humiliation 8 years ago courtesy of her husband, President Bill Clinton. At least she acknowledged that others have gone through worse, she said these are a the people that make her get out of bed everyday. I was reminded of an SNL skit of Hartman as Clinton in a McDonald’s. After having taken a boys French-fries, Clinton says to his father “We’re gonna wake up everyday thinking about you.”

It wasn’t however the only reference to times before Bush. Clinton tried to remind us of how good we had it before GDubz. She assured us that she could get us back on the track we were on before he took over. She wanted us to know that the policies of Bill would carry over into Hillary. Unfortunately, we don’t have the same ingredients for that recipe this time around.

Then there was Barack Obama. He did a fantastic job of keeping up with her considering she needed to really shine tonight. Is it me, or did he sound like he’s had the flu? His single greatest moment was in rebuttal to Hillary’s shrug-off of the question of super-delegates and pledged delegates. Hillary said that she didn’t think it would come to her going after super delegates and possibly upsetting the popular vote over THEIR choice for a nominee. Obama made the argument that the supes ought to strongly consider voting along with he people based on the point that the popular vote being over-turned again would be very disheartening for a population has only increasingly felt alienated from the behaviors of the government. I agree that such a situation would be a call on people to ensure their government is listening. His reference to “silly season” was my favorite part of the night. After being attacked for taking a line from Mass. Governor Duval Patrick (we’re neighbors, no joke) Obama warns of the dangers of negative energies of this kind. His demeanor was good tonight, and I appreciate his tone. I think Obama takes more time to articulate the response he’s looking for in these debates, but I think he goes a lot deeper than she does.

Live Action Akira Announced!

cover-akira.jpg

And, who, you ask, is behind this attempt at glory? Leonardo DiCaprio is said to be producing it. I know, weird to me too. I have to say, if this is pulled off, it could be tremendous. For those of you who haven’t read or seen Akira you should really do yourself a favor and get your self into it through one medium or another. Fantastic story. This is the trailer for the anime movie:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT_SLtKoeVY[/youtube]

 

US Embassy in Kosovo Attacked

r.jpg

On Sunday February 17 the parliament of Kosovo unanimously supported a decision to declare its independence from Serbia.

Now, I’m not the ninja to give you a history lesson in the happenings in that part of the world. But I do know that there are plenty of Serbs who live in Kosovo and they are not happy about the decision, nor are any of the Serbs for that matter. They are largely accusing the West of being behind the decision, or are at least pissed that the US, UK, Germany and others have already recognized the new state.

Today there was an enormous protest in Serbia’s capital, Belgrade in support of Serbian solidarity, denouncing the indempendence movement. At the tail end of the protest a few hundred protestors attacked the US emabssy there. They’ve apparently set a few rooms on fire and broke into the compound.

Read the full article here. 

Why Now?

A Washington Post piece explains why this story might have only come out now.

As for the timing of the story, you might think the Times had waited until McCain had all but secured the GOP nomination, to avoid influencing the primaries. But my understanding is that is not the case–that the team of reporters has been wrestling with it and the editors published it when it was ready.

The McCain/Bennett strategy, of course, is to make the Times the issue. The senator’s statement doesn’t deny any of the specifics in the piece.

Again, there won’t be any long term suffering from this article. He’s what teh Republicans have. And while the suggestions of innapropriate behavior are clear, both parties deny it. How many people will really let this affect the way they view McCain? Isn’t being a phooey phoney what being a Republican nominee’s all about? They don’t care how their agenda gets taken care of, so long as it has support.Â