2008 Endorsement: John McCain

by Justin La Grange

I'm writing to you not as a Republican. I'm writing to you not with any racial mindset. I'm writing to you not with riches or richly in-debt. I'm writing to you as an American; from Warren Buffett to Joe the Plumber to Betsy the Smoking Homeless; from Harvard's Joseph Ocklesworth IV to Holland's Joe the Plumber to Huntington Beach's Jose Rodriguez; from J. Lo repping the Bronx to Mary-Jo repping the South to Scar-Jo repping SoCal. I'm writing to you as an American who wants to see the best of present and future. As an American, who wants to preserve the tradition and sanctity of the presidential office. As an American, who values a leader with only the top notch representation of American values and character. As an American, I can think only of John McCain as an option to represent this country going forward.

First and foremost, I would like to start out by paying tribute to and saluting Barack Obama. After witnessing the vicious, slanderous, unfounded, and hurtful attacks hurled at Governor Sarah Palin, I decided to take the upper ground in terms of fair political discourse. Senator Obama should be applauded for potentially becoming the nation's first black president. He's a man of unparalleled brilliance, style, and inspirational qualities. I don't want to take away from the magnitude of that achievement, and I think he has the character and durability to be a good leader.

However, I do have some significant reservations.

Senator Obama rose to fame and power after appearing at the 2004 Democratic Presidental Convention, during which time he gave a rousing speech that catapulted him to the United States Senate after serving for a few years in the Illinois State Senate. During his four years in the Senate, he focused two of those on his run for the Presidency.

The biggest question in all of this is why? Why now? There's a certain level of audacity to saying that you're going to run for President after such a short stint in major public office, notably one without any executive experience. Isn't there a certain level of effrontery to want to be President without waiting your turn and gaining more experience? Isn't there a certain level of effrontery to shoving yourself into the Presidental nomination without having a clear ostensible record for the American people to judge you on? One has to wonder why Barack Obama hungered to do all of this so quickly? One has to wonder if the ascendancy of Barack Obama to this level without much experience or record speaks to a dangerous cult of personality? One has to wonder if Barack Obama can get away with too much as President with such a dangerous cult of personality and an irresponsible subservient swooning media?

One of my best friends articulated this very well as he was fluxuating on who he will support in 2008:

"I must be at peace with my conscience. I am no longer a supporter of B. H… well you know the rest. My heart is full of regret for abandoning my beloved H. Clinton and falling victim to the empty promise that is Obama. Mr. Obambi has recently shown his true colors and demonstrated that he is no super hero, but simply a heartless and dispassionate politician. Obama’s thirst for power and popularity is unrivaled and frankly it scares me. Obama has acquired international fame and recognition and I fear that his first priority is no longer the interests of the American people..."

First and foremost however, we are in a center-right country that tends to average out to having center-right values, whether they be economic, foreign, social, etc. The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama is on the left. Perhaps, but questionably, not on the hard-left, but consistently left. Whether it's "spreading the wealth around", talking to rogue states without preconditions, relentless support for unfettered abortion rights, reasonable hostility towards free trade, massive union support including open voting, excessive support from labor unions, affirmative action support, anti-voucher or anti-significant European style competition overhaul of the education system (in favor of throwing more money at the problem), being strongly against gun rights, too much government intervention in healthcare programs, spending proposals ($1T in new spending), getting a grade of "F" by the National Taxpayers' Union, a poor grade by the "Citizens Against Government Waste" group, or a lack of commitment to immigration reform, his record is decisively left and arguably out of the mainstream. With the aforementioned record, policy proposals, and endorsements I find it probable that Barack Obama will certainly move towards the "implimentation" of policies outside the American mainstream, and with the trifecta of House and Senate control, there's a horribly large possibility that this unholy setup without checks and balances can lead to severe pushes of agenda outside the mainstream. Most Americans don't want this, and these policies don't align with mainstream values.

While I don't think Senator Obama shares deep sympathies with any of his controversial associations, I fault him heavily for deceiving the American people by throwing these associations under the bus when it was politically convenient to do so. Obama flat out lied to the American people when he denied launching his state senate career in domestic terrorist Bill Ayers living room. He has lied to the American people when he claimed that he did not know that his pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, was an anti-American and anti-white zealot who said that the government gave black people AIDS as a way to kill them off. He presumably has lied to the American people about his Aunt Zeituni's illegal immigration status (or for writing about her so much in his books, he sure is a sucky nephew). He's dishonestly downplayed his associations with Farrakhan and Tony Resko. He admitted to flirting with Marxist ideology and doing drugs in college, certainly not becoming for America's commander-in-chief. In summary, I think Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton said it best:

"The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training."
-Joe Biden

"Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign, and Senator Obama will bring a speech he gave in 2002"
-Hillary Clinton

In contrast, recognizing that Senator John McCain is a significant and intelligent departure from President Bush, who Senator Obama shamefully and wrongfully puppets as a would be extension of Senator McCain, I very strongly endorse Senator McCain as President for 2008.

Senator McCain has an extraordinary record of leadership dating back to his days as a naval war hero who refused to abandon his men in his Vietnamese POW camp and extending to his present triumphs of extraordinary bipartisanship and running an underdog campaign in a toxic Republican climate.

Senator McCain has had an extraordinary amount of experience dating from his naval service over 40 years ago to his many years in the US Senate.

In an era of excessive partisanship, Senator McCain has been proven to be far more bipartisan and less divisive than Senator Obama, dating back to McCain-Feingold and calling religious-right leaders "agents of intolerance".

Senator McCain is as committed to combating climate change and dedicated to environmental issues as Senator Obama, and coupled with Governor Palin's extraordinary experience with energy issues, the McCain/Palin ticket is as formidable a ticket as the Democrats in leading America towards energy independence.

Senator McCain is one of the most experienced and respected leaders in America in terms of foreign issues and foreign policy. While the Democrats and Senator Obama would have sent Iraq into a cascading quagmire, Senator McCain demanded a troop surge as put forth by General Petraeus, which has now preserved and vindicated all the effort, blood, money, and tears Americans have put into Iraq. Iraq is now seeing its lowest levels of violence since combat began and the combined 53 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan now have a chance at a stable democracy instead of the excessive tyranny they lived with under Saddam Hussein and the Taliban.

Last, but most importantly, I'd like to discuss with you why Senator John McCain is the only choice for President in these troubling economic times.

Let's start with this idea of extra taxation, which in this case includes Senator Obama's proposed raising of the dividends tax, capital gains tax, corporate tax rate, and taxes on those that make over $250,000 (although that is changing day by day). When you are in an downturn slash economic environment in which people are not willing to take risks to further stimulate the economy, you have to incentivize people to take risks in a glum economy, and that includes tax cuts and not tax raises. All of these groups in which Senator Obama seeks to tax are the groups which have the potential capital to build, restimulate, and grow the economy, and create jobs.

It's NOT ABOUT RICH VS. POOR, it's about common sense and growth. It's no secret that when Reagan cut the upper class tax rate from 70% to 28%, revenue to the government doubled. People who are at the upper rungs of the economy need to be rewarded for their increased ability for entreprenurial output and innovation.

In regards to McCain's plan to lower corporate taxes, take note that our corporate taxes are the second highest in the world. During a potential recession, why would you scare international or internal investment in the US away from creating businesses and jobs in America? Why develop a business in the US, taxed to high hell, when you can open up shop in Ireland for 1/3 the tax rate? It's not simply about oil and other corporate fat cats. It's not about class warfare. Lots of businesses are struggling and if you make hostile business climate taxation policies, businesses don't grow and leave US shores, setting up in more business friendly economies, and our economy tanks. In our potential recession, we need to keep businesses in the US and lure more businesses here, and we can do that by lowering corporate taxes.

We've lived too long with a government that is not a good steward of our taxpayer dollars. John McCain, unlike President Bush, has vowed to streamline government programs and take out the veto pen to cut down drastically on wasteful congressional pork-barrel projects.

Here are some comments I've made recently about John McCain's general mantra to grow the economy:

"There's so much waste in the government. Republicans aren't about cutting programs like healthcare and medicare. We are about streamlining them, making them less bureaucratic, finding waste and cutting it, and operating government organizations more efficiently like a business. While Bush hasn't been responsible about cutting pork-barrel, McCain and most Republicans will be. Democrats will not allow that because they have to bend over to union interests and have no concern for spending Americans' hard earned money. No one in America should have to pay one cent more of taxes for an inefficent government that IS NOT RESPONSIVE TO THEM or RESPONSIBLE STEWARDS OF THEIR TAX DOLLARS!"

