I just finished watching Obama's announcement speach. It was moving and exciting, and sold me even further on this man. I don't think any other politician has ever appealed to me as much as he does. He will be the next president of this country. I will put my all behind that goal. My all not being that much compared to other's "all", I won't be able to go to Iowa or New Hampshire, (that would be awesome, and if there's someone that would want to bankroll that...) For the past couple of years, I've been dismayed by how Democrats have acted. This year, and last years election excepted. Previous to that, though, Dems have been bumbling fools. Falling for every trap that Republicans had so obviously laid right in front of their eyes. I think the tables might have finally turned, thankfully. At least there are more Democrats who walking around with their eyes open. There are still remnants of the mole-people who used to make up the majority of their old minority. I think Hillary Clinton is one of those. She hired a "faith advisor" who is there to help her court the evangelical vote, which she'll never get. She's saying some more of the right things, but still thinks that she has to be more Republican to get enough votes. It's not needed, as last year's election shows.
Obama spoke of ending the war, by next year, in fact. Obama spoke of hope, of restoring this nation to it's old glory. Of unions, of broadband internet in rural and urban areas, of education, of ending poverty. Obama spoke of hope and it didn't sound cynical. It didn't sound like "you'd better hope", it sounded like "we all here, hope, together."
Republican Bumbling Report:
The "pro-life" party has just given itself a new name. The "pro-cancer" party. At least that's how they'll be seen if they don't completely forsake "Focus On The Family" and similar groups. FoF and others like it and affiliated with it, are pushing against the mandatory vacination of all children for Human Papillomavirus, the cause of two thirds of cervical cancer. Why? Why would someone want to stand in the way of curing cancer? Why would someone be "pro-cancer"? Well, obviously, a childhood vacination will encourage pre-marital sex. HpV is a sexually transmitted disease. In the logic system that these pro-cancer groups employ, if you just wait till after you get married, you won't have to worry about getting cancer from sex. Don't worry about the thought that no one knows they carry HpV, and a woman's husband could give it to her. Even if both had been abstinate from cradle to the altar.
At what point do these people completely lose all credibility? I issue the challenge to all of the NC republican legislators to renounce this pro-cancer group, and approve the requirement of a childhood vaccine for HpV.
Links for this post: