I’ve caught myself riffing on a tune that took me a while to recall where it came from. I kept hearing “Hillary won’t go… Hillary won’t go… Hilly won’t go …”
Then it came to me, and I looked it up. The following lyrics under the fold were adapted from Sweet’s Little Willie. If you don’t know the tune, you can find an odd cover of it here. [mp3]
She had it all - beauty, brains, and a body to die for. She almost did.
All the guys wanted her. One took her.
She had always been the one in control. It only took a disdainful look or a sharp word to keep the boys in their place. She didn’t recognize that the word “NO!” was considered by this “man” merely to be a challenge to be conquered, a cape waved in the eyes of His Raging Bull. “Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated!”
What His words didn’t defeat, His violence did. Battered into submission, she was His for the taking. Every port in His storm.
Honest and aware people should always note the feedback they generate from those around them. It’s how we make those social corrections necessary to achieve desired goals without causing new problems. Few go to the extent I do to see what the rest of the world is saying about America, and generally, the picture of We, the People isn’t too shabby.
But the image of our so-called leaders leaves a lot to be desired. This does, of course, reflect upon we voters as making poor choices, but assuming that no lasting harm is done, we seem to be getting a generous helping of benefit of the doubt anyway.
I’m not a supporter of Barack Obama. But if, as it now appears, the people select him to be the next president, then he would be a choice I could abide - provided he is saying what he really means.
This has been my problem with Obama since the 2004 Democratic Convention. His keynote address was a very stirring performance, causing my prior blogger incarnation to rave about him being a future president. Unfortunately, his votes to confirm Condi Rice as Secretary of State despite her blatant incompetence and some of his other pro-Bush votes has cost him my support - and me my enthusiasm for him and his ambition.
But that doesn’t mean it’s the end of the world for Obama. Not yet anyway. But there is a growing concern that, for Obama, that time is drawing nearer with each speech and with each primary victory.
When I first began blogging back in July of 2003 on a now-defunct site, one of the reasons I gave for my doing so was that I was already aware that the news media was clearly biased in favor of George W. Bush and the Republicans. I was concerned at the time that the GOP policies would cause great harm to the nation, and that the mainstream media was ignoring this probability. Events since that time have shown that in general, I was right - not that this earns me any special distinction as I’m barely a footnote in blogging history. I’m no Kos, no Atrios, nor am I as well-known as the late Steve Gilliard.
Despite this lack of Web stature, I felt that every little bit would help, and it looks like I was correct. An ABC News/Facebook Survey has found that, for the first time in polls since 1996, Internet news sites are rivaling newspapers as Americans’ sources of presidential election news. We bloggers are also the only election news source to show growth.
I’m writing this one on the fly, so if it’s a bit sloppy, [insert famous Steve Martin gag phrase]
Over at Citizens for Legitimate Government, Michael Rectenwald opens up an examination of why concerns over corporate sponsorship of political candidates is nothing to be concerned about:
…what we mean by “corporate” today is its popular, connotative sense. In this sense, “corporate democracy” means that our democracy has, presumably, come under the sway of corporate (business) dominance. That is, for-profit corporations control the funding, the agenda, and ultimately the politicians whom they select and ‘elect’ into office. As such, “corporate democracy” is an oxymoron. It cannot exist.
I would like to suggest to the self-styled “Dr. Rec” that maybe he’s been a bit too busy to read certain current events.
I’ve been quite remiss in my posting duties due to real-world time constraints. Luckily, I have a few loyal readers who occasionally give me something that I think deserves posting. Such is the case today, an observation concerning the recent claims by Mitt Romney that his father George marched with Martin Luther King. This story has since been disproven, adding to the already numerous reasons (which do NOT specifically include his Mormon faith in my opinion) why Romney is wrong for this nation (standard non-martial law condition applies), but I will allow VS-) to have the floor. Just keep in mind that this was written prior to the story - as presented by the candidate- being shown to be false.
R
Detroit Free Press is not exactly most reliable source on anything, let alone on all things Romney. But the time is particularly intriguing–Romney now backtracks to say that he was speaking metaphorically when he said that he “saw” his father “march” with MLK. He neither saw them, nor did they march together. As MSNBC puts, “Romney says that it depends on what the definition of ’saw’ is.”
I won’t attempt to defend the sorry record of the Democrats in protecting your economic interests and employment prospects. But can you be sure that the Republicans care a whit about you either?
The North American Free Trade Agreement… was opposed by 65% of U.S. citizens in 1993. That was just before President Bill Clinton, backed by all but three of the nation’s 1,300 daily newspapers, eked out a narrow victory for NAFTA with mostly Republican support.
I’ve spent much of the day today - the first one I’ve had to post here for a while now - caring for three two-day-old orphan kittens. I have no idea where their mother is, but my family and I can’t stand to see these creatures starve to death. There was a fourth, but he died before we could do much for him, and one of the remaining three refuses to eat from a bottle even though he’s clearly hungry.
Imagine my disgust through this experience to read that in Puerto Rico, people’s cherished pets have been callously thrown off a bridge by a man hired to collect them and transport them to a shelter. At least 50 former pets were put into a common grave near the bridge by a local resident, and at least six badly injured pets were reunited with their owners.
The problem is: someone didn’t understand that the majority of these removed pets were not in violation of any rules in the public housing project in Barceloneta on Puerto Rico’s north coast. But the problem doesn’t stop with pets with homes, or even with animals in general.
Read the rest of this entry »
I’ve been getting mail from my regulars for the last week or so, and I haven’t been able to respond due to a change in the SMTP policies of my ISP. What this means in clear American language is that I can receive emails, I just can’t send them.
This has me a bit suspicious, in that the stated claim for the instigation of the tighter email transmission policies is to reduce the amount of spam being disseminated, and yet spam - for me at least - isn’t much of a problem. I got a few as we all have, but it hasn’t dominated my inbox.
Rest assured, dear Regulars, that I will - as soon as my real-world occupation ceases its monopoly on my time - make arrangements be become responsive again.
I just wish that was the limit of the communication problems I face. I fear there is more.
Read the rest of this entry »