"Unfortunately, it's not just as easy as tax those above $250,000, not to mention Barack raises taxes on everybody with the doubling of the capital gains tax. 110,000 small businesses in America make revenue about $250,000, and raising taxes on them stifles growth and hurts their bottom line. In addition, citizens who make over $250,000 are generally more intelligent, innovative people who will cycle money back into the US market either through creating more businesses or buying products. They fuel the economy and create growth, innovation, and jobs - in a potential recession, it's better they have the money and not the inefficient federal government where a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats decide what to do with it."

"I know being poor in America sucks, but I am of the opinion that wealth is created for everyone in a very free market (semi-regulated to the point of enforcing contracts, external factors, and exchange of information) that heavily rewards innovation, growth, and risk-taking. The US took off because people were allowed to do that en-masse, and other countries with heavier redistribution paradigms are far more stagnant. In other words, we can live in a society where we have a gap between the rich and the poor or we have a tiny gap between the less poor and poorer. There are optimum tax rates for generating overall wealth, rewarding risk taking and innovation, and creating economic balance and fairness, with the acknowledgement that life just can't be fair and equal for everyone, but it can be reasonably decent for all. I believe tax rates are too high, and unreasonable when we have a government that wastes 40 cents of every dollar with bureaucratic negligence and inefficient waste. It's not just programs, although lots of those are ridiculous. It's about the need for streamlining."

McCain's healthcare plan will insure 21 million more people in America, versus Obama's 26 million. However, McCain's healthcare plan is far more efficient because it doesn't involve federalizing more healthcare and new federalized programs in America. This is not the time for larger government.


I'd also like to address Governor Sarah Palin's VP Candidacy. Sarah Palin is the only candidate on either ticket to have executive experience, which includes running the largest state by land size as well as a $40 Billion Dollar economy. It is unfair to judge her entire future on a couple of bad interviews only days after she arrived on the national scene. If you look back to her debates for the Alaska governorship you'll see her performance is tremendous when versed on the issues. Look at her progress from those interviews to the Vice Presidential Debates. Look at her performance as the most popular governor in America. Think how far she'll go when she arrives as VP at the White House. Think how amazing she'll be once she's sat in on foreign policy and staff meetings on all the issues. Sarah Palin no doubt has a reformer's heart and an incredible intelligence that some people refuse to see because folks like Keith Olbermann diminish her because they're scared of her and they patronize people who don't talk like they just came back from an elite Washington cocktail party.

People - I understand we desperately need change! I promise from the bottom of my heart that John McCain will offer the change you are looking for and represent you with the utmost honesty and integrity with which he has served this country for nearly half-a-century.

Please, vote for John McCain on Tuesday. From California to Maine. From men to women. From rich to poor. From straight to gay. My friends, I love you all and I feel strongly about this.

______________________________________________
Obama's Redistribution of Wealth Discussion Back in 2001:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Obama's Record on Voting 96% of the Time with his Party/Biography:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/

Key Votes:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/key-votes/

Project Vote Smart - Obama on the Issues:
http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=9490

Interest Group Support:
http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=9490

Quick State by State Electoral Update (Current as of 7P Nov.1.08)

by Justin La Grange

As we know by now, it is not the national polls that matter (although they are important trend indicators), but state polls that determine the outcome of the electoral college. Obama could be registering 60% to 40% nationally (theoretically), but if he's getting 100% support in California, Washington, New York, Massachusetts, etc, it is still hypothetically possible to lose the electoral college (just an illustrative example that national polls aren't necessarily king).

Funny things are starting to happen. States that McCain should have absolutely solidified like North Dakota, Arizona, Georgia, and Arizona are becoming bonafide swing states with Obama trailing by exactly 3-4% in all of these states. But states that McCain was trailing in recently that he needed to solidify have been tightening, like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and North Carolina. Indiana and Missouri have actually switched back into McCain's column.

With all these polls, keep the following in mind:

In 2004, President Bush was trailing 13-17 points behind John Kerry in Pennsylvania right before the election. President Bush lost Pennsylvania by roughly 2 points. Today, John McCain trails by only 7.5% in Pennsylvania, after being behind about 10-12% early last week. Remember that Obama was also ahead in the Pennsylvania primary polls, and absolutely tanked in the primary outcome.

John McCain is the "safe candidate", especially in backwater states in places like Western Pennsylvania. And 1 in 7 voters are still undecided. This is the reason why John McCain's attacks on Ayers and "socialism", and GOP PAC's attacks on Resko, Wright, and Khalidi are not totally in vain. They solidify doubts in undecided voters who will view John McCain as the safe candidate: the white naval hero who has the bipartisan record. To illustrate, it was reported in Texas that 23% still incorrectly thought that Obama is Muslim. While I don't think that's specifically the case with these undecided voters, people will often vote for the candidate that they have the least questions and doubts about in the voting booth.

Also, these polling outfits take into account heavy turnout by African-American and youth voters. While African-Americans have been coming out en-masse, the youth vote this year is a little more dubious. Also, these polling outfits have not taken into account increased turnout among Republican voters, which if speaking to any Republican I know has been any kind of anecdotal indication, Republicans and many moderates will be out full force mobilized against Obama.

I've been looking at these polls, and a lot of them just don't seem right. For instance, California is a state far more prone to success for McCain than Bush, and yet the numbers are showing 57%-33% in favor of Obama. While it's true California is not that heavily polled, I can promise you that those numbers are inaccurate, especially when Bush has lost California in numbers like 57-43 and 55-45. If California is absolutely incorrect from an outfit like RCP/Yahoo Political dashboard, what does it say about the other polls in undoubtedly the most accurate polling outfit which averages all the other major polls.

And as a verbatim mention from my other note:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=33243837333&id=1219649&index=0

Possible Reasons for Polling Error:

Voters who are more enthusiastic about their candidate tend to respond to pollsters. More often than not, that candidate would be Barack Obama, perhaps making him overrepresented in the sample.

The Bradley Effect: People don't want to tell the pollster they're voting McCain or they put themselves in the undecided category for fear of seeming racist. This intimidation effect seems plausible, as I don't feel terribly comfortable going around Berkeley toting my McCain/Palin pin (but I do), but will be very comfortable toting McCain/Palin in the ballot box.

Safe Candidate Syndrome: People are not afraid to go with the more controversial and less safe choice (if their a moderate swing voter) when chatting with a pollster or doing some online survey. However, there's a certain finality and seriousness of the ballot box that makes people re-examine their concerns and fears and vote with the "safe" candidate

The Numbers
Taking into account how grossly wrong all these polls could be from the factors I've listed above, look at the current swing state percentages from RCP/Yahoo Political Dashboard, keeping in mind McCain can afford to lose a couple of these states:

Missouri: 48.3%/47.7% (McCain/Obama)

Indiana: 47.3%/46.8% (McCain/Obama)

North Carolina: 48.3%/47.0% (Obama/McCain)

Florida: 49.8%/45.7% (Obama/McCain)

Ohio: 49.2%/43.6% (Obama/McCain)

Virginia: 51.0%/45.0% (Obama/McCain)

Pennsylvania: 51.2%/43.7% (Obama/McCain)

Nevada: 50.5%/44.0% (Obama/McCain)

Colorado: 51.5%/45.3% (Obama/McCain)

New Mexico: 50.3%/43.0% (Obama/McCain)

Keep in mind the margins in these states are all below 7.5%.

While I definitely don't think McCain has an equal shot at winning, and he's certainly on the defensive with an uphill battle, I'm here to say that for anybody that thinks Obama definitely has this in the bag might just be a little too hasty. McCain has a chance here, and if he had no shot, Vegas wouldn't be riding 84-16 on Obama. They'd be riding 99-1. McCain has always been the underdog, and he's always come back from behind. They declared him dead in the primaries, and here he is today running strong against a major Democratic tide. Never count out John McCain.

McCain Tightening Up The Race and Positioning His Path to Victory

by Justin La Grange

I will write an endorsement note soon; not that it will be any surprise, but I just wanted to articulate why I'm endorsing who I am endorsing so I'm not further accused of being any of the following:
a. racist
b. stupid
c. devoid of hope
d. all of the above

At this point, October 22, Obama leads by slight margins in a lot of key states that McCain needs to pick up, according to RCP/Yahoo Political Dashboard (where you can find all this data). These are Florida, Missouri, Ohio, and North Carolina. And when I say slight margins, I really mean slight margins like 1-3% in all of these, within the margin of error. With two weeks to go, McCain gaining momentum, and growing worries of the Bradley Effect and polling error taking place in mid to high single digits on final poll outcomes, it is now looking likely that those states could easily and likely go to John McCain. When you have margins like this, I anticipate that these states, driven by the propensity of the undecideds to swing to the non-controversial candidate, will go to the "safe" John McCain.

Current Polling In FL, NC, MO, and OH:
Florida (27EV): Obama 48%/McCain 46.5%
North Carolina (15EV): Obama 49.2%/McCain 47.2%
Missouri (11EV): Obama 48%/McCain 45.3%
Ohio (20EV): Obama 48.3%/McCain 45.8%

Okay, that assumption tallies to 247 electoral votes for McCain and 291 votes for Obama. McCain still needs 22-23 electoral votes from somewhere. Below are some of the options.



Nevada (5 Electoral Votes)

Obama is leading McCain 49.3% to 46% in Nevada, which factoring in statistical error could make Nevada even. I don't think McCain is trending as well in the west as he is in the East Coast states I've listed above which is why I haven't given it to him as I have FL, NC, OH, and MO. However, when the polls start tightening up near the end of the race and given the factors I've listed for tightening above, I think McCain is in a very comfortable position to possibly win Nevada.

Pennsylvania (21 Electoral votes)

McCain is still campaigning very hard in Pennsylvania despite high single digit to low double digit trailing in the polls. You would think that this seems very odd as McCain has near abandoned states like Michigan and Iowa where he trails by a similar margin. Interestingly enough, Pennsylvania is a major anomaly, with pollsters and campaigns on both sides admitting that the margin in their internal polling is significantly tighter than national polling. In addition, Pennsylvania has a history of dramatic poll shifts in the final days, and the final results tend to favor Republican candidates heavily, albeit the polls had the Democrats at twenty point leads in those races (for example; so they ended up winning by narrow margins). Obama was absolutely trounced in Pennsylvania primaries by Hillary Clinton, likely by more socially conservative Democrats who saw right through his covering up of those Chicago and San Francisco liberal values. In that trouncing, Clinton saw a larger margin of victory than the polls had been predicting.

Pennsylvania is a state that stretches into the midwest and has a very large contingency of Republicans in Western Pennsylvania as well as socially moderate/generally moderate suburban voters all over Pennsylvania - exactly the kind of voter that caters to McCain (less so than President Bush, who lost the state by a very narrow margin). Rep. John Murtha also called Western Pennsylvania "very racist", which can only work the "Bradley Effect" in McCain's favor.

New Hampshire (4 Electoral Votes)

New Hampshire is a very libertarian state, and McCain had a large fan base there dating back from 2000 in which he called religious leaders backing George W. Bush "agents of intolerance". Despite a roughly 9% trail in the polls (52-BO/43-JMC), this is a state that was tied for McCain just a few weeks ago and could easily tie again with national shifts trending towards McCain. Keep in mind that New Hampshire is not a bonafide East Coast liberal state, much like Pennsylvania. Incidentally, McCain has been campaigning quite amply in New Hampshire as of late.

Virginia (13 Electoral Votes)

McCain is trailing by 7 points (51.5-BO/44.5-JMC). Again, national swings and polling error can put this state further into play. Virginia is also a traditionally Republican state, although it does have lots of blacks coming in full force for Obama as well as a lot of folks moving from DC into Northern Virginia. However, the 2004 election underrepresented Bush's actual support by a decent margin in the polls, meaning that it's possible such a thing could happen here.

Colorado (9 Electoral Votes)

Obama is currently leading McCain 50.4% to 45% in this traditionally Republican state. Again, national swings and polling error can put Colorado into play come November 4th. Somehow, I'm not terribly bullish on Colorado, but if McCain can continue to tighten it up a little, it may be possible to pull off a win.

Getting to 270

Making the assumption that McCain pulls off the aforementioned 247 EV's in OH, FL, MO, and NC, let's assemble some likely scenarios to 270.
247 + 21 PA + 1 in Maine = 269 tie
247 + 21 PA + 4 NH = 272 win
247 + 21 PA + 5 NV = 273 win
247 + 21 PA + 9 CO = 277 win
247 + 13 VA + 9 CO = 269 tie
247 + 13 VA + 21PA = 281 win
247 + 13 VA + 5 NV + 9 CO = 274 win
247 + 13 VA + 5 NV + 4 NH = 269 tie

As you can see, the road to the White House for John McCain lies in winning either Pennsylvania or Virginia, and then peeling off a small bit of something else to tip it over.

Reasons for Polling Error:

Voters who are more enthusiastic about their candidate tend to respond to pollsters. More often than not, that candidate would be Barack Obama, perhaps making him overrepresented in the sample.

The Bradley Effect: People don't want to tell the pollster they're voting McCain or they put themselves in the undecided category for fear of seeming racist. This intimidation effect seems plausible, as I don't feel terribly comfortable going around Berkeley toting my McCain/Palin pin (but I do), but will be very comfortable toting McCain/Palin in the ballot box.

Safe Candidate Syndrome: People are not afraid to go with the more controversial and less safe choice (if their a moderate swing voter) when chatting with a pollster or doing some online survey. However, there's a certain finality and seriousness of the ballot box that makes people re-examine their concerns and fears and vote with the "safe" candidate

References:

WSJ: Are the polls accurate?:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122463210033356561.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

News Outlets Sweat Over Exit Poll Accuracy:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081021/pl_politico/14778

BBC: Will Closet Racism Derail Obama:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7675551.stm

Is UC Berkeley Subverting State Law? It Sure Looks Like It

UC Berkeley has made no secret of its desire to eliminate Proposition 209, which was passed in 1996 to eliminate discrimination against certain races in the California public university admissions process. Specifically, Prop 209 made it illegal to continue the practice of giving applications with "minority" designations preference and a boost up in the admissions process despite having inferior "numerical" (GPA and SAT) qualifications. You could tell the process of discrimination was rampant before Prop 209 because minority enrollment plunged and their numerical data points surged upward, as evidenced by the data in the links I have provided.

The question in front of us now is whether UC Berkeley has disobeyed state law as mandated by the people of California by subverting the non-racial application review process in its admissions office. The evidence is quite overwhelming to support this.

Here's a pretty non-shocking yet explosive allegation made by an admissions committee member at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), who claims in his report that UCLA has covered up the fact that it takes race into account in its admissions process through this really dodgy process called "holistic" application review, or basically the notion that the application reader's touchy feely opinion of the student is king. The major charge is that application readers look at the application more favorably if there is a mention of race, and that is not likely preferable as a applicant if your father is a diplomat from Hong Kong and your major hardship was getting a lesser BMW than you wanted for your sweet 16. The report also charges that UC Berkeley uses similar admissions review processes and is more touchy feely; therefore is also quite likely to be subverting state law.

http://www.latimes.com/news/education/la-me-ucla30-2008aug30,0,776059.story

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/CUARS.Resignation.Report.pdf

Now here is the primary beef at UC Berkeley. Look at the admissions data by SAT Score for applicants who were admitted and decided to come to Berkeley. The margin between the median SAT Score by race from Black/Hispanic and White/Asian is enormous. Furthermore, the margin between Chinese and everyone else is even more enormous. This data is unfortunately pre-2006, but it still says a whole lot about what's been going on these last few years. From what I've heard, the present data trends are similar.

Year 2005 Median SAT Scores For Freshman Registrants: 135
• American Indian: 1335

• White: 1360

• Asian American Average: 1380

• International: 1430

• Chinese & Korean: 1410

• East Indian: 1410

• Filipino/Pacific Islander: 1290/1300

• African American: 1080

• Hispanic: 1140

https://osr2.berkeley.edu/Public/STAFFWEB/KW/sat.percentiles/median_tables/tbl10.html

Look at that enormous discrepancy! What factor specifically caused the average admitted and enrolled Hispanic and African-American groups to get in despite scoring an average of about 200-300 points below the major White and Asian peer groups? What elements were so spectacular in their applications that made up for the obvious deficiency in test scores? Did these groups have an abundance of extra curricular or leadership attributes that the average Asian or White did not have? It certainly can't be GPA, as the school's provided tables show a lower average GPA for these groups as well. Maybe it is just me, but I'm going to say that, in the words of David Letterman, "something doesn't smell right."

This is a civil rights issue. This is a government entity discriminating against its citizens. This is a whole group of people in that 200-300 point SAT margin that did not get into Berkeley. Citizens have a right to an investigation of UC Berkeley's admissions office for these potentially high crimes.

More Links on the Issue

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2008/08/25_fall08-stats.shtml

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2008/04/14_admits_table.shtml

https://osr2.berkeley.edu/Public/STUDENT.DATA/PUBLICATIONS/UG/ugf07.html

https://osr2.berkeley.edu/Public/STAFFWEB/KW/sat.percentiles/median_tables/tbl6.html

Really Hilarious McCain Quotes = I Heart John McCain

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father." --at a 1998 Republican fundraiser

•

"Washington is a Hollywood for ugly people. Hollywood is a Washington for the simpleminded."

•

"You know, the French remind me a little bit of an aging actress of the 1940s who is still trying to dine out on her looks but doesn't have the face for it."

•

"I said, 'The nice thing about Alzheimer's is you get to hide your own Easter eggs.'"

•

"At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt." -to his wife, Cindy, after she playfully twirled his hair and said "You're getting a little thin up there,"
•

"You know the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? One is a scum-sucking bottom-dweller. The other is a fish."

•

"My Social Security number is 8." --joking with Jay Leno
•

"You know, by a strange coincidence I was not elected Miss Congeniality in the United States Senate this year." --after being asked by Rev. Rick Warren about going against his party

•

"The good news is that we now have enough money to run the entire campaign in Colorado. The bad news is, some of that money is still in your wallets and purses." --speaking at a fundraiser in Aspen, Colorado

"Fuck you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room." --to Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), during a testy exchange about immigration legislation

•

"I had something picked out for you, too - a little IED (improvised explosive device) to put on your desk." --to Jon Stewart
•

"In case you missed it, a few days ago Senator Clinton tried to spend $1 million on the Woodstock Concert Museum. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I wasn't there. I'm sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event. I was tied up at the time." --on the years he spent as a P.O.W. in Vietnam

•

"Thanks for the question, you little jerk." -- John McCain, after being asked by a high school student if he was too old to be president. For good measure, McCain then threatened to draft him.
•

"Remember the words of Chairman Mao: 'It's always darkest before it's totally black.'"

•

"Presidential ambition is a disease that can only be cured by embalming fluid."

•

"I'm older than dirt, I've got more scars than Frankenstein, but I've learned a few things along the way."
•

"Never get into a wrestling match with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it." --to reporters in New Hampshire after being asked him about Mitt Romney

•

"We spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don't know if that was a paternity issue or a criminal issue." --on wasteful congressional spending
•

"I spent several years in a North Vietnamese prison camp, in the dark, fed with scraps. Do you think I want to do that all over again as vice president of the United States?"
•

"We have a lot of work to do. It's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border." --referring to a border that does not exist, ABC News interview, July 21, 2008

•

"I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself. I don't expect to be a great communicator, I don't expect to set up my own blog, but I am becoming computer literate to the point where I can get the information that I need." --New York Times interview, July 13, 2008

•

"Maybe that's a way of killing them." --responding to a report that $158 million in cigarettes have been shipped to Iran during Bush's presidency despite restrictions on U.S. exports to that country, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, July 8, 2008
•

"I will veto every single beer, um, bill with earmarks." --speaking at the National Small Business Summit, Washington, D.C., June 10, 2008 (Watch video clip)

•

"Well, basically, it's a Google." --on how he's conducting his VP search, Richmond, Virginia, June 9, 2008
•

"We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies." --Kenner, Louisiana, June 3, 2008

•

"You know that old Beach Boys song, Bomb Iran? Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran." --breaking into song after being asked at a VFW meeting about whether it was time to send a message to Iran, Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, April 18, 2007 (Watch video clip)
•

"I will conduct a respectful debate. Now, it will be dispirited -- it will be spirited -- because there are stark differences. I am a proud conservative, liberal Republica-- conservative Republican...Hello? Easy there."

•

"I am a illiterate that has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance I can get." -after being asked whether us uses a Mac or a PC.
•

"It's not social issues I care about."

•

"No, I'm calling you a fucking jerk." --to fellow Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, when Grassley asked "Are you calling me stupid?"
•

"Only an asshole would put together a budget like this ... I wouldn't call you an asshole unless you really were an asshole." --to Budget Committee Chairman and fellow Repulican Sen. Pete Domenici, during a Senate budget hearing

SOURCE: http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/johnmccain/a/mccain-quotes.htm

Complied by Daniel Kurtzman

Interesting Electoral College Scenarios

Here is today's electoral college map, making the assumption that all swing states go to the person currently leading, no matter the margin. According to this, Barack Obama wins the election 273-265. In order for this to happen, McCain will win Ohio, Virginia, Florida, and Nevada - he doesn't have comfortable margins in either Nevada, Virginia, or Ohio. However, this assumes Obama will retain his very uncomfortable leads in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Colorado, and Minnesota (all under 3%). Keep in mind that McCain is likely to keep Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Nevada, meaning he needs to turn over only one other swing state to win (with the exception of New Hampshire). Pennsylvania, Colorado, or another dark horse state could easily go McCain's way.


According to recently released data, Obama could lose roughly 6 percentage points on election day because he is black. In other words, when the pollsters call folks, they feel comfortable being "progressive" because it is not their real vote. However, when they actually get in the voting booth and have to make that critical decision, they will vote for the safe candidate, which is John McCain. Anyway, assuming Obama loses 6 percentage point in each state, above is the resulting electoral victory for McCain - an absolute sweep (this is also assuming McCain gains no points and being very generous towards Obama - just dropping Obama's percentage 6% and keeping McCain's the same, even though that's not really realistic). It's fascinating that Washington currently has Obama leading McCain 49-45, which is an extremely small margin for a state like Washington. Consider New Mexico, a reasonably red state, having Obama leading 50-44. It is unfathomable that Washington is a narrower swing state. Also consider solidly Blue Minnesota, the only state to have not voted for Ronald Reagan, having a 47-45 lead for Obama - that's only 2%, also unfathomable. The point is that if polling behavior is really slightly different from voting behavior, it's going to be a very tough race for Obama.


What if everything is near the current status quo come election day, except McCain wins New Hampshire, in which he is only trailing by a little over a percentage point? That would give both candidates 269 electoral votes. In that case, the House would cast their vote for Obama (for President, the constitutional responsibility of the House), and the Senate would cast a tie for the VP vote since Lieberman (no longer a Democrat), would cast his vote for Sarah Palin. This 50-50 tie would then go to Vice President Cheney, who would most certainly vote for Sarah Palin. Boy, the Democrats were stupid for crossing Joe Lieberman. He's already spoken at the RNC, and now he might swing a VP election to Sarah Palin, with president Barack Hussein Obama! It's called karma Democrats - karma for swinging so far to the left that you oust absolutely respectable, honorable, and moderate Joe Lieberman. Horrible!

What The Fa MotherFa? Why Be A Republican With These Positions?

Recently I was verbally assaulted by a fellow Facebooker for some of my posted items and notes being "propaganda" and furthermore called a "chickenhawk". It's true that I have made no secret of my preference for John McCain in this election, but that still does not qualify this guy calling me a "chickenhawk". Instead of being a pussy and whining about it, I got us into an extensive message battle in which I explained why I should not be called a chickenhawk, and I stated some positions that are regarded as centrist to liberal. He then retorted, "Why on earth are you voting for John McCain?" I realized at that point that I had been asked that a lot, so I'm going to clarify exactly what I believe and how that likely correlates into a center-right preference. In summary, I'm pretty libertarian, i.e. conservative on economic/military issues and liberal on social issues. So why vote for the GOP? Because first and foremost I view economic issues and the limited role of government as king, and social issues are just philosophical formations to which I subscribe but have no use for. If you ask me whether I'm more likely to be overtaxed or have a gay marriage, I'd say hopefully overtaxed (yes Carlos, I can anticipate your retort already). If David Beckham offered me a gay marriage and half of his estate, you would see me swiftly move to the Democratic Party. And a year later, you would see me get a swift gay divorce and be swimming amongst Ferraris and Heidi Fleiss's whores.

_______________________________________
Here are some excerpts from my message regarding my political philosophy:

"Needless to say, I'm a tad bit disappointed. I take great enjoyment in my political writing, satire, and being provocative and inflammatory. Most of my FB friends (whom I know nearly all in person) know that."

