Congressman Perlmutter, my representative, probably isn’t worried much about my vote. I didn’t vote for him in the last election and I was unlikely to vote for him in the upcoming election. When Ryan Frazier, a local politician who I interviewed a few years ago, declared for the race, the chance of me voting Perlmutter became zero.

But for anyone who is still pondering their vote, here’s what Frazier would bring us: a definite no vote on bad health care reform, a smart man who knows his constituents, a vet who served his country with honor, and an unapologetic conservative who will work hard to do what’s right for us. All of that would be good enough for me, but he’s also a hell of a nice guy who has shown, at the local level, the ability to be a good representative.

If you’d like to learn more about him, this would be a good place to start.

What the world needs is more government officials micromanaging the war against the epicureandistrial complex. Which is why I’m so darned glad about this moment of brilliance coming to us from New York.

Some New York City chefs and restaurant owners are taking aim at a bill introduced in the New York Legislature that, if passed, would ban the use of salt in restaurant cooking.

“No owner or operator of a restaurant in this state shall use salt in any form in the preparation of any food for consumption by customers of such restaurant, including food prepared to be consumed on the premises of such restaurant or off of such premises,” the bill, A. 10129 , states in part.

The legislation, which Assemblyman Felix Ortiz , D-Brooklyn, introduced on March 5, would fine restaurants $1,000 for each violation.

Mr. Ortiz, thank God there are brave Assemblymen out there like you protecting me from the hazards of table salt.

God be with you, sir.

Read the rest.

I’m watching American Idol. I’m working. I’m helping my wife with a computer project. I’m reading the news.

That is what should commonly be known as “stupid-tasking.” Where the hell did my ability to focus go? I kind of miss it.

Nonetheless, those of you who might have missed the

Katie Stevens is cute for a ten year old. Okay, that’s not fair. She must be at least thirteen. She sounds moderately okay in a bland and boring kind of way, but inspires a hearty eh, whatever, from me and not much else.

Randy didn’t like it much and pulled out the dreaded karaoke critique. Ouch. Ellen is nicer, but still thinks that the li’l girl couldn’t pull off the emotional aspect of the song. Kara damns with faint praise. I personally prefer to damn with harsh language. Like “damn.” Simon says: “You kind of sucked (long pause) the energy out of the room.” Or something to that effect, which was unintentionally ouchie.

Siobahn who is cute, apparently of age, quirky, and potentially not particularly bright. Or, perhaps, constantly stoned. Dunno. She’s also consistently interesting even though I didn’t find her “House of the Rising Sun” to be quite convincing tonight. I would chalk it up to trying too hard, but that’s just me.

Randy butters her up with kindness and admires her risk-taking behavior and then proclaims it “hot.” Ellen calls her spectacular. Kara digs, too. Simon says: “I wasn’t quite such a fan of that.”

Once again, Simon is the voice of reason. He is, however, extra bitchy this year.

When darling girl sees Lacey Brown , she asks, “She’s still here?” Funny moment and not a bad point: Brown hasn’t been so good to this point in the competition and certainly hasn’t lived up to her auditions. Tonight, she does pretty well--emphasis on the pretty--until a bum note at the end of the song.

Randy calls it her best performance in a long time. Ellen agrees and says it was a great song choice (I agree). Kara liked it, too. Simon says: “I didn’t love love the song, but you sang it really well.”

Nicely done.

It’s almost unfair for me to critique Katelyn Epperly performance of “I Feel the Earth Move.” ‘Cause I hate this song and even if she’s doing it well, I’m going to hate the song. So, regardless of artistic merit, sitting through it was painful for me.

Randy says it felt put on--"a little sleepy, a little boring.” Ellen doesn’t feel like being very nice, either. Kara’s not feeling the love. Simon says: “I like your hair.” But it goes down hill from there.

When Didi Benami is singing well, I absolutely love her voice. I also love her doing Stevie Nicks, who was one of my earliest and naughtiest crushes because conservative boys do so love their hippy chicks.  That said, the audience seemed a little confused…

...And so did Randy, although he liked it better than the previous week. Ellen gives her credit for bouncing back from the previous week and gives a mildly positive review. Kara says it was one of her favorite moments of the year so far--which seems a bit much to me, but I did enjoy it. Simon says: “I have to agree with Kara.”

Good for Didi.

