Halloween Post

What's your Halloween candy personality?

Going along with the Halloween theme...

Want to dress up as something scary this Halloween? Well apparently you have 2 choices: Hillary Clinton or Rudy Giuliani.

...or... .


Or better yet:

...or...

You Don't Wanna Mess With the President!

Just because I'm a Republican doesn't mean I can't make fun of them!

In other news, I'm sure many of you heard about Mitt Romney's "Obama-Osama gaffe." But, have you seen this video?

Ted Kennedy confuses Obama with Osama


And another video for your viewing pleasure:

You Don't Want it From the President


And, of course, I have to report that only one Democrat running for President showed up to Florida's Democratic Convention.

Reuter's reports: "The Democratic Party's convention in Florida during the weekend was like a rock concert performed solely by warm-up bands."

"This would be the least exciting (convention) in 30 years, the least encouraging," said a noticeably deflated, long-time Democratic conventioneer Alice Long Owens of St. Augustine, Florida.

This convention didn't get nearly as many posts on the Tampa Bay Buzz Blog as Florida's Republican "Presidency IV," which was, by the way, amazing.

Oh well. I'm sure that the huge and nationally representative populations of Iowa and New Hampshire will make up for the Dems blowing off Florida. Oh wait...

The Top 10 Things you Need to Know

1. DO NOT fly Southwest Airlines.
2. Congratulations, Governor Jindal, the first Indian-American governor!
3. Sen. Clinton continues her unethical fundraising antics.
4. I was right about Sen. Fred Thompson; he's even more boring in person than on TV.
5. I was wrong about Mayor Rudy Giuliani; he is very engaging and inspiring.
6. Gov. Mitt Romney is still my favorite candidate for president.
7. DAVID was interviewed on Hannity & Colmes! Sorry, no video :(
8. The RNC is following the DNC by punishing states for earlier primaries (including NH); however, Florida has only lost half of its delegates to the RNC and the Republican candidates won't be boycotting my state.
9. Thank you to Rep. Stark for apologizing for his outlandish remarks.
10.Favorite quotes from Presidency IV:

"Where will the Canadians go for healthcare?"
-Mayor Giuliani on America adopting socialized healthcare

"11% - that's paid staffers and blood relatives."
-Sen. John McCain on Congress' approval rating

"When those old hippies find out they get free drugs, see what happens."
-Gov. Mike Huckabee on Medicare

"I wasn’t there, I’m sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event. I was tied up at the time."
-Sen. McCain referring to his time as a POW during Woodstock.


p.s. If you are going to comment on my blogposts, please read the blog first. Thanks.

Rush's Midas Touch

My appreciation goes out to Rush Limbaugh today for turning a contempt-filled situation into a considerably large, heartfelt donation to children of fallen Marines and federal law enforcement professionals.

The letter signed by Harry Reid and 40 other Senators in an attempt to censor what Rush could say on his own radio show was given to Rush by Clear Channel CEO Mark P. Mays. Rush, in turn, put the letter on eBay as a fundraiser.

The letter ended up going for more than $2.1 million - the largest charitable auction in eBay history, beating Jay Leno's guest-signed motorcycle which went for $800,000.

Not only that, but Rush promised to match the funds, so he will add $2.1 million of his own money, meaning that this letter, originally signaling government abuse of power against a private citizen, ended up in more than $4.2 million dollars in scholarships for children of fallen Marines and federal law enforcement professionals.

On top of that, Rush is putting certified copies of the letter signed by him for sale on his website for $1,000. All of this money will go toward the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation.

Of course, Harry Reid had to have his say in the matter.

Sen. Reid tried to pretend that he was a part of this donation by implying that he and Rush had "buried the hatchet" and using the pronoun "we" when speaking of the fundraiser and amount of money raised.

Specifically, Sen. Reid stated: "I strongly believe that when we can put our differences aside, even Harry Reid and Rush Limbaugh, we should do that and try to accomplish good things for the American people.



Rush Limbaugh's reply to this:
"I asked Sen. Reid to match and all the other senators who can afford to do so. I haven't heard from them on that. I asked Sen. Reid to go on the program and discuss his discussion of me as 'unpatriotic.' He did not accept my offer to do that and now has the audacity to climb aboard this, praising the effort, saying that 'he' never knew that it would get this kind of money."

Rush also said:
"It's poetic justice that Dingy Harry and those 40 signatories to this letter have made it possible for at least $4.2 million to go to the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation."

Read more here.

Once again, thank you, Rush Limbaugh.


Oh, and for you viewing pleasure:
Harry Reid Condemns Rush Limbaugh (Parody)

More from the Cluetrain

As an extension from my review of the Cluetrain Manifesto, here are two of the 95 theses presented and my thoughts on them.

#17: Companies that assume online markets are the same markets that used to watch their ads on television are kidding themselves.

Very true. Most of all, the internet adjusts market segmentation. Instead of appealing to broad audiences (ex: male), internet markets are more specific and concentrated (ex: male, married, 2 children, annual income of $70K, Miami Dolphins fan, etc).

By using the internet, companies can communicate in a one-to-one fashion as opposed to the one-to-many communication that TV, radio and newspapers provide. The internet can provide personalized experiences that other forms of media cannot. And, perhaps most importantly, the internet allows for [easier] feedback, or communication in general, from the consumer to the company.

#74. We are immune to advertising. Just forget it.

I disagree. Although pop-up ads are annoying and most people just don’t like advertising, I don’t believe that we’re “immune.” First of all, the authors of Cluetrain must have forgotten about product placement as a form of advertising. If people don’t realize something is being advertised, how can they be immune?

Also, I think advertising has been able to evolve and grow because of the internet. It’s able to target those smaller, more concentrated markets because of the internet and there’s more opportunity and need for advertising. Many websites depend on the income from advertising to stay up and running. Going along with this, there has been a movement towards online advertising from newspaper advertising. According to Wachovia Equity Research, online ad spending rose 17.8 percent in 2006 while major marketers continued to reduce spending on newspapers.

Finally, if people are immune to advertising, why is total US advertising spending for 2007 expected to be $152.3 billion? Online advertising spending alone reached nearly $10 million in the first half of 2007. That’s a lot of money to waste on something we’re immune to.

In other news,

A Reuters/Zogby poll regarding approval numbers of President Bush and Congress was released today. The results:

President Bush: 24% approval. Down from 29%.

Congress: 11% approval.

Also, a USA Today article reports that the feelings surrounding the SCHIP program are mixed.
A USA Today/Gallup poll shows these numbers:

52% agree with President Bush. This concerns the allocation of benenfits going towards families that earn less that 200% of the federal poverty level. (or $41,000 for a family of 4)

40% say benefits should go to such families earning up to $62,000, as the bill written by Democrats and some Republicans would allow.

55% are very or somewhat concerned that the program would create an incentive for families to drop private insurance.

The last figure is the most interesting to me. The largest percentage reported in this article regards people being "very or somewhat concerned" about families dropping private insurance. Because the margin of error is +/- 5%, this figure shows that at least 50% fall in this category of concern.

And I thought Americans wanted government-run healthcare and were all completely in favor of the SCHIP. Well, all except for children-hating republicans.


Oh, and is it just me or does a possible Putin/Ahmadinejad alliance frighten anyone else?

One less annoyance on TV?

This morning as I was walking into the metro I received, as I usually do, a Washington Post Express. While waiting for the train to arrive, I began to read the stories about the Green Bay Packers defeating the Washington Red Skins, the rate of cancer deaths falling and Secretary Rice's new round of Middle East talks. But then I arrived upon page 38. Along with Ben Affleck's "I'm Bad at Acting" headline and T.I.'s "Celebrity the First Caught Ridin' Dirty While Parked" headline, I saw a headshot of "The View" co-host Elisabeth Hasselback. And what did the headline associated with her story say? ... "One Less Annoyance on TV." Interesting. Though the actual text did not mention her conservative view, however, it is easy to correlate the headline with her opinions.

So, why am I writing about this? Well, because it annoys me.

Why is Elisabeth deemed an "annoyance?" Oh, wait, it's because she's not afraid to let her conservative beliefs be known. She's not afraid of Rosie or Joy Behar and she persists when she is berated and told her opinions are wrong.

I understand the headlines in the "People" section are meant to be amusing. But this particular statement crossed a line. It referred to a person's beliefs and values as "annoying."

This annoys me. It annoys me everytime someone who subscribes to the ideology of so-called "love&compassion" believes someone that fights for their beliefs is annoying or wrong or shouldn't have a "soap box" with which to express these beliefs.

It also annoys me when a person advocating what they deem a good program has to criticize the other side with viscious words such as:

"they are a pitchfork-wielding mob of hate-filled sociopaths who saw an opportunity to extract their pound of flesh from some random and defenseless family that had dared to align themselves with their political opponents. That's pretty sound as explanations go."

Here's a question posed by the author of the aforementioned article:

"What, for instance, would Bush, Malkin et al say to a woman in her 30s with an infant child and a husband who wants stay at home as the primary caregiver, but can't find affordable health insurance on the open market?"

My usual response to people on the left asking questions such as this is, well, if you are so concerned for families without (fill in the blank), why don't you contribute your own money and ask others who feel the same concerns to donate and then you can sponsor (fill in the blank) for the family.

My biggest problem with social programs such as the SCHIP is that it takes away money from people who have worked hard at their jobs and are therefore able to afford to insure themselves and it gives it to people who expect the government to give them handouts and are therefore unmotivated to work harder or to be personally responsible for themselves and their family. This misuse of the system ruins it for everyone, but it is nearly impossible to fix.

Continuing with the discussion of healthcare:

I found a post on the DailyKos saying that Democrats are more trusted and are believed to be able to do a better job with regard to healthcare. Here's a link to the results of the poll.

Let's take a look at the CBS News Poll, Sept. 14-16, 2007.
From 9/14-16/07, 42% stated they were very dissastisfied with the quality of healthcare BUT from 2/23-27/07, only 28% claimed by be very dissastified. This is a huge increase in the number of people dissastisfied with the quality of healthcare, a 14 point increase, actually.