"I'm sorry you disagree with my viewpoints. Most of my friends do, yet I have fun in a political back and forth jabbing and also enjoy substantive dialogue on the issues. We "jab back and forth" all the time (yes, via Facebook), reminding each other of our other candidates' triumphs and falldowns. It's a sport and a game - not that politics is a sport - it's a real sad affair actually - but one that is so sad that it needs to be livened up and "sportinized" in order to survive it. If I had conservative friends (Berkeley - hello?), my notes would be no fun and unprovocative."

"When other people incessantly post stuff about McCain being old, Bush being a retard, and Obama soaring in the polls, I take a friendly jab and then respect them for their viewpoints, because apparently with the exception of me everyone else is entitled to them."

"Despite my hope for a quick withdrawal, preference for gay marriage/LGBT rights, pro-choice position, hope for more public transportation infrastructure, progressive support for a female VP, alternative energy/environmental protection, stem cell research, moderate gun control position, support of vouchers to allow the less unfortunate and minorities to get a better education..."

"...but don't let any of that get in the way of calling me a chickenhawk."

____________________________________
I then clarified my positions (excerpt):

Because first and foremost I value economic freedom and freedom from a large oppressive government that overtaxes its citizens and then wastes their money with no accountability. No matter how rich or poor anyone is, they should not be unfairly taxed. I passionately believe in that. While that won't change much with McCain, and the Republicans have been terribly tax & spend as well, I cannot accept the Democratic party (especially Obama's) rhetoric and action on the issue.

I believe in every citizen earning their way in a market economy, and believe that redistribution harms people on the lower economic rungs by creating dependency and never giving incentive for people of lower economic status to move out of that class. I believe in Clinton's (wildly unpopular with Democrats) Welfare Reform Act.

You of course are familiar with how unions have brought down the airline industry (and other industry). Unions have outgrown their use, and whichever party has them in their back pocket is the party I cannot accept.

School choice - I sincerely want our schools improved - especially for the lowest tiers of society - and guess which party is in bed with public school teachers' unions, hijacking everybody's right to a good education. [If you allot $8000 dollars to each student/parent instead of investing the money solely in the school to which their child would normally subscribe, the student/parent can choose whether the school he goes to is good enough - if it's not, private institutions will be clamoring to take that $8000 to give a superior education. Then in order to survive, the public school will up their game if they have to compete against private institutions for the student].
I love immigrants and immigration, but we can't continue to be a country that can't properly account for who is in it [and the resulting balance of resources]. Whichever party at least has more rhetoric towards closing the borders is my party. McCain had a reasonable proposal on this about a year or so back.

Iraq is a mess/stupid idea, but there's no denying that the surge, which McCain supported and Barack didn't, was the right thing to do in stabilizing Iraq and will allow us to pull out AND have a relative amount of success in securing the country.

McCain = better than Bush on environment [went across party lines and co-sponsored bills promoting the environment and fighting global warming]

McCain = female VP, open to pro-choice VP

Whichever party/candidate is the best on those issues is first and foremost the one I will lean towards. I'm not rich - I just believe in smaller government - the power of the individual [and freedom from government oppression].

It's also a function of where I grew up and how I developed my thinking, but I'm sincere and passionate about a conservative libertarian ideology - I'm not evil, I'm not a religious fanatic, I don't hate gays...I just have ideas about the fundamental nature of government.

______________________________________________
Some More Issues Discussion (Liberal Positions):

I am pro-choice. However, I have a strong pro-life ethos and I loathe how too many left-leaning people are too quick to dismiss excellent arguments from pro-life groups. I did write a blogpost about the abortion issue, in which I fundamentally concluded that ending the right to an abortion would first and foremost be dangerous to women who really want/need an abortion and take illegitimate back door procedures to get one and the logistical nightmare of the government/taxpayer supporting 40 million unwanted babies that would have been born since the 1970's and more than likely be a drain on society financially and in terms of resources (prison, welfare, etc). I do however dismiss the notion that an abortion is something that women should be willy-nilly entitled to and I condemn the amount of abortions that have occurred in which lots women have no one to blame but themselves and should be deserving of no sympathy for murdering their child.

I believe in background checks for guns. Not every idiot, especially one with a hint of a criminal record, should be allowed to purchase a gun. However, law-abiding Americans have the right to own a gun for protection or whatever they see fit. As an American, you should be able to own or operate whatever you want, but when you infringe on the life or property of another American, you should be punished to the full extent of the law.

I believe in states rights to decide gay marriage, at minimum. It's been a long road to this conclusion, and I've come to believe that gays in a legitimate relationship should not be barred from having the same legal and ceremonial rights that straight Americans have come to enjoy. When you bring marriage into the "state", marriage is no longer the property of religious groups - it is the property of all people and therefore no citizen should be denied access to it. However I am not a fan of a large sector of gay separatism, and that is gays being hostile to Americans who happen to have more traditional values just for the sake of history and tit-for-tat. If gays want gay marriage to be an accepted concept in America, they need to separate themselves (no pun intended) from a separatist culture that usually includes severe indoctrination in leftist ideology. Be the better man (or queen), and accept their right to their opinion just as you should be allowed to have yours.

Travel Stats Review: End of an Era

Effective 12:00AM Eastern Standard Time on August 21, 2008, my 23 year tenure as a non-revenue (free flight) dependent had come to a close. It's extremely sad to me that I can no longer have the world at my fingertips with the click of a button, and I feel really small and confined in California against the backdrop of a world that has become quite huge again.

The good news is that I've gone to so many places, seen so many great things, and met so many cool people along the way. I've been asked if by a few people if I'd ever documented my travels or compiled any stats. As a tribute to my illustrious "career", I thought I'd put those stats into a note, both for my own self interest and those who might care. Also, a few interesting "what Delta was a few years ago" flights.

As a background, my mom worked for Pan Am from 1966 to 1991, and Delta from 1991 to Present. Children of airline employees at all levels are entitled to travel benefits, and in Delta's case, absolutely free domestic & international travel in the most premium cabin available. This standby travel, or getting space in the highest cabin or even on the plane, is ordered by active/retiree/affiliate and seniority.

Anyway, here we go:

I've been to:

• 29 countries (thanks Vatican City!)

• All six inhabited continents

• 27 US States

I've Cleared US Customs through 7 gateways in order of frequency:

• Atlanta (Asia, Europe, Middle East, South America)

• New York (Europe)

• Los Angeles (Asia, Central America, Europe)

• Miami (Central America, South America)

• Cincinnati (Europe)

• Honolulu (Australia)

• Salt Lake City (Mexico)

International Connections:

• Cleared a connecting flight from Cairo in CDG (Paris), a connecting flight to Athens in FCO (Rome), a connecting flight from Dublin to New York in SNN (Shannon), and connecting flights to/from Singapore in NRT (Tokyo).

US Noteworthy/Major Cities I've Been To:

• Anchorage, Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Charleston, Cincinnati, Columbia, Dallas, Denver, Des Moines, Fort Lauderdale, Hartford, Honolulu, Ithaca, Kahului, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, New Orleans, New York, Newark, Orlando, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Portland, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, Savannah, Seattle, Salt Lake City, Tallahassee, Trenton, Washington DC

Major/Noteworthy International Cities I've Been To (Non-Connecting):

• Amman, Amsterdam, Aqaba, Aruba, Athens, Barcelona, Berlin, Brussels, Buenos Aires, Cairo, Colonia, Cordoba, Dubai, Dublin, Eliat, Guatemala City, Heidelberg, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Jerusalem, London [January 2009], Madrid, Mazatlan, Melbourne, Milan, Montevideo, Nice, Paris, Petra, Rome, Rosario, San Salvador, Santiago de Chile, Sevilla, Singapore, Stuttgart, Sydney, Tangier, Tel Aviv, Tokyo, Vatican City, Venice, Victoria, Vienna

Favorite Cities

• Amsterdam, Barcelona, Boston, Buenos Aires, Charleston, Dubai, Honolulu, Madrid, Melbourne, New York, Paris, Seattle, Sevilla, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, Venice

Countries I've Been to More Than Once:

• Argentina, El Salvador, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain

Airlines I've Flown (In Order of Frequency):

• Delta

• Pan Am
• SkyWest, ExpressJet, Comair, ASA\

• Southwest

• American

• United

• Qantas

• Northwest

• Air France

• Alitalia

Top City Pairs (Possibly Via Connecting Gateways):

