Friday, May 11, 2007

Couple of things

- While the problems in Jim Whitehead's forum are too many to count, does anyone else appreciate the hypocrisy in the opening statement ...

Knowing they can't win the special election for the 10th Congressional District seat on the issues, the state Democrat political machine has instead chosen to go negative in an effort to obscure those issues. We are now confronted with the very kind of negative campaigning that Americans of all political persuasions have grown to detest - the politics of personal destruction.

Let's leave aside, for a moment, that he closed with a line made popular by a Democrat, and instead focus on the fact that Whitehead, a man who just a week ago was quoted by the press as saying that 'left-wing radicals' were trying to deliberately register members of al-Qaida to vote, despite the fact he had nothing to back up that claim. Listen, if you say something outrageous, and then others criticize that statement, that's not negative campaigning. Aside from that, I found the column to be full of ridiculous bluster (which isn't shocking coming from a fairly ridiculous man), including a disdain for people who don't think like him and unrealistic and non-practical suggestions for how to deal with illegal immigration.

- I know this seems rather small, but it's actually huge. A central place for folks to inquire about volunteering is very essential, particularly for the non-profits that need them to function.

- I'm gonna suggest that Rory Sabbatini keeps his mouth shut. Before you start challenging the world's best golfer, you may want to actually pad your resume a little more. Shoot, you may also want to remember last weekend at the Wachovia Championship, when you also called him out and this 'beatable' Tiger Woods fired a final round 69 to your 74 and won the title.

- Perhaps I'm a little hard on him, but I really felt that Brian Kemp's comments were off-base. Again, not only are they not reflective of the situation facing the LRA, but they also don't take into consideration the benefit the University of Georgia will be receiving.

- Here's something which states the obvious - of course John Edwards's policy proposals are costly, but kudos to him for offering bold, big ideas. That's the type of discussion we need to be having. I like some of his ideas, while I'm not thrilled with others.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like some of the Edwards proposals, and I like that he's being honest that they'll take some money. The failure to own up to the American people that shared sacrifice is necessary to accomplish anything great may be my biggest complaint about the Bush administration (now that's saying something).
My concern for Edwards, though, is that he gets tagged Mondale-like. As much as American voters claim to respect honesty in our candidates, we throw that out the window if the honesty is that the candidate acknowledges a need to raise taxes of any kind.


1:47 PM  
Blogger Xon said...

Except that we get DO get asked to 'share the sacrifice' rather often. And whenever a new politician comes along like a bizarro-world used car salesman (Bigger! Bolder! But YOU pay all the costs! This world must change!), he or she never seems to want to get rid of the old policies that apparently were such failures that their bold new suggestions have become necessary. Because, see, we already pay a lot of money to cure the world's ills, taken from us by politicians of the last generation. Now Edwards wants to take MORE, and this time the ideas really ARE going to make the world better, he swears (of course he does! How cute), and of course we all just need to remember (again) that nothing comes easy and sacrifice is always necessary. It's a bit insulting, actually, and I'm too young to be this cynical.

6:54 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home