Saturday, January 05, 2008

manchurian rising?

jan 5th, 2007

interesting that hillary is fading, and barack is rising. barack is probably a manchurian candidate, propped up saudi money. they can't wait to get a mohammedan into the us president's chair with hand on red button. oh boy, that would be just swell.

fortunately, if barack is the democratic candidate, all them bubbas are going to rise up against him and vote in a republican.

hmmmm. that republican would be.... huckabee? a serious redneck baptist?

talk of devil and the deep sea. are these candidates an indication that america is in severe decline? i do hope they draft gore.

this is why i reiterate, democrats or GOP, same difference to india. both are barbarians.

paul krugman said something in the nyt about how china is neither going to be bullied, nor charmed by any yank president.

alas, all indian 'leaders' can either be bullied or charmed, or bought for peanuts. jagdish bhagwati once said that india's curse is that it has brilliant economists. i disagree, the curse is that we have politicians who can be bought so cheaply.

10 comments:

san said...

Brzezinski Endorses Obama, Becomes His National Security Advisor

MiddleRoad said...

I doubt that Huckabee will do well in N H or most other states going forward

san said...

The NeoLib-NeoCon Family Feud

deutsche said...

the other half was stolen by christian to fund christist terrorists/padres/nuns

Gagan said...

If it progresses for Obama as it has so far, I won't be surprised if the political mud-slinging during this election goes way beyond traditional "S/He smoked weed" accusations and "I didn't inhale" explanations.

san said...

Buddy, don't feel like you have to stick around slumming it with the rest of us. Feel free to go and seek out your morally superior brethren in the Holy Land, and leave us heathens behind, okay? Don't feel like you have to keep us company with your delightful presence, huh? But that plane ticket asap.

socal said...

The Christist bigotry lay exposed in Iowa. Let's face it, Romney lost because he is Mormon. Translation: he isn't our type of Christist. And the bigots who voted against him were hug-buddies of 'Christian.' Religion of Love? I guess not.

san said...

That's a good point. It'll be interesting to see how the wider Mormon community reacts once Romney loses.

rathore said...

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/04/6184/

The victories by Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in the Iowa caucuses on Thursday make one thing clear: in America’s heartland, the God strategy works. Recent history suggests it won’t stop there.In this approach presidential candidates make their religious faith demonstrably public and wield it as a campaign centerpiece.

And a textbook example of damning by praise -
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3071083.ece
Bob Kerrey, a notoriously outspoken politician and failed presidential candidate in 1992, stirred the pot when he endorsed Mrs Clinton and then proceeded to compliment Mr Obama for his understanding of Islam.

“I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim,” Mr Kerrey said. “There's a billion people on the planet that are Muslims, and I think that experience is a big deal.”

When challenged about his comments, Mr Kerrey insisted that his intention had been to praise Mr Obama. He suggested that there was a “smear campaign” and that people were “acting as if he's an Islamic Manchurian candidate [because] he spent a little time in a secular madrassa” as a child in Indonesia.

rathore said...

Long article in NYT magazine on banana-republic worthy US voting machines, running on MS Windows derivatives. 'Nuff said. Not surprising that Bush 'captured' (see below) a majority of evangelical votes in 2000 and 2004. If Obama is the eventual nominee, one can expect a Republican with evangelical backing to trounce him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/magazine/06Vote-t.html?ex=1357275600&en=75d8092a30334e06&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
Is it possible that someone could hack voting machines and rig an election? Elections officials insist that they are extremely careful to train poll workers to recognize signs of machines that had been tampered with. They also claim, frequently, that the machines are carefully watched. Neither is entirely true. Machines often sit for days before elections in churches, and while churches may be wonderfully convenient polling locations, they’re about as insecure a location as you could imagine: strangers are supposed to wander into churches.

PS-
Detailed Comparison of Indian and US Diebold electronic voting machines

http://techaos.blogspot.com/2004/05/indian-evm-compared-with-diebold.html