A Chicken Is Not Pillage

Same Back Atcha, Pal

It seems that John McCain "hates" bloggers.  Yup, real fan of free speech, that one ...

Like A Free Ride When You've Already Paid ...

One of the best posts I think I've written all year ... and it's over at Left in the West.  Hell, even the wingnuts thought it was worth looking at.  But I would like to point this out to Wiley, who is, apparently, NOT familiar with all Internet traditions:

"Wingnuts" are righties.  "Moonbats" are lefties.  Do try to keep it straight.

Oh, Andrew, tsk, tsk ...

I think I'm going to have to make a new category just for Andy Hammond's silliness.  He isn't even worth being offended by any more.  I just feel embarrassed for the man.  I go away for the weekend, and this is all the man can come up with:

1)  The majority of British folk don't think that Global Warming is caused by humans.  Andy's poorly thought out opinion?  That proves that it isn't.  What's truly moronic is his sad attempt to deride the very people who have studied the issue for thinking that the uneducated and uninformed are ... wait for it ... uneducated and uninformed.  Tada!  The Aristocrats!  Uhhm, Andy, how many times now have you argued that a consensus of people who've actually studied the problem isn't proof?  Given that, exactly what "gotcha" do you think you have by trotting out a bunch of Manchester mill workers to disprove what the vast majority of scientists who've studied the damn issue believe?  In case the news hasn't made it to Happy-fun-time-Andy-land, facts don't conform to popular opinion.

I'm sorry, Mark, but you're flat out wrong.  Andy really is dumber than Eric.

2)  BARACK OBAMA IS GONNA DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE!!!1!  Look out, America!  He's stealin' your seal!

Okay.  Andy posts the following comparison.
Wow, that's pretty damning evidence that Obama is "presumptuous and arrogant", to use Andy's words.  Certainly that uppity ... person ... can't presume to think he can appropriate the symbols of real Americans, can he?  After all, imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery unless you're an uppity ... person ... running for the highest office in the land, who obviously HATES America, just like everybody else who steals it's great symbols.  No true patriot would ever do such a loathsome thing, right?  AMIRIGHT?  Uh oh.

What the hell?  Is that Saint Reagan's name applied to such presumption and arrogance?  Why yes, yes it is.

Andy, you're embarrassing yourself.  I know there's a touch of thoughtfulness in that rattling brain cage.  So I'm asking, begging even, would you just quit being so dumb?

Democracy Really Sucks When You Don't Get What You Want!

Shorter Steve Eschenbacher, Idiot for HD 96:

'Identity politics and laziness is dooming our Democracy, and the best proof is that people won't vote for *ME*.  ~mumbles~ Stupid voters ...'

A few things, Steve.

1)  As I've tried to point out to you before, the fact that politicians lie to us is not the special knowledge that you have.  It's strange how many Republicans think they are the only ones privy to that insight.  If you accept the fact that most people expect politicians to be lying, then maybe you might be able to make sense of how people could agree with your positions, and still not vote for you.  Here's a hint, Steve, they might think you're lying.  You are a politician, after all.

2)  You tied yourself to the party of Identity Politics.  The Republicans, for going on 30 years now, have branded themselves to an ideal, and begged people to identify with it.  Only one problem.  That ideal has turned out to be a complete sham, a con-job.  People are waking up to the fact that they just don't like 'Brand Republican'.  You chose to smack that label on yourself, and it's pretty damned tawdry to blame the voters for not trusting the brand you sell.  To be more honest with you than you deserve, I'd have respected you infinitely more if you'd have run as the Independent you see yourself as.  You didn't.  No one will or should see you as an adherent to the ideals if those ideals don't demonstrably fit the actions of the label you chose.  That's your fault, Steve, not the fault of the voters.

3)  Now you done told me yer piece 'bout how I ain't gots no common sense, and I ain't no intellectual like you is,  so I  hope you'll take this here advice in the kind spirit it's meant.  You prolly ought not start your stump speakin' with the phrase:

"Hello, Mr. and/or Mrs. Pinko.  I'm Steve Eschenbacher, and I'd like to represent your district of this disgusting little commie collective."

