I had originally said I'd vote for whoever the Democratic candidate was, that I prefer Obama but I have to support the cause and get Bush's policies out of office. This is my main logic against Hillary's rhetoric of "I won this primary, which proves that I am the only one who can win this state, since if I win in a Hillary v. Obama contest, everyone who votes Hillary will eventually vote McCain if Hillary isn't the nominee." Aside from this associating herself with the Republican candidate more than the Democratic candidate, it's pretty stupid.

And that's my concern. I dislike Bush's policies, but what I dislike more is his refusal to read the writing on the wall. Let's look at some similarities:

Both are on paths of their own design to a goal that their supporters believe is sound, but the majority of people (who are not supporters) are repeatedly trying to make the case that the idea is more sound. Even as more people defect and the goals that are set forth aren't reached, the goals just change and we change the point of the contest. Key to this is making sure you only listen to the supporters (whose numbers continue to dwindle) and completely ignore the opposition, even if it's what's best for the country. Stay the course, and keep declaring "Mission Accomplished" early and often.

Neither one of them seems to be able to operate in a black budget. Deficit spending and a lack of transparency lay foundations for the form of government they lead.

Both are unwilling to look at the popular vote, but instead are willing to be elected by the courts. Hillary is using committee pull and willing to sue to get Michigan and Florida counted, even though they broke the rules that Hillary, Obama and Edwards signed in August 2006(? on the date.) Buck what the majority of nation wants, buck the fact that FL and MI didn't really get their voices heard, Hillary was the only one who was on the ballot so who knows what the constituents real voices say, but under the guise of "we want their voices heard" she "wants any vote that can count for her no matter if it actually represents what the people want."

Bush misspeaks all the time with stupid words, Hillary misspeaks with stupid elaborate made up fantasy stories about how her homestate is every state she's projected to win OH SHIT LOOK SNIPERS IN SCRANTON, PA.

Finally, Rush Limbaugh supports both.

Really? Think about it, policy aside (Hillary has policies, like the gas tax holiday, that side with McCain, not Obama) Hillary is a clone of GW Bush. I respect Obama so much for not going so far as to destroy any real hope of supporting Hillary if she wins, yet I feel she bashes him so much with her "shame on you" that I don't know how she can support him when he wins. Looking at what she does and how she's played this game, I can't in good faith vote for her. I can't vote for McCain, but she has played the game in such a way that where I once would have supported her by the "D" after her name, I can't vote for her ever.

I was listening to NPR (Shut up it's literally the only non-country station I get) and they had two guys on debating on stem cell research. The one guy in summary said "I'm sorry there's millions of people out there who would benefit from this research and if you object don't use it." To which the conservative christian pundit said "Sorry I have to support it if they spend my tax dollars on it, and I'm not gonna shut up until my tax money doesn't fund it."

Sorry, am I missing something here? The pro guy stumbled through a weak response, but he should have just said "If you're so concerned about your tax money going to things taxpayers disagree with, go out and fight the hugely unpopular war in Iraq instead of something that is sincerely trying to directly help American citizens."

In Burma, thousands of people took to the streets in support of a Democratic regime change, and were met with Military force from the government, killing many and forcing many others to flee the country. Now, if I were a Burmese citizen and wanted Democracy brought to my country, looking at the world, how might I do that?

Well, it seems pretty obvious. Get to the US, blow up a building and spread intelligence that I had told the Burmese government about it and that they didn't stop me. My country should have the US military come in and offer a Democratic regime change within 4-6 months. Simple, much more effective than having monks march in the streets, and given that pictures of slaughtered monks show evidence that people are being killed it seems like a small price to pay to improve the lives of a country recieving little aid or attention.

I mean, we did it to countries that didn't really want Democracy, why wouldn't it work in a country that DID want it? Glad this is the reality of the world we live in, crafted by the US government.

Thanks to Puja for finding the full site from my grumpy atheist, http://objectiveministries.org/kidz/ The atheist's speech bubble changes when you click on him, and he says the best things ever because they're DEAD ON. I love coffee!

UPDATE: The photo is too big, so check it out here:
http://www.surfrock66.com/images/atheist.bmp IT'S WORTH THE CLICK!

I'd choose a million gods that "only love me a little" ESPECIALLY if they're nice animals like elephants over one god who apparantly loves people so much that he allows his alleged son, who he sould love more, to be tortured and beaten and murdered and then uses that son's corpse as the symbol for that love in the future.