Could this be because of the proliferation of healthcare coverage in the media? Could it be because the mainstream news media is tellling us to think about the healthcare system in America? Or could it be because the poll was skewed (I believe it is possible to make a poll say what you want it to)?

I honestly don't know. I despise insurance companies and their stupid policies and ways of doing business. But do I think the government should get involved? No. No matter who tries to fix it or what party is involved, the government will just screw things up worse.

As Ronald Reagan once said, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

Hillary and Nascar Cooties

Interesting... Hillary Clinton is proposing "tax cuts of up to $1,000 a year on Tuesday to encourage millions of working-age families to open personal 401(k) retirement accounts."

AND, she has retreated from her brilliant (note the sarcasm) idea of giving free handouts equaling $5000 to babies born in the US.

Read all about it here.

And, as always, for your entertainment: a YouTube video!

Nascar Cooties...

The Cluetrain Manifesto and Illegal Immigration

Basically, Cluetrain authors Rick Levine, Chris Locke, Doc Searls and David Weinberger attempt to inform readers of the ways the web has affected business and markets.

They present 95 Theses and try to convince readers of their theories with stories. While anecdotes and analogies are typically more engaging than more academic-like material, the particular stories used didn’t exactly thrill me. That along with the fact that there were 95 theses presented. Wouldn’t 10 have worked? These theses certainly could have been fewer in number. They all referred to a relatively small number of underlying ideas.

Besides presenting anecdotes, the book says that because of networks, it is easier for people to communicate. For instance, at work, you can communicate with co-workers without ever leaving your desk. While an unintended consequence of email may be the proliferation of office gossip and mindless chatter, employees are able to get more points of view on their work from coworkers they may have never even met before. Therefore, the quality of work improves and results in even better ideas, products or projects for the company.

Another interesting point made by the authors is that the internet will cause advertising to become obsolete. Because it is relatively easy for consumers to compare companies and scope out the truth, “word of web will trump word of hype, every time.” Now, this book was published in 1999 in the midst of Y2K chaos. But, eight years later, just as the Y2K scare did not come to fruition, this idea the authors had has yet to be seen. There is still an abundance of advertising and many people are still brand loyal to products that may not be the best or may not live up to the “fluff” its advertisers come up with. I would even argue that we have seen an increase in advertising because of the internet. Nowadays there are websites, besides the product and/or company sites, that are created by advertising companies with the purposes of more subtly promoting the product. Not to mention pop-up ads and web sites relying on advertising to stay up and running.

I will say that the book is an interesting read, if you enjoy reading about the possible affects of the internet.

Also, for your viewing pleasure: YouTube Videos!

Glenn Beck's History of Illegal Immigration


Was Rudy's Phone Call Staged?


Another Video About Rudy:

Interesting Survey

Link to the original story.

Democrats vs. Democrats

Though I usually don't agree with Senator Nelson (D- Fla.), I thoroughly support his decision to do something about the DNC stripping Florida of its delegate.

This quote from Sen. Nelson sums up my thoughts on the matter:

"We believe the right to vote, and to have that vote count, is — in fact — the cornerstone of our democracy... Without it, nothing else will work."

Some background on the situation:

"Nelson, with Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.), made it official Thursday they are suing Dean and the DNC for a declaratory relief injunction to prevent the party from going through with harsh penalties against the state that went into effect automatically Sept. 29. The lawmakers said those penalties effectively will negate the votes of almost 4.5 million voters."


4.5 million voters. And the DNC doesn't want them to vote. Shameful.

Censorship at its Finest

So, Democrats tried to get Rush Limbaugh in trouble with the CEO of Clear Channel for his "phony soldier" comment via a letter.

My question is, what happened to liberals love of free speech?

Apparently it's okay for Democrats to say whatever they want, but it's not okay for Rush, on his own radio show, to give his point of view.

By the way, the CEO of Clear Channel wrote a letter back to Sen. Reid saying he would not do anything about Rush's comments. He wrote that Rush has always been a huge supporter of the American troops and therefore he could not assume that this one comment was meant to "personally indict combat soldiers simply because they didn't share his own beliefs regarding the war in Iraq."

The CEO also said:

"While I do not agree with everything Mr. Limbaugh says on every topic, I do believe that he, along with every American, has the right to voice his or her opinion in the manner they choose. The First Amendment gives every American the right to voice his or her opinion, no matter how unpopular. That right is one that I am sure you agree must be cherished and protected."

All I have to say to those who signed the first letter condemning Rush (Hillary, Barack, John Kerry, Bill Nelson, etc.) is

haha.

p.s. Straight from Real Clear Politics:

Zogby: President Bush is even less popular than he used to be, as just 29% rate his performance as excellent or good, while 71% call it fair or poor. It's barely possible, but Congress performs even worse -- just 11% call its performance excellent or good, while 87% say it's fair or poor.

RCP: Bush stands at 33.6% in the RCP Average, while Congress stands at 27%.

So if it's Bush vs. Congress, Bush is doing a better job.

Nice.