Steve, simply put, voters aren't as dumb as you think they are.  The difference as I see it, between Republicans and Democrats, is that Republicans expect voters to be dumb.  In that sense you are the perfect Republican.  You've just written a post about how voters don't know shit, and really don't deserve your beneficence.  If that's the attitude you knock on doors with, don't you think people might just pick up on the fact that they're being talked down to?  Our Democracy will be just fine, in the long run, even without you.  I sincerely hope that in the next 5 months until the election you aren't going to spend the whole time whining about how icky voters are, and how it should really be all about your values.  Face your impending Epic Fail without insult and with some dignity, would you please?

A Job As Needs Doin'

I have no idea what psychosis drives me to view the more unseemly and unreasonable elements of the online world.  It has been well established that I spend much more time among the right-wingnut's websites than many of my Montana brethren.  (I don't do it as much as I used to.  Most of the wingnuts/warbloggers/fake libertarians have just gone off the deep end.  I still read Michelle Malkin though, only so that I know what BullShitCairn will post later in the day.)  I occasionally lurk amongst the racists (the real ones, not the commenters of Professor Chaos. )  Ultimately, I think that it's a fascination with the unreasonable, the illogical, that drives me to wonder how and why people can so easily believe the ridiculous.

I do shy away from applying that curiosity to friendlies, for the most part.  I remain boggled as to how I can write nearly anything, and MarkT will simply read what fits his bias.  But ultimately, it isn't fascinating enough for study.  Our ongoing argument concerning how useless Ralph Nader was in his efforts will likely never be resolved; nor will it change jack-squat.  He will maintain the fiction of his other-reality predictions, I will retain the sadness that we never got to find out.  It's a humorous engagement, but has no pragmatic value for either of us.  Bush remains President.

However, there is a new angry movement afoot, and that draws me like a bee to nectar.  The Democratic primary campaign is over ... or is it? Dah dun DAH!!!  There are those out there who are seriously unhappy with the results of the primary, and they are organizing.  They call themselves PUMA's.  That stands for 'Party United? My Ass!'.  Officially, the acronym stands for other than that, but Ive been watching for some time and I see no reason to sugarcoat the bile in this formation.  They are angry.  They've been cheated.  No one official supports their special snowflake-ism.  They are 18 million strong (probably more like 1800, but who am I to quibble?)  Oh, and, Obama sucks.

Most of the Lefty-sphere is ignoring these folk, and much probably rightly so.  But they don't share my unique psychosis.  I find the PUMAs fascinating.  Over the coming weeks I will review, study and comment on these people.  Call it an effort of online anthropology if you will.  But there is a lot to behold in that forest of illogic, and I just can't resist.  Just so that we're clear on PUMA belief, they hold that a conspiracy between a particular campaign, the DNC, the EmmEssEmm and 18 million brainwashed idiots robbed the Democratic candidacy from Hillary Clinton.  Oh, and ... SEXISM!!!!1!  They want the media fired, Howard Dean fired, Obama prosecuted or at least made to seem icky and their place in the sun (an odd choice for special snowflakes).

Now here's the harsh part.  I really want to blog this.  But I am tired of blogging; almost Ed tired. It might just be the season.  I don't know. I had planned to give this up right after the primary.  But, the best laid yadayada.  I like the idea of engaging the PUMAs.  I am not a sexist, and I clearly see their circular reasoning.  To me, this is strangely ... fun.  All I'm asking of you, gentle reader, is not to expect too much too soon.   I'll get to it as I can.

What A Doof!

It seems that Mikey lives in a time warp.

I'm proud still that Montana shed the Paultards from Big Sky Country and gave Mitt Romney the win when it still mattered.

Ron Paul, just yesterday, got 20,851 votes.  That was 22% of the Republican ballots cast in yesterday's primary.  Ya see, kitten, Mittens didn't matter.  He wasn't even on the primary ballot in Montana.  Paul was, and there has been no 'shedding' of his support.  But fuck yeah!  Go Mittens!

Bated Breath

I truly wish I shared Cece's dogged determination to see the best and the truest.  'Cause I hate sitting around to watch the fallout.  The waiting is the hardest part.

Who I'm Voting For In The Primary

Jay Stevens has done a great thing in encouraging people to post their primary endorsements at Left In The West.  I would do so, save that these aren't endorsements.   I hardly feel qualified to endorse anyone, as in encouraging others to vote as I would.  I would much rather just post my opinions, and let others make up their minds as they see fit.  A few caveats:  1)  I reserve the right to change my mind between now and the booth on Tuesday. I claim this only because of the AG race which is causing me no end of angst.  2)  I will not waste a bunch of time on uncontested races.  If I mention them, it is because of the significance of my idea of support.  Take that as given.  3)  I will be voting (obviously) the Democratic ballot.  If I could, I would vote for Kelleher for US Senate, though Lange looks to be a hoot as well.

President of the United States:  Barack Obama.

Notes:  There is nothing under the sun that could force me to vote for Hillary/Bill Clinton at this point, not even in the general.  The actions of Clinton supporters at the Rules and By Laws committee meeting have convinced me that, yes, Clinton intends to destroy the party's chances in November if the American people and the DNC don't hand her the lollypop.  Bill will just have to suffer not being President yet again.  Boo Hoo.

United States Senate:  None.

Notes:  I said what I meant and I meant what I said.

United States House of Representatives:  Jim Hunt.

Notes:  I don't need to say more.  Rehberg sucks administration dick and I want him gone.

Governor and Lieutenant Governor:  Don Pogreba and Jason Neifer

Notes:  There is no hope of them winning, and I don't care.  Their voice is precisely the "leverage" that Nader voters thought Ralph had in 2000 ... and didn't.  I'm voting for Don and Jason just to let the Governor know that even among those who like him are those who think he can do better.  And I hope he will do better.

Attorney General of the State of Montana:  Steve Bullock.

Notes:  I have had, and continue to have, the hardest time with this one.  I've written before that my preferences for this office are such; Politically: Mike Wheat, Professionally: Steve Bullock, Personally: John Parker.  In the end, I have to go with Jay's endorsement of Steve.  It has been argued by all and sundry concerning who would be the best to beat Fox in the general.  Let's be clear.  ANY of them would.  I like John Parker a lot!  A whole lot.  I think he's great guy and I look forward to voting him into office in the future.  I think Mike Wheat is as professional a political animal as there ever could be.  This guy might be Schweitzer's replacement.  I would be knocking doors from here to Three Forks if he'd have taken on Dennis Rehberg.  But the guy we need as AG right now is Steve Bullock.

There are serious questions about the source of Steve's money.  He appears to be lobbyist favored.  But he doesn't talk in ways that favor lobbyist money.  He is most clearly focused on the issues that support all Montana.  A friend asked me to look into his monetary sources and I did.  And what I found was guy who can get the funding to do what needs be done.  I am not comfortable with this decision, but I think this guy is the best administrator we can hope for, for the Montana legal system.  God help me if I am once again wrong.

Montana State Superintendent of Public Instruction:  Denise Juneau

Notes:  It is rare that we have an opportunity to vote for someone so unbelievable rational about the office they are running for.  Let's not pass up this chance to vote for her.

State Auditor:  Monica Lindeen

PSC 3:  John Vincent

Notes:  Ya' know, it's funny how the Gallatin County Commission has suffered since John left it.  It is 100% Republican controlled and has little idea how to deal with the public service issues facing it.  John was a reasonable voice on that commission, and now can be a reasonable voice for the state resources of Montana.  He's running un-opposed.  So why oppose him?

Montana House District 64:  Franke Wilmer

Notes:  None necessary.

How Odd ...

In President Bill Clinton's 2 runs for the White House, I remember that Bill Clinton and/or the Clinton family visited Montana all of ... twice.  And both of those visits were in the Billings area.

In this primary campaign season, however, Hillary Clinton (you remember her; she's the candidate?) has visited Montana twice already and gone to four cities or towns.  Not at all untoward given the scope of this primary. 

Bill Clinton, on the other hand, has visited Montana 4 times, and gone to or is going to at least 17 towns or cities.

So I guess I'm kinda ignert about such things, but I need you folks to remind me again.  Who is running for President?  Who is going to be in charge if the Clintons retake 1600 Pennsylvania avenue?

So Deep Apologies To Patty Duke

But this hits the nail square on the head: