Thinking Unenslaved

photo credit: Linda Davidson – The Washington Post

“…always go for the black guys.”

photo credit: Preston Keres – The Washington Post


…how many states Obama would have won if the stage crew had remembered the pole.

photo credit: REUTERS/Ina Fassbender

photo credit: AFP/Saul Loeb (edited by Synthaetica)

“Thank you, Senator Obama. Thank you so very, very much!”

“If I have to separate you two, I will, Hillary and Obama.”

---

Photo credit: Mario Anzuoni/Reuters

---

“Senator Barack Obama attempts to cast ‘Accio’ on Senator Hillary Clinton, who is off-camera. Unfortunately for Barack, Hillary quickly cast ‘Protego’ and went along her way, smirking.”

---

photo credit: AFP/Getty Images/File/Joe Raedle

---

Shoe-sie and the Banshees
(yes, it’s your bonus pun for the day)

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

---

Echo and the Bunnymen

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

---

The Cure

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

---

photo credits (in order):

Shoe-sie and the Banshees = Imelda Marcos ~ AP Photo/Aaron Favila, file; Leslee Unruh ~ unattributed file photo;
Echo and the Bunnymen = Alberto Gonzales ~ AFP/File/Saul Loeb; Bush’s Cabinet/Department of Homeland Security ~ AP Photo/The White House, Eric Draper
The Cure = Barack Obama ~ AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast, File

Fred Thompson announced today that he will announce his candidacy for president over the July 4th holiday. Apparently, having another republican contender in the mix is deemed to be somehow beneficial to the American political process. Proof once again that conservatives have generally abolished responsible cognition.
 
Of course, the basic problem I have with a Fred Thompson candidacy is purely aesthetic. Qualifications (the few that there are) aside, do we want a candidate, let alone a president, who strongly resembles the Crypt Keeper? Especially when the Crypt Keeper is capable of looking a hell of a lot more patriotic than Thompson? (and is generally a hell of a lot more marketable ~ I mean, really…a Fred Thompson doll? I don’t think so!)
 
The other side of this conundrum is the basic inability I have to take him seriously, since in the above pose and so many others, he strongly reminds me of Jim Carrey’s ‘Fire Marshall Bill’ character. While the role of bumbling alarmist certainly fits, I certainly wouldn’t want that kind of guy in my party primary.
 
On the other hand, whatever agonizingly stiff and duplicitous blowhard the Repugnicans want to expectorate as a presidential candidate simply makes Barak Obama look all the better, so…rock on!

---

photo credits (in order of appearance): AP Photo/Douglas Healey, File; unattributed screen grab; unattributed screen grab

---

a fat, sweaty Republican pedophile, i find Hillary’s latest attempt to gloss over her voting record and change history to be deeply disturbing.

Arianna Huffington has an excellent article on the issue, from which I excerpt below:

---

Instead of honestly explaining her transformation from pro-war supporter to cheerleader of the war’s progress to tentative opponent of the war to her current incarnation as long-term opponent of the war, Hillary skipped right over the unpleasant past and tried to talk only about the future: “Well, you know, Matt, I think the important thing is for the Democrats to be united in trying to either persuade or require this president to change this direction now — that’s what all of us in the Senate are trying to do.” Sure, why answer the question when you can divert attention and blur the differences between you and your opponents?

---

what really strikes me about Hillary’s rhetorical spin, in this day and age, is its blatant similarity to the very things that she and other democrats complain about in the current administration: historical revisionism, bald-faced lies, and sidestepping forthright questions with non-answers and evasion. naturally, there’s a level at which all politicians are indeed cut from the same cloth, but is it too Utopian to wish that our Democratic leadership hold themselves to higher standards than those exercised by the people they’re hoping to displace?and how about this word-play from the former president, campaigning for his wife:

---

“To characterize Hillary and Obama’s positions on the war as polar opposite is ludicrous. This dichotomy that’s been set up to allow him to become the raging hero of the anti-war crowd on the Internet is just factually inaccurate.”

---

 
indeed, so describing polar opposites as polar opposites is “factually innacurate”. i can no longer discern which administration mimics the other, but isn’t it about time someone—anyone—held themselves to a higher standard? Their respective voting records are quite clear. Obama opposed the war in 2003, and Clinton actively supported it.

 
it’s unfortunate that the great leaders of the past cannot be the great leaders of the present. as Arianna notes, “Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth.” one can only wonder what Franklin Delano Roosevelt would think of the political shenanigans of both parties today, and specifically of Democratic candidates whose actions repeatedly suborn principled behavior in a day and age when moral clarity and ethical thinking could, and should, be the very ideals on which to campaign.

 
Assuming he makes it through the primary, Obama is definitely Commander Other’s candidate of choice.

---

photo credits: Senator Clinton: AFP/Getty Images/File/Sandy Huffaker; Senator Obama: AP Photo/Cheryl Senter

---

(unattributed, via Firedoglake)

---

“Barak Obama is seen here putting the move on Hillary Clinton, who struggles to maintain composure as Barak’s hand slips higher and higher in an attempt to work out the details of a Barak-Clinton presidential ticket in 2008.”

---

(AP Photo/Gary Malerba)

---

“John Edwards smiles pretty and says “ya’ll” a lot in an attempt to convince southern voters that he’s still real, and actually has a chance in hell against Obama and Clinton.”

---