• Los Angeles-San Francisco

• Los Angeles-Salt Lake City (to get other places)

• Los Angeles-Atlanta

• Los Angeles-New York

• Los Angeles-Honolulu

• San Francisco-Honolulu

• San Francisco-New York

• Los Angeles-Orlando

• Los Angeles-Seattle

• Los Angeles-Oakland

My More Interesting Flights Mostly Outside of Atlanta/New York:

• Los Angeles-Melbourne (QF)

• Los Angeles-Hong Kong (Delta)

• Los Angeles-Guatemala City (Pan Am)

• Melbourne-Sydney (QF)

• Sydney-Honolulu (QF)

• Miami-San Salvador (Pan Am)

• Miami-Buenos Aires (Pan Am)

• Paris-Los Angeles (American)

• Cairo-Paris (Air France)

• Rome-Athens (Alitalia)

• Tokyo-Singapore (Northwest)

• Salt Lake City-Mazatlan (Delta)

• Honolulu-Salt Lake City (Delta)

• Kahului-Atlanta (Delta)

• New York-Nice (Pan Am)

• New York-Istanbul (Pan Am)

• Los Angeles-San Francisco (United 747)

First Flight:

• Los Angeles-New York (Pan Am 747)

Longest International Flight (Tied):

• Dubai-Atlanta (15h:15m)

• Los Angeles-Melbourne (15h:15m)

Longest Domestic Flight:

• Atlanta-Kahului (9h)

International Flights in Coach:

• Aruba-Atlanta

• Tokyo-Atlanta (1 of 2)

• Rome-Athens

• Los Angeles-Melbourne

• Melbourne-Sydney

• Sydney-Honolulu

International Flights in a Premium Class:

• everything not listed above

Domestic Flights I've Flown In a BusinessElite Cabin (long since discontinued):

• New York-Los Angeles (763)

• New York-Salt Lake City (763)

• New York-Cincinnati (763)

• New York-Atlanta (763, 777)

• Atlanta-Los Angeles (763, 777)

• Atlanta-Orlando (777)

• Atlanta-Denver (763)

• Atlanta-Kahului (763)

• Cincinnati-Los Angeles (763)

• Orlando-Los Angeles (M11)

Flights With Startling Capacity Levels (long since discontinued):

• Salt Lake City-Los Angeles (763D)

• Salt Lake City-New York (763D redeye)

• Cincinnati-San Francisco (763D)

• Orlando-Los Angeles (763D, L1011, M11)

Other Tidbits:

• never had a bonafide in-flight emergency

• longest layover in an airport: 17 hours (ATL, 6A to 11P)

• longest continuous sleep: Atlanta-Dubai, 10.5 hours

• longest time overseas: 3 weeks

• shortest time overseas: 19 hours

• farthest point from Los Angeles: Singapore

• states not mentioned in cities: New Mexico, Kentucky, North Carolina

• Planes I've Been on: MD88, MD90, MD11, 727, 732, 733, 738, 747SP, 744, 757, 762, 763, 764, 777, DC10, L1011, A310, A320, A330, CRJ, CR7, CR9, ERJ

And yes, I'm a nerd :)

Dear Democrats: What May I Ask Is Wrong With You?

As Republicans, we weren't initially really worried about this election. We understood that like the economy, politics is a very cyclical thing. We understood that we were primed to lose this election, and Dear Democrats, it was yours to walk away with. May I asked how you fucked up so badly that Grandpa McCain and a sexy librarian from Alaska have a more than 50/50 chance of winning this election?

You had the chance to nominate the glorious Hillary Rodham Clinton, whom I lovingly refer to as H. Clinton. H. Clinton had the backing of the most powerful political force in America: herself and Bill "presidential kneepads" Clinton. This political team had the political experience and wherewithal that the American people trust. Moderate H. Clinton had the backing of working class white men and women all over America - a group that might very well sink this election for Barack in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, etc. Most importantly though, H. Clinton had the "American" wherewithal to win in this election, in that she is not a European-esque far-left secular progressive loon that has been endorsed by moveon.org - this white working class voting bloc of which I speak loathes those kind of people, and the secular-progressive leftist media has not fully done its job in revealing Barack Obama's ties to these groups.

To highlight this, I present Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a Democrat socialite who was strongly supporting H. Clinton. Today, Ms. Rothschild has just come out in full support of John McCain. Some of the reasons Mrs. Rothschild cited were the following:

"I believe that Barack Obama, with MoveOn.org and Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean, has taken the Democratic Party — and they will continue to — too far to the left. I'm not comfortable there."

"I believe that the McCain-Palin government will be a centrist government," Rothschild said. "It's not going to be an ideological government."

Links:

• http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080917/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_clinton_backer
• http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/prominent-clinton-backer-and-dnc-member-to-endorse-mccain/

Also, Hillary Clinton supporter Donald Trump has endorsed John McCain on Larry King Live. Donald Trump is no doubt one of the most savviest business people in America, and with his being a relatively moderate pragmatist, his endorsement carriers a lot of weight.

Link:• http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13558.html

Mrs. Rothschild and Mr. Trump are doing exactly what moderate, sane Democrats all over America should be doing - standing up to your party's horrible decisions made by the media and the far-left elite! If you do not vote for Barack Obama, and voice your displeasure en masse, you send a direct message to these elements that have hijacked the Democratic party that they cannot do this to you - that they cannot hijack your party! The Democratic Party under JFK and Clinton stood for something: it stood for the people, not Barbra Streisand and moveon.org. You are crucial to the survival of this party, and if they don't have you on board, they lose everything! By abstaining to vote or voting for McCain, who is most bipartisan and best for the country, you create a loss and force the Democratic party to adapt to your needs next time. You hold the power! H. Clinton 2012.

McCain is Most Bipartisan link:http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/15/records-show-mccain-more-bipartisan/

What Will Obama Do Now That He's Not The Only Rockstar?

The Republican Party, ya know - that stodgy thing for old people, has just stolen and will continue to steal the revolutionary and rockstar thunder that once belonged solely to Barack Hussein Obama. By the time Election 2008 rolls around, Sarah Palin - whom you'll notice I selected as McCain's should-be VP pick days before her announcement - will be America's new buzz and leave Barack Hussein Obama in the dust as old news. So what does Sarah Palin have that McCain does not? Well, that would include experience, bi-partisanship, beauty, directness, tenacity, authenticity, humor, and an all American homestyle feel - she's an absolutely incredible person that will leave Barack Obama looking like an unauthentic overeducated sop.

Liberal pundits are already knocking Sarah Palin for a lack of experience, even though ironically she has about as much experience as the Democrats' top ticket guy. However, Barack Obama is a measly do nothing Senator in a measly do nothing Democratic Controlled Senate. As Mike Huckabee correctly pointed out, Senators pick one or two pet projects and pretty much do nothing. A governor, however, is an executive in an office that's much like the micro-scale of the presidency. The governor must make tons of prudent executive decisions in one day that can have lasting effects. The governor gets as much executive experience in one day of the office than one gets in one year in the Senate. Barack Obama has no experience as an executive - he's either sat in a big office or a big Senate Chamber spewing out his do-nothing rounds of intellectual snobbery.

Sarah Palin, a heartfelt fighter that cares about government working for and being accountable to the people, has had a tremendous amount of executive experience in ways that exactly counter the ways that Republicans in the Executive and Legislative branches betray the philosophy of their party. Her record shows her as a clear fighter against special interests and pork-barrel. In her short tenure, she's worked tirelessly to get corrupt politicians (often from her own party) removed and vetoed loads of wasteful spending. She was an ardent opponent of Alaska's "Bridge to Nowhere".

In case you haven't noticed, Sarah Palin is a babe. She might be the first president that will ever be masturbated to. She's nice, and puts off this soccer mom MILF vibe/imagery that will send guys in this country nuts. For the sheer rockstar appeal, people who think outside the political establishment might have a choice between the first cool black guy to run or the first soccer mom babe - giving people options. She's also a fun bubbly person that people will like. Outside of that superficiality, Sarah Palin is authentically one of the nicest, caring, and non-self serving people in America and likely in all of politics. However, she will fiercely take down any opponent that she does not believe has the best interests of America (aka, their own selfish political interests) in mind. In addition, she has a propensity for these one line zingers that simply sting and shut down her opponents. Women will admire her power, her authenticity, and hopefully elect McCain/Palin so their daughters can see that someone who grew up normally like themselves truly have a shot at being America's president or VP. Most women in America, except hardnosed liberals, are more concerned about having a woman VP that cares about family interests than they are with abortion-on-demand.

Barack Obama doesn't feel authentic to the American people because he speaks above them (the intellectual snobbery of which I regularly speak). Sarah Palin speaks to them, and is one of them - while still being brilliant and tenacious. She didn't go to Columbia and become a politican through rockstardom and intellectual snobbery. She's a true American Dream story - a normal woman who wants change for her kids, for their generation, and starts from the very bottom and rises to the top with consistent hard-work and an authentic desire for the common good that voters recognize - her extreme popularity in Alaska speaks to this. In regards to her abortion stance, Sarah Palin is uniquely pro-life not because she's a religious zealot or doesn't value women's rights, but because she earnestly cares about the sanctity of all human life. Despite knowing her latest son, Trig, was going to have Down Syndrome, she refused to have an abortion and will likely love him as much as her other kids. Her socially conservative credentials will be more accepted in the mainstream because they seem to be issues she authentically cares about as opposed to carefully crafted political calculations.

Sarah Palin is America's true maverick, and represents true hope and change for America. Not Barack BG (big government) Obama.

Veepstakes: John McCain vs. Barack Obama

John McCain's Best Selections:

Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin is the younger, attractive, extremely smart, sensible, and practical female governer of Alaska. In this election where America wants to see "change", McCain's selection of Palin would certainly represent "change" and show that McCain is a politican that certainly believes in "change". Palin represents a similar change that can be had with a Lieberman ticket, except her reasonably conservative credentials will not cause any defection of the party base (except a few rednecks who couldn't fathom the idea of a woman president). Should Barack Obama select a white male politician as VP, McCain's selection of Palin would make him seem real progressive and be the real agent of change - a severe embarrassment to Obama. In addition, Palin would help John McCain seal the Hillary women and moderate Democrats - the lucrative 20-30% of Hillary supporters who say that they will refuse to support a Barack Obama ticket.

Joe Lieberman

Lieberman shows America that John McCain is really serious about killing the establishment and not being a whore to devisive partisan politics. Lieberman is a practical pro-America politican who very much represents America's center. If you look at all the states in play, it seems the margin of victory will be decided narrowly by the center. As for Republicans claiming they will defect or not come out to vote, it simply is an empty threat. Any Republican with half a brain will accept Lieberman as a low-position VP who can't really do much anyway over the potentially devastating President Barack Obama. The rednecks who have trouble with Lieberman's abortion views are already dead-set against having a heavy abortionist named "Hussein" getting near the white house. They'll come around.

Barack Obama's Best Selections

Evan Bayh

I would vote for Evan Bayh. Being a somewhat hefty Republican, I think that says a lot. While Bayh certainly will not get me on board with a Barack Obama ticket, it might get a decent amount of moderate/centrist Floridians, Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, Nevadans, and dare I say, uh, "Indianains". Without those, Obama cannot expect to win the electoral college. Should you need background, Evan Bayh is a very reasonable, practical, and centrist New Democrat coalition member who could possibly make Barack Obama look like less of an appeasement communist hack.

H. Rodham Clinton

The liberal media doesn't want to tell you that the Democratic Party is divided. However, it is, and the selection of H. Clinton will work to heal those wounds. Also, some regard Barack Obama as too far from the political establishment, and too much change will result in an inability to play Washington. However, we all know that Hillary Clinton and her dirty weasely claws sure know how to play Washington (as well as B. Jefferson "Is My Peepee Out?" Clinton).

My Selections

• McCain/Palin

• Obama/Bayh

The Time Has Come to Mobilize Against America's Greatest Threat: Barack Obama

What was any small credibility the Democratic Party ever had left had been totally eradicated by the nomination of B. Hussein Obama.

In their worst scheme to date, the Democrats have developed a dangerous religion - a dangerous cult. A cult designed to mystify and awe based on idolatry and superstardom. One, that like a cult, preys on people's greatest fears in a cyclically slumping economy. One that sells indulgences in the form of votes. One that exploits a fragile American condition by convincing America that the empty promise of "Obamatology" is real. The Democrats, being mostly comprised of Atheists, have actually found their God in the form of Barack Obama. One that has actually convinced a severely delusional America that he can move mountains, and unlike anybody else, can part the murky seas of and impart change upon the unnavigable waters of the red-tape and bloated partisan and processed American government.

Barack Obama is absolutely nothing except a Hollywood actor in the grandest psychological and sociological engineering hoax in America's history. Never has their been a time when someone so politically insignificant and so out of touch with American values been elevated to the point that he has a 50/50 shot of winning the US presidency. Elements used to build and engineer this God like cult of Obama include visible worship by the liberal media, white guilt, youth/sexuality, the power of imagery, the erection of a Hitler like cult of personality, and utilization of Obama's powerful Hitler-quality speaking skills.

In order to cover up their magnificent ruse, the holy engineers of Obamatology are claiming that Obama's groundbreaking surge in popularity can be attributed to Obama having an all around parallel to JFK. Unfortunately, Obama is no JFK. The core difference being that JFK believed in and wanted to build upon American values, whereas B. Hussein Obama believes in and wants to build upon European values. JFK believed in economic freedom and free markets. JFK believed that a mighty American military is the greatest peacekeeping force in the world. JFK believed in the might of every American - every American as equal - and decried affirmative action. JFK was a proponent of the death penalty. JFK's wife was the classiest lady in the world, not a horrid "for the first time I'm proud of my country" secular-progressive barbarian. JFK would have been tossed out of today's Democratic party.

JFK's intentions were noble in Bay of Pigs. JFK would have railed against the horrific Hugo Chavez. JFK loathed communism, obviously. Vietnam? Russia? JFK also did not go all "good night and good luck" and refused to condemn Joe McCarthy's noble anti-communist crusade. Obama, while not an "out" communist, keeps regular company with and is heavily supported by groups and persons with heavy communist sympathies. Need I mention who moveon.org, the Daily Kos, Hugo Chavez, Susan Sarandon, and Danny Glover support? You can smell the secular-progressive stench conspicuously oozing from B.O.'s pores day by day.

Obama believes in a free market blend. What the hell is that? Either the market is free or it isn't. And it sure isn't going to be any freer with public school unions and other various unions requiring payback after they've put so much money in the coffers of Queen Obama. Not to mention the recent pro-union business climate bill that Obama is trying to push through Congress. An America controlled by labor is extremely dangerous. Foreign investment has already pulled out enough. Do you want to see it pull out further and watch our economy crumble? A healthy business climate is based on a fair free market wage - when unions demand that their workers are paid more than the market will bear, prices get thrown out of whack, the market gets thrown out of whack, and the whole system comes crumbling down.

Obama's inital position on the military invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan is dangerous. In other words, when he had no evidence that miliary action was not required and not appropriate, he still chose to break with 99% of his colleagues (and side with Barbara Lee, the most dangerous politican in America), and opposed the invasions because he is simply an anti-war Code Pink liberal pansy fruit. What happens the next time when military invasion happens to be the prudent course of action? Can we trust Obama to not be his self-demonstrated form of Code Pink pansy? I think not.

And here's a fabulous reality for you! What if they rename "New York's John F. Kennedy Airport" to "New York's Barack Hussein Obama International Airport"? It will rival the King Abdulaziz International Airport in Jeddah and the Al Maktoum International Airport in Dubai. Wouldn't it be even funnier if the guy that orders the signage for the airport accidentally orders an extra "S" instead of a "B", effectively naming the airport "New York's Barack Hussein Osama International Airport"?

I've mentioned Obama's dangerous positions in my previous posts, but his cult of personality is what's most dangerous and most urgent - and we must mobilize the country to counter this dangerous cult. With an almost God like international admiration, he could have the ability to persuade the US and the world to move closer to a dangerous moveon.org and CodePink mentality, which despite a fradulent cover as a moderate, form the cornerstone of B. Hussein Obama's political sympathies.

JFK is rolling over in his grave.

Australia

Australia - no doubt that this was the most important and best trip of my life. As many of you know, prior to this summer I had been to five out of six of the "inhabited" continents, and never thought I'd make it out to Aussie land so soon. I considered my going to Australia, my sixth continent, a significant lifetime achievement, something that if I died tomorrow might be said about me in a eulogy. The world is a big confusing place and there's an incredible sense of accomplishment and awe over going to every corner of it. It helps you both understand more about other people and ourselves. The idea of "ourselves" as a worldwide people would have been laughable to me just in the California bubble. Also, I guess I've always had a fascination with people - maybe it's because I can't relate to them very well so I have to see and analyze to help me understand.

Another part of the travel is escaping temporary problems in life - or what I perceive to be problems and less fortunate people would view as minor puny setbacks, like Donald Trump's ice division of Trump Corporation going under. I'm such a brat - when guys my age are living in cardboard boxes, hustling for a living, or rotting in rehab, I'm whining about a little bit of nothing.

Anyway, back to Australia.

Melbourne
For my sixth floor roomies, I can report that I got to see our favorite Australian ever, a Miss Anna Jaffe. I can also report that Anna is doing very well. She's as resplendent as ever, even though she won't ever say so. As usual, Anna dodged my picture taking, much like she did around Berkeley. She also was embarrassed by my being so touristy with my huge camera, and demanded I invest in a new one. Anna was also infuriated when I attempted to do a "Steve Irwin"-ish Australian accent - she issued her usual death threats :)

I had the pleasure of being taken around St. Kilda and various parts of Melbourne by Anna and her friend "Procle". Between Anna, Procle, and my Sephardic Jew curls, our presence was like just another day at Temple. Anna and Procle also were mindblowing specimens of this incredible Australian banter and sarcasm we've been hearing about so much in the states. It was a beautiful, constant back and forth sort of "language". As we all know Anna's facility for language, you can imagine how well she performed in the competitive back and forth. If you can imagine anything much the opposite, envision a couple of elderly country folk in the back woods of Tennessee talking about mundane straightforward things in a turtlesque voice. Procle also accused Anna of being "demanding", which of course Anna vehemently denied. Anna was in fact extraordinarily generous, especially allowing me to be so touristy and treating me near the entire day at her insistence.

Some cool things we did included Anna forcing me to drink coffee, despite my strong distaste for the mudlike liquid. She then described how Australian coffee is far superior to any coffee found in the states. Apparently it's not about the beans, but all about the "process". We also went to Luna Park in St. Kilda, which has this legendary mini-Colossus like roller coaster that gives you great views of the beach and St. Kilda. Then the beach. Then a 90 story tower in Melbourne. And a casino...by the way, Anna has developed a severe gambling problem (just kidding Anna). Anna misses you guys, and for Christina, guys and girls. It was an amazing day - thanks again Anna.

Sydney
Absolutely incredible city, just incredible. There's a special feeling that you get being in Sydney that is indescribable. Anyway, I just did the main touristy things, like the Harbours, Opera House, all the requisite buildings and sites, Olympic Park, the Blue Mountains, and Taronga Zoo. Despite all these sites being amazing, what was really incredible for me was just the feeling of being in the city. No other city has quite capitvated me like that before.

Travel Experience/Routing for Qantas and Delta

Los Angeles-Melbourne (747) 23JUL 11:40P-25JUL 7:30A
Melbourne-Sydney (737) 27JUL 6:00A-7:20A
Sydney-Honolulu (763) 30JUL 7:45P-30JUL 9:30A

Qantas was an incredible travel experience from LAX-MEL. Incredible service, incredible entertainment, incredible food, incredible goodies, and the incredible experience of once again flying on a 747 (which I haven't done for a good few years, and not with regularity since flying to New York on Pan Am). It was also extremely strange boarding an international flight right in Los Angeles. I'm so used to having to go through a Delta "gateway" like Atlanta or New York to get somewhere important and global. I also got to experience the "disappearing day" that happens when you cross the international date line overnight

MEL-SYD included a full small breakfast in coach for a 1 hour flight. Wow. After that, I was treated to the beautiful airport that is Sydney's Kingsford Smith.

SYD-HNL was nice. No in-seat entertainment, but still a nice flight.

HNL-LAX connecting on Delta. Late as usual. Finally in first class though, and great service, working in-seat entertainment, and what I thought was a great meal.

The End

I thank God for every one of these incredible experiences. It is such an amazing gift and I'm grateful I've been able to see all that I have so far.

Melbourne:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2343295&l=0bf6e&id=1219649

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2343311&l=69877&id=1219649

Sydney/Inland New South Wales: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2343816&l=9946f&id=1219649 http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2343860&l=5cac2&id=1219649 http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2343918&l=260fd&id=1219649 http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2343963&l=eb9c2&id=1219649 http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2343968&l=7ca4b&id=1219649

Barack Obama and the Donkey Dilemma

As I've long predicted, America would come to understand the true nature of Barack Obama and toss him aside like the elitist (however not nearly as douchebag) John Forbes Kerry-esque snob that he is. Since America was too stupid to analyze his ultra-left voting record, it took a revelation of a twenty year relationship with a disgusting ultra-left and ultra-racist pastor (who thinks the government manufactured the AIDS virus to dispose of minorities) for Americans to realize that B. Obama is a liberal nutcase. Furthermore, Obama really must think we're quite stupid for believing that he never knew his pastor had these racist anti-American sympathies and that he conveniently was not at church when Wright was incessantly spewing his filth. And did I forget to mention Obama's horrid patronizing comments about normal Americans clinging to guns and religion to assuage their economic problems? His contempt for normal non-San Francisco secular progressive snobs is disgusting.

Now the Democrats are having quite a problem and I'm enjoying it very much; they wish they could take back their ballyhooing over Obama now that America has figured out how politically and personally revolting he is. Unfortunately for them, they've electorally puffered up Obama to be their nominee and have found out that my precious H. Rodham Clinton is so much more mainstream and electable (evident by H. Clinton trouncing McCain in the most recent polls by 9%). They've found out that America does not elect radical anti-American red diaper babies. Not to mention one that has next to no experience.

Liberals love to attack their Obama opponents for being racist and not fulfulling their white guilt obligations, but the truth of the matter is that Obama is not black. Obama is genetically 50% white; his mother was a pale far-left secular progressive communist loon from Kansas. Saying Obama would be the first black president ever is like saying I would be the first Hispanic president ever because I'm 50% Latin American - it's simply not the case because I'm functionally white. Obama is in fact less black than he is Arab. He looks very much like an Arab coming from a region that straddles the Northeastern part of equitorial Africa and looks nothing like regular African-Americans. He is also culturally white - despite his dalliances in Chicago, he is a fundamental product of Honolulu and Indonesia, where there are no African-Americans to be found.

Here's another thing that everyone in America is totally onto him about - he is not a Muslim - but an Atheist. His grotesque secular-progressive snobbery is characteristic of no one else but a liberal atheist (likely from San Francisco). Good decent hardworking Americans can smell an atheist from a mile away. I wonder if Obama clings to his "religion" because of any economic and class hardship? Or maybe he's praying for God to stop making his wife and pastor be such deplorable loudmouths?

Speaking of which, what is Obama going to do about his horrible wife who spews anti-American profanities so un-judiciously that it would make Teresa Heinz Kerry blush? Hey Michelle - do ring me when your proud of America again. Resident New York Times bitch Maureen Dowd kind of hit the nail on the head about the uncouth and unacceptably sassy Michelle Obama:

"I wince a bit when Michelle Obama chides her husband as a mere mortal — comic routine that rests on the presumption that we see him as a god ... But it may not be smart politics to mock him in a way that turns him from the glam JFK into the mundane Gerald Ford, toasting his own English muffin. If all Senator Obama is peddling is the Camelot mystique, why debunk this mystique?"-Maureen Dowd, New York Times

The Democrats better get their act together, dig their heads out of their asses (no pun intended), and get Michigan and Florida's electoral votes to throw the nomination towards rotund and glorious Hillary Rodham Clinton. America is a wonderful place, and will not be duped by the likes of a Barack Obama secular-progressive atheist who seeks to restructure our marvelous enterprising free market economy into his vulgar brand of multiculturalism/racism and European Socialism. The Democrats are moving towards these sympathies - and they will not win in America unless they find candidates that dismiss their new brand.

Clinton Trounces McCain in Polls:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080429/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_divided_democrats;_ylt=AtUCbzYpQ7v1Np1o9oFqngyyFz4D

Downfall of Obama Thanks to Wright:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080429/ap_on_el_pr/obama_pastor

Democrats Polling Gets More Negative:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080429/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_divided_democrats;_ylt=AtUCbzYpQ7v1Np1o9oFqngyyFz4D

Should Be Democratic Candidates:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Ford_Jr.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_Bayh