Paige Miles goes for a subdued and ridiculously boring “Smile.” Wobbly and uninvolving, unfortunately.

Randy goes for the smack down. Ellen continues the downward smack. Kara adds in a sideways slap or two. Simon says: “Such a shame because you had so much potential...but the problem is you have no idea who you are.”

I wouldn’t be surprised to see her going home, although she’s playing the rarely played “Michael Jackson is dead” card. Which, that’s a surprise move.

I do like Crystal Bowersox in spite of her white girl dreads, which are wrong wrong wrong. Tracy Chapman’s “Give Me One Reason” is a good fit and lets her stretch her voice a bit. Not only is it fun, but it’s the first lively song of the night and she looked like she enjoyed it. Love her.

Randy gives it lots of love. Ellen and Kara, too. Simon says: “Uh, you are one million billion percent going to be in the top 12 next week.”

The world loves Bowersox.

Stupid Traitor Bitch Aside: Stupid traitor bitch. What the hell goes so wrong in her head that she decides to undertake terrorist training and commit herself to murdering a fucking cartoonist? Hate isn’t a big enough word for how I feel about Colleen “JihadJane” LaRose.

You can never go wrong with Patsy Cline. Well, almost never. “I Fall to Pieces” as sung by Lilly Scott, who had previously been one of my favorites, was surprisingly bad. Her vocals were unsteady, although the audience seemed to enjoy it.

Randy liked the mandolin and called it “hot.” Ellen, too. Which makes me wonder just how different it sounded in the theater because, no. Kara was nice about it. Simon says: “It didn’t have the wow factor.” But he doesn’t much criticize the performance, so who knows…

...I exhibit the desire to defend actor Sean Penn from, well, I guess from anything, remind me of the little jerk’s deep sea dive into dumb.

Penn, appearing on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” on Friday, defended Chavez during a segment in which he detailed his work with the JP Haitian Relief Organization, which he co-founded.

“Every day, this elected leader is called a dictator here, and we just accept it, and accept it” said Penn, winner of two Best Actor Academy Awards. “And this is mainstream media, who should—truly, there should be a bar by which one goes to prison for these kinds of lies.”

Moron.

Read the rest.

Okay, let’s play Imagination Time for a moment.

Imagine that you are a lesbian living in the Denver area (imagining liking girls is pretty easy for me; imagining the change in plumbing is a little tougher). Imagine that you are also a parent of a pre-school age child and are looking for a good school for your kid. Now, tell me what that school would look like?

Would it be a Baptist school? Why or why not?

Would it be one of the Denver Waldorf schools or a Montessori school? Again, why or why note?

Lastly, would it be a Catholic school? Why or why not?

Whether I like them or not, the religious schools very well could have policies against accepting or keeping students who are living in families that don’t adhere to their standards of conduct. Not only is it legal, it’s entirely understandable. Yes, I also understand why the parents might have wanted their kid in a religious school, but that doesn’t really change the other side of the equation.

The story of a lesbian couple whose kid is not being allowed back into a private Catholic school is raising a bit of noise around the area, though. Even school staff is voicing (anonymously) disappointment in the Denver Archdiocese decision.

According to the Archdiocese, parents who enroll their kids at Sacred Heart of Jesus Catholic School are expected to follow the Catholic Church’s beliefs.

“No person shall be admitted as a student in any Catholic school unless that person and his/her parent(s) subscribe to the school’s philosophy and agree to abide by the educational policies and regulations of the school and Archdiocese,” the statement said.

Because this student’s parents are homosexual, the Archdiocese says they were in clear violation of the school’s policy.

School staff members, who asked to remain anonymous, say they are disgusted by the Archdiocese’s decision.

For those staff members who disagree so strenuously, I suggest that you tender your resignations. For parents who disagree, I suggest you withdraw your children. Register your disagreement in the best way you know.

Still, the “disgust,” especially on the part of the staff, is either incredibly naive or merely over-dramatic. What did they really think would happen? They do happen to work in a Catholic school. For that matter, for the parents, I feel fairly sure that they must have been actively subverting any code of conduct and policies that they had to agree to before placing their child in the school.

I say again: what did they really think would happen?

Last year when I was looking for a new job, I came across one that I was reasonably well-qualified for at a local Christian college. I started the application process and came to the code of conduct that I was expected to agree to and live up to as a requirement of employment.

Now, I really wanted a job and the idea of working on a Christian college campus appealed to me to. I know that this will be shocking to some folks out there, but I truly do take my religion seriously; I mean it when I call myself a Christian. That doesn’t mean that you’ll be able to find me to be a perfect fit for the teaching of any one church, and I have a hard time reconciling the areas of disagreement with my desire to be involved in a church.

When I came to that code of conduct, though, I knew that I would not be able to sign it in good conscience. It might not be readily apparent to anyone at the school and I might well be able to talk my way into the position, but it would be starting my employment based on a lie. I could not sign that code of conduct because it would have been a lie.

I have enough respect for myself to stand up for those things in which I believe. I have enough respect for others to not lie to them about the same.

Read the rest.

"Meanwhile, Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues her promise to run ‘the most goat-rodeo Congress in history.’”

That’s the stuff.

Read what Goldstein has to say because he’s right.

Good writing, ishambat. Impressive logic, too.

Here is the comment I posted on the great logo scandal.

Oh, c’mon.

The larger circle is the outer atmosphere and it contains our planet (and that would be the negative space on the inside). The big red swoosh is symbolic of hitting threats over the horizon.

It’s more contemporary than the old logo and it’s more visually interesting. I think someone should have noticed that it could be mistaken for something else and should have asked for redesign.

But that doesn’t mean it’s part of some larger plot.

Save the outrage for something real.

Don’t know what the great logo scandal is? Check it out here.

Look, I love me some Andrew Breitbart, but Frank Gaffney has put something on Breitbart’s Big Government site that looks pretty looney to me. Don’t let the site go down the Ron Paul road to craziness.

In other words, don’t let the crazy be the enemy of the good.

There is precisely no reason to jump on this particular bandwagon. Questionable design choices do not equal plots to spread Islamic symbols to America through obscure military logos.

Hey, Democrats, way to walk a righteous path!

I don’t really understand why we need a specific bill to ban discrimination against gays in public schools--which is to say, what form of discrimination is currently legal and acceptable?--but of the two reasons to oppose the bill, one of them really boggles my mind.

The first concern, coming from libertarians and free speech advocates resonates heavily with me. If the bill’s language is too broadly drawn and it is harmful to legitimate free speech, then the bill is wrong. What, precisely, would constitute harassment? Are hurt feelings and mere suspicion enough to unleash the hounds of aggrievement? Or is there a higher bar that needs to be cleared?

The second concern, coming from people who fear the purple mafia, is one that I dismiss out of hand. “It will push the gay agenda.” Inasmuch as there is a gay agenda, in the main it is simply to gain the kind of acceptance and protection from harassment that every other citizen enjoys. While these folks might throw some specific instances of truly bizarre behavior and policy goals, the truth is that none of the gay people I know (strangely, the majority that I know count themselves as conservatives and libertarians, which is less a statement about typical gay political stances than it is about typical Friends of Zomby political stances) want to destroy marriage, push their sexuality on unsuspecting straight folks, or destroy the moral fabric of the country with tactical drag queen air strikes. They just want to go about their lives.

“It seems pretty consistent with Kevin Jennings being appointed in the Obama administration,” said Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit public interest law firm, referring to the controversial founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network who now serves as the assistant deputy secretary for the Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools.

Jennings came under fire in September after acknowledging he should have better handled an incident in 1988 when he was a teacher and failed to report that a boy he believed was 15 years old told him he was having sex with an older man. (Since that time, the former student, referred to as “Brewster,” has revealed he was 16 years old, the age of consent in Massachusetts, at the time of the incident.)

“When [Jennings] founded GLSEN, his idea of a safe school was one that pushed a radical homosexual agenda by even encouraging first and second-graders to engage in homosexual activity,” Staver said. “So I think that’s the impetus behind this bill. We have an administration that wants to push a radical social agenda.”

We can debate some specifics, but I do not see a scary gay agenda that will tear apart the country.

That said, I generally oppose this kind of legislation because I don’t quite understand what it accomplishes. There are already laws against harassment and most schools are aggressive in dealing with harassment issues in the district. Boy, could I tell you some stories if I were allowed to tell you some stories. If children are not being protected from harassment by their teachers and their districts right now, it’s because individual teachers, schools, or districts aren’t doing their job.

Handle it at the local level and there is no need for more Federal government posturing.

I twitterated about this a bit ago, but I ran across an article that twists the knife in a slightly funnier way:

Over at The Root, where Slate magazine sequesters black journalists, Michael Arceneaux decides it’s time to excommunicate certain undesirables from the African-American brotherhood. Because “while we love our own,” he writes, “we sure do dream of erasing a few of them from the history books.”

As much as anyone can possibly laugh about this kind of racializing, it’s nice to see that Reason can find the funny.

Read the rest.

Joe Stack was no hero.

That thought came through my mind when I read through his suicide note and then read a comment left on a forum run by the hosting company for embeddedart.com, where Stack had a site.

Joe Stack was no hero, despite what someone like Denns25 might imagine. “Joe Stack fought and died for his country on this day...”

No, Stack has a laundry list of complaints about the fairness of society that lead him to lash out like a child throwing a tantrum. His selfishness put others in harms way. Instead of dealing with his complaints and problems like an adult, instead of stepping up and being a leader in overturning those corrupt politicians, companies, and churches that he despised, he decided to take the cowardly, disgraceful path of a suicide bomber. Yeah, Joe, won’t that show ‘em.

And I bet they’ll really miss you when you’re gone, too.

Joe Stack was no hero. He was just another Timothy McVeigh acting out in as destructive a way as he knew how, hoping that his lifelong failures and sense of victimization would somehow be granted nobility through self sacrifice. Instead, he’ll be a nasty footnote in America’s history of crackpots and lunatics.

Striking a blow for feminist authoritarians around the globe, Kim Kyong-Hui stands up and demands her place at the table.

You go, girl!

Just click on through...

In reference to the below, I have a little bit of advice for my friends on the left.

Today Democratic Sens. Michael Bennet, Kirsten Gillibrand, Sherrod Brown and Jeff Merkley sent a letter to Majority Leader Harry Reid asking him to push through a government-run health care plan through the reconciliation procedure.

Now, before we go any further, this isn’t concern trolling. Honestly. I’m just offering some strategic advice from the point of view of a guy who enjoys that aspect of politics and not just the partisan back and forth.

Of course, I’m also a guy who is going to be working to see you guys sent home come the next time you’re facing an election. Take it for what it’s worth.

First, if you feel the need to bulk up your left-leaning bonafides by threatening to use, shall we say, extreme measures to pass parts of the health care package, then go ahead and threaten away. It’s part of the game and it’s entirely understandable. It will probably buy you a few votes and a few dollars from the Daily Kos set, and, given the new sense of Republican competitiveness, you’ll need every advantage you can get.

But don’t try it. Actually attempting this kind of a bully maneuver would be a huge mistake. Why?

You’ll face opposition from your own party that might well make the maneuver impossible. Any Democrat facing a midterm election is feeling the pressure from the right and center right now, and that pressure is overwhelmingly opposed to passing any version of the current plan. What kind of support and cover will you expect from those folks?

It will be no surprise that I think you won’t get a single hand stretching across the aisle to give you even the slightest appearance of bi-partisanship. The GOP knows two things right now: that they have the political cover that they need to stand firm against the current versions of health care reform and that they need to work with the fiscal conservatives is they don’t want to face their own primary challenges in the midterms.

The Democrats have had a year of supermajority and have failed to achieve their biggest goals. The wasted political capital--both the effort spent in the trying and the feigned powerlessness when the electorate knows better--has left the great progressive movement weak, has left President Obama weak, and has left congressional Democrats weak. The triumphalism of a year ago is already faded in almost every corner and where it still exists it sounds remarkably out of touch with the great majority of America.

Nearly the entirety of the left seems to have misjudged the mandate that was handed to them in the last election, and the misjudgment lead to wild overreach. In politics, the biggest danger of both winning and losing elections is precisely the same: not understanding the reason that the election went the way it did.

Consider that reality deeply before you make a move that goes so powerfully against the poll trends. No, you don’t want to make decisions purely on focus groups and polling, but you don’t want to ignore the voices of the citizens, either. A decision like this--spearheading the subversion of the normal legislative process, ignoring the will of the citizens, and doing it all in a way that makes you an obvious target--is precisely the kind of thing that can ruin a political career and most certainly would haunt you in every election in the future.

Strategically speaking, from where I sit it seems like a pretty bad decision.

For that matter, I’m still not sure it would work, either. Is this the kind of thing that can actually be passed through the reconciliation process? I tend to think the answer is no, but I don’t know if it’s been tested, either.

As I said, take it for what it’s worth. I’m no fan of the health care ideas that have been coming from the left (and a bigger opponent of any public option), I’m a conservative, and I’m not the guy that the Democrats are courting. I’m not in the nebulous middle that moves with relative ease from party to party between election cycles--I’m not someone who they would consider to be “in play.”

While I think the claim that Andrew Sullivan is anti-Semitic was a stretch, this critique from The American Spectator’s Philip Klein seems to be about perfect in its view of Sullivan’s writing.

So, while one can only speculate as to what motivates Sullivan’s views on Israel, even giving him the benefit of the doubt and judging him strictly by his own standards, his daily ratings are philosophically incoherent, intellectually lazy, and increasingly insane.

I would imagine that we would all be a little better off if we treated Sullivan’s ideas with the seriousness that they deserve: if open mockery seems to cruel, then ignoring him is entirely reasonable.

Read the rest here.

Update- The allegation of anti-Semitism is like the allegation of racism: break it out only when the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the conclusion. Cheapening the word--and the sin--by applying it capriciously or even through sly insinuation diminishes real acts of anti-Semitism and racism. 

Insurance Journal, April 23, 2002

PIFC Opposing Government Mandation of Private Insurance Company Investments.

The United Kingdom Hydrographic Office

What Mandation Means to You.

Information Standards Board for Health and Social Care

Commissioning Data Sets: Mandation of 18 Week Referral to Treatment Data Items.

Journal of Health and Social Policy, Feb. 1992

The Mandation of Insurance Coverage for In Vitro Fertilization

Taiwan News, Oct. 26, 2009

ECDIS conference highlights IMO timeline for mandation.

Ginsburg, WH Jr., Annals of Emergency Medicine, August 24, 1994

The mandation of a standard of care by legislative or insurance underwriting fiat certainly ensures the existence of the standard and will serve to require the use of the procedures, techniques, or technology so mandated. Before the mandation by law, however, the profession must recognize the matriculation of the idea to the guideline to the standard.

But, yeah, Palin totally made that word up. Oliver Willis: Like, Stupid.

“I forgot he was black tonight.”

What the hell does that mean? Listening to the audio, it’s even worse because it seems to indicate that Chris Matthews was somehow surprised that a black man could stand and talk about a wide range of subjects, could be in front of a “bunch of other white people”, could be so “in tune” with American life that he might somehow not sound black.

Or something.

What was he thinking?

If, as Matthews suggests, we’ve really entered a post-racial period, can’t we dispense with talking about race and get to talking about policies? 

I was in favor of skipping this year’s State of the Union address, but darling girl said we needed to watch. For some reason. So, here goes the running commentary and translation.

I just wish I had my own teleprompter to help me along…

Nancy Pelosi: For godssake, I hope he’s good tonight because careers are on the line. Oh, and welcome the President of the United States.

President Obama: Thank you. Madame Speaker, irritating faux pas machine, members of congress, some other folks who have been invited for easy political points, how’s it going?

First, I’d like you to know that all the bad stuff happened well before I got here and now it’s getting better. Which you might not have noticed with all the extra unemployment, bad economy, and stuff. Lucky for America, I ran for President and it’s getting better.

No, seriously.

So, I know you want all the hopey-changey bits and you want it quicker. You aren’t upset by the ballooning deficit or terrifying bills that my party has been proposing; you’re upset that we haven’t given you changes faster. Which is why some of you voted for a Republican who campaigned aggressively against my policies.

For some reason.

And, thank God you elected me, because I have personally never been more hopeful about America’s future than I am tonight. Which might be surprising when you think about all the extra unemployment, bad economy, and stuff. But you’re finally going to get a government that matches your decency and embodies your strength. Unlike all those bastards who have gone before.

By the way, we all hated the bank bailout. Seriously. I hated it, you hated it, everyone hated it. But, thank God for me, we did this and it made everything all better and we got most of our money back. Thank God for my willingness to be unpopular for your benefit. PS- We’re sending some gentlemen of Italian-American ancestry to get the rest. Eat the rich!

I cut taxes. For everyone. No, seriously. And I did it while extending extra jobless benefits to all the folks who still don’t have jobs. As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas and stuff, which was pretty awesome. Because of us, there are two million Americans working now who would otherwise be unemployed. Which you might not have noticed with all the extra unemployment, bad economy, and stuff.

And we’re going to add some more--and thank God for that handful of jobs that $700 billion buys you.

You might not have noticed, what with the continuing high unemployment rate, but jobs are being created and it’s getting better. No, seriously. And the real job engine of America is found in small businesses--the businesses that are being abused by the big banks. Which is why I’m going to take some of the money repaid by those banks--money borrowed from your childrens’ futures--and lending it out to small businesses that are such bad risks that the banks won’t give them money. And, if I might steal an idea from my Republican opponents, let’s kill off all capital gains taxes on small business investment.

Cool, huh?

And, while I’m at it, why the heck do other countries have faster trains that us? In the most powerful nation on the planet, why can’t we have trains that go faster? That’s important, too, you know.

Clean energy. Energy efficiency. No tax breaks for businesses who hire overseas.  Strange mix of policy ideas, sound bites, and useless suggestions.

Now, back to jobs. I’m going to tell congress to make sure that they give me a jobs bill, like, now. Because while I would say that small businesses are the real growth engine of jobs in America, I want to make sure that government is doing it part to screw things up.

Speed bump of confused, disjointed thoughts that don’t make much sense, really. India, Germany, and China have fast trains. Why can’t we have fast trains, too? I won’t accept second place for America! Faster trains and job bills, now, damnit!

What was I talking about?

It might be hard, you might not like the medicine, but, damnit, you will buy what I’m selling. I’m not going to punish banks, I’m just going to bully them a little bit for their own good. The lobbyists are trying to stop the bullying, of course, but, damnit, you will buy what I’m selling.

Next, we need you guys to be more creative. Especially with speedy train technology. What the hell? Why can’t you guys solve cancer and give me faster trains and cleaner energy? Why?

Now, to buy a little conservative good will, I’m going to give you nuclear energy, some offshore drilling, and maybe a few coal plants, too. But to buy some liberal good will, I’m going to make sure that we do it while spending lots of money on green initiatives and screwing up the economy with some good, business-punishing climate change, cap and trade type bills. And global warming is real, damnit.

Next, other countries need to buy our stuff. Why aren’t they buying our stuff? Damnit, they will buy what we are selling. Next year we’re going to set a totally random goal of doubling exports and that will help create a totally made up two million jobs in America. And we’re going to do it with a magical export wand that I have in my office and a little extra deficit spending that no one will miss, anyway.

God, I love how trade protectionism plays so well on both sides of the aisle.

They will buy what we are selling. Damnit.

Education is important, too. We’re totally crowdsourcing that problem. Schools. We like schools. “The best anti-poverty program around is a world class education.” Which is why we’ll do our best to make sure that they have to go to public schools instead of choosing the best schools in their region. And to make the cost of higher education even higher, I’ll be putting more government money, bureaucracy, and control of the schools and taking direct control of the student loan industry. And student won’t have to pay so much for their loans. And I’ll do it all with a little extra deficit spending that non one will miss, anyway.

Hey, see the faux pas machine back there? I’m going to drop his name now and move right along pretending that he doesn’t exist. Because, damn, that man gets on my nerves.

Oh, and to save your house, I’m going to give you health insurance reform. You might not want it. You might not want what we’ve proposed. You might be opposed by a really big amount, but you will buy what I am selling. Damnit. And thank God I’m willing to sacrifice myself and my party to ram it down your throats regardless of how you feel on the subject.

Damnit, you will buy what I am selling. Which is precisely why we will still get health insurance reform and punish the evil insurance companies. And, while I’m at it, thank God for my wife, Michelle, for hating fat kids.

I know you don’t believe what I’ve been saying for the last year, but I’m going to say it all again. And you will buy what I am selling. It’s my fault since, you know, only a few states were getting killer sweetheart deals and most Americans were all, “Hey, what’s in it for me?” Well, let me tell you, magical reform that gets absolutely everyone the access to great coverage and lower deficits. No, seriously.

So, look at it again. I’m pretty sure you’re going to like this little baby. Runs like a top. Low miles, Cheap as hell. Now, give me my reform.

And my speedy trains, too.

Do it for America.

Sure, that extra bureaucracy would help decrease the deficit, but let’s do even more. Under Bill Clinton, we had extra money. It’s Bush’s fault. And what I spent this year was Bush’s fault, too. Which means that none of it was my fault. No, seriously. And, as a Senator, it’s not like I did much or voted for much or was really paying attention since I was campaigning pretty much the entire time, so it’s not my fault.

Anyway, to address the problem, I’d like to close this particular barn door and hope that you don’t notice the bonfire raging inside. So I’m proposing a spending freeze of minimalistic proportions and hope like hell that all the promises will buy enough votes to keep me working with a strong majority. Because Americans aren’t really paying that much attention, are they? Hell, they still like me…

Oh, where was I? Bi-partisan, very serious, going to solve it, veto, defiant refusal, restore the paygo lie, and don’t worry because I can still solve the problems and slyly insult the folks on the other side of the aisle. You know who I’m talking about: those folks who created this problem and it’s all their fault. So, let’s spend money without leaving lots of debt. Let’s try common sense, which you Republicans wouldn’t even recognize if it bit you in the ass.

I hate lobbyists. Don’t you? I’m quite fond of speedy trains, though. But, back to my point: I hate lobbyists and I’m going to bully them like I bully the banks. While we’re at it, screw the Supreme Court and I hate free political speech when it applies to some folks that I don’t much like.

I hate earmarks. Don’t you? I’ll do something about that, too. And I’m calling on congress to be completely transparent about all earmark requests in a way that I don’t feel we need to be transparent about lots of other things right before votes. But enough of that.

We need to work better together. While I’m not slyly insulting you, I’m going to call you out on leaning on parliamentary procedures that keep America from tasting the full, deep beauty of my reforms. So stop it.

Blahblahblahblahblah…

“I’m trying to change the tone of our politics.” Which is why I insult slyly. So, Democrats, remember that we have a majority that they can’t touch and we can totally ram change down their throats. And to my Republican friends, you better roll over and take it or I’m going to insult you less slyly.

Now, about national security. I know I’ve been blaming Bush for a long time, but I don’t want to talk about that anymore. I want to rise above my previous campaigns of blame and bring hopey-changeyness to the whole world. Since the day I took office, national security has gotten better. Not that I want to point the finger of blame or anything, but, yeah, it’s me and my administration.

Anyway, where was I? Oh, yeah, I promised to end the war and that’s exactly what I’m doing. Just not necessarily as fast as I first said. But the war is ending and our troops are coming home. The one in Iraq, that is. The other one is still going pretty strong. Don’t see an end to that any time soon. Oh, and I love the troops. Don’t you? Let’s give them stuff. Let’s give them lots of stuff. I’m not entirely sure what stuff, but it was a lot of stuff and a new VA and a commission that will talk about the stuff that they need and--yeah, hooray stuff!

I hate nuclear weapons. Don’t you? The Russians and I are getting rid of them and securing all those loose nuclear bits that sort of shook loose when Russia fell down. I hate North Korea. Don’t you? Not too fond of Iran, either. And I promise to speak in harsh tones about them until something happens. Something meaningful. I’ll probably point my finger at them a bit, too.

AIDs. Climate change. New this and that. More programs mentioned in passing. I love America. Don’t you? Pretty fond of Haiti, too, so hopefully we can help them out a bit.

And I like gay people. Don’t you? We’ll let them serve in the military. And I like women. Don’t you? Let’s make sure they get paid enough. And I like borders. Don’t you? Let’s do something about those, too. Wow, that’s some serious drive-by politicking, isn’t it?

Now, let’s all give America a big hug because the citizens really don’t trust us right now. They don’t recognize the importance and wonders of us. So, let’s give them a big hug and, maybe, buy them a drink.

I promised change and I’m going to deliver. Whether you want me to or not--and the Democrats better step in line whether it costs them their seats or not. Because, damnit you’re going to buy what I’m selling.

And thank God I’m here to sacrifice myself for your good.

Good Lord, this is almost Clintonian in length.

Read Vodka Pundit’s drunken take. Althouse, too.

PS- For Colorado bloggers, click on through to this post. For the others, well, we’ll just be drinking without you.

Sad.

PPS - Thank you Instapundit for undeserved (yet entirely solicited) attention.