McCain and the Keating 5

No doubt people have heard about the 13/14 minute video documantary about John McCain’s association with Charles Keating and the Saving and Loan scandal. I had. But this video is still chilling.

http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo

Of course, McCain and his supporters are crying foul. But what the hell did they think would happen when Johnny and The Palin Drone started slinging mud at Obama? Did they really think he was just going to politely withstand the smears? He is not John Kerry.

And why should he be?

To reference a political axiom: I’ll put down my gun when you put down yours.

The thing is this kind of BS only plays to Kool-aide drinkers anyway, which benefits Obama, who, by most assements is leading, not McCain. Frankly, it strikes one as typical of McCain’s undisciplined style, his penchant for giving into his nasty side, to his darker demons, and saying, Fuck it, just let em have it.

McCain has poor judgement. He cannot keep his cool. He’s erratic and illetempered. And increasingly  he just comes of as a jerk! Not to mention a sleazy opportunist.

And he wants to be President of the United States? Hell, Arizona should do themselves a big favor and strip this guy of his Senator seat. Because if McCain loses who knows what kind of temper tantrum he’ll throw.

Obama’s economic plan

Some key elements include:

• A $1,000 emergency energy rebate to help families with high fuel costs right now while putting $50 billion into job creation to get our economy back on track.
• Families making less than $250,000 a year will get a tax cut three times larger than under John McCain’s plan and will face absolutely no tax increases.
• While John McCain has voted against raising the minimum wage 19 times, Barack would raise the minimum wage and set it to rise automatically with inflation.
• Invest $15 billion a year in green energy research to reduce our economy’s dependence on foreign oil and create 5 million American jobs a year.

Sounds good to me.

But I’m sure there are some who see a problem with it. So, let me have them.

This really made my morning.

Alaskan blogger, Mudflats, decided to do a little editing to a makeshift derogatory Obama sign hung above the highway.

Check it here.

Political Lawns Signs

Over the past week or so I’ve been taking note of the political lawns signs popping up in my neighborhood, especially last week when I was riding my bike to work. You just notice more when you’re riding a bike. And it makes sense, now that the conventions are over, and we have about 2 months until the election, that these signs should be appearing more and more. Of course, there was an early sprout lawn sign about a block or so a way in the subdivision behind us for Ron Paul, but it hasn’t really spread.

Anyhoo…if political lawns signs are any kind of election bellwether, I’d say that Obama is doing quite well. In fact, the ratio so far is about 2 dozen or so Obama lawn signs to one McCain sign. Of course, that is just in  my little area of Birmingham, Michigan, which includes the downtown area and the neighborhoods eat of Woodward, near Adams and Maple Roads, for those who know the area. For those who don’t, being east of Woodward is, I found out, commonly referred to as the other side of the tracks. Although that could apply to train tracks since the trains runs through our neigbhorhood, so close to our house that we can hear the trains as they pass. It isn’t disturbing. In fact, we like the sound. Reminded Colleen and I of our days in Kalamazoo, when we were attending Western Michigan. Also remeinds me of living in Ypsilanti, when I went to EMU for undegrad, where the train ran through as well. But once again I digress.

Birmingham is not a big city, but it is bigger than the town of some 6,000 that Sarah Palin was once governor, with a population of approximately 20,000. But the economic demographics can vary quite significantly. There are some very wealthy people in this town, and as such they automatically support the Repubilcan candidate regardless of who it is. But apparently in recent years, Birmingham has been skewing more Democrat. Recent elections, in which State Senator Papageorge and Congressional Rep. Joe Knollenberg, both Republican, were almost ousted, would bare this out.

This trend appear to be true as well for all of Oakland county, which, according to some articles I’ve read, could be significant in this election. Back in the 80s, when Regan and Bush were running for President there was a saying that went sometning like this: As goes Macomb County so  goes the state of Michigan, and as goes Michigan so goes the country. This was in referenc to Regan Democrats, largely blue-collar workers that went for Regan and helped him to two terms, plus a third via Bush. Well, a similar idea is being talked about, but this time it is not Macomb County that is getting the attention. It is Oakland County. But it isn’t blue-collar works this time, but wealthier white-collar workers who may be conservative but have had enough of the Republican party, at least as represented by W and his ilk. Also, while some are economically conservative they are more socially moderate.

In any case, I find this encouraging, enough to put my optimism/pessimism rating at something like 58/42. But I am still far from confident that Obama will win the White House in November.

I just love Dahlia Lithwick

But I think I may be jealous of her more than anything else. Because she writes so damn well it makes me want to weep. Okay, maybe not literally, but you know what I mean. Damn, she’s good.

Lithwick is a senior editor and legal correspondent for Slate.com, and here is another excellent article from her on slate.com. This one is about one my favorite subjects, those adorable Hillary Holdouts. You know, those just can’t let it got Hillary supporters who seem to have problem with the democratic process when it does not serve their agenda to nominate a candidate that somehow serves to validate thier unrealized ambitions, or some such gobbldygook. blah blah blah.

What I really love, and very much appreciate, about this article is Lithwick’s argument that there is a large enough constiuency of PUMAs (Part Unity My Ass), which is a PAC for these people who still refuse to accept Obama as the Democratic Nominee and will stop and nothing less that overthrowing his nomination and installing thier very beloved Hillary, to scuttle Obama nomination.

It’s hardly clear that Team Hillary is as vast or as powerful as it claims. Polls suggest there isn’t a deep pool of Obama-hating women who could derail his election.

Whew! That’s good news. Still, I can only be so optimistic. Because, as Lithwick writes:

These disgruntled women—whether they plan to vote for John McCain, sit out the election, or simply gobble up airtime—are tacitly working toward electing McCain; a candidate who claimed last week at a presidential forum at Saddleback Church that life begins “at the moment of conception” and who voted against legislation ensuring equal pay for women. These women must be well aware that a vote for McCain is a vote to overturn Roe. I assume they don’t care. But my real problem with the Hillary Harridans—and the media’s relentless focus on them—is that they give new life to Paleozoic stereotypes about irrationally destructive older women.

So caught up in their fury as a result of their disappointment, these particular Hillary supports seem entirely oblivious to the damage they could be helping to inflict upon this country by helping, whether directly or indirectly, getting McCain elected.

Saying women have tendency to get hysterical may be a stereotype but it is a difficult one to refute in light of this kind of behavior.

As I’ve said before, I don’t know about other Obama supporters, but as for me, if Obama loses and it is clear that Hillary supports such as those mentioned in this article helped to make it happen, Mrs. Clinton and her clan can kiss my support good-bye. I’m a male and I too possess a serious capacity for hysterics and will exercise my God-given Amerian right to indulge in such idiotic behavior.

Hilary’s canidacy is like Michael Myers

It just won’t die!

Even if Hilary herself has (publicly) moved on, her supporters are like politically flesh-hungry zombies that you just can’t seem to shoot in the head. And instead of moaning, they whine and they whine and they whine. And they won’t shut up. Apparently, the plan being to annoy the rest of the Democratic Part into giving them what they want.

And what do they want now? For Hilary’s name to be entered in the roll-call at the convention in Denver. This despite the fact that most in the Democratic Party believe this would result in a “dangerous show of disunity.”

Michelle Cottle, a senior editor at The New Republic, addresses this matter in her pesky column in this Sunday’s New York Times opinion pages.

Her rebuttal to the MAJORITY opinion in the Dem party that does not want Hilary’s name entered into the roll call is this:

It’s true that having America watch as some portion of Mrs. Clinton’s 1,640 pledged delegates thumb their noses at Barack Obama would disrupt the party’s vision of a carefully scripted Denver love-in.

No, Mich-ey, you got it wrong. It is Hilary or at least her embittered supporters that want the love-in. Because according to you they NEED….

a constructive way … to channel their anger and disappointment could wind up being the path of less destruction for Mr. Obama’s campaign. Plus, it’s the right thing to do.

Maybe these mostly Boomer ladies need to take a lesson from their Generation X sisters (and brothers too, who supported her undisciplined husband when he was in the White House diddling interns with cigares) and suck it up because the contest is over and their candidate lost. That is the right thing to do.

Cottle claims that:

You don’t have to be a die-hard Clintonite, or even much of a feminist, to be moved by the significance of her presidential campaign.

Oh, I was moved all right. I was moved by her code speak to white blue-collar workers that they could not trust a black man to treat them fairly, a myth that Obama continues to struggle to overcome. Not to mention her macbre allusion to Robert Kennedy’s assassination, which no matter how she tries to spin was a sick suggestion that a black man running for president, never mind holding the White House, could end up with a bullet in his head from the gun of some whack job. And then of course there was the moving race baiting by her husband. Oh yeah, it was a moving campaign all right. I was moved to never pay this woman any deference ever again, never mind support her in any way shape or form.

Cottle of course points out that Hilary’s run was historic. Yes. That is true. And now it is historically over. Democrats need to focus on winning the White House, with the winner of the Democratic Primary, Senator Barack Obama. But of course that just can’t be done. Why? Because some Hilary supporters still need some kind of “catharsis and a bit of closure.”

Shit. I’m not sure which concept is more annoying? Hasn’t all the whining been catharsis enough? And what more closure do you need than BARACK GOT MORE VOTES. There’s your fucking closure. It’s done. It’s over. Move on. If you just can’t bring your poor broken heart to support Obama then don’t. But shut the hell up about it already. And keep in mind that if Barack loses there are those of us, who otherwise would have supported Hilary, who if the results seem to show that bitter Hilary supporters played a significant roll in sinking Obama’s chances, may at least consider seriously not only not supporting Hilary’s next run at the White House but just might actively work against her. That petty bullshit works both ways, ladies.

And for those still griping about Hilary getting a bum rap from the media. Take it up with the media. Not the Democrats in your own party, for crying out loud.

But back to the historic nature of Hilary’s campaign. I love how Cottle refers to the excitement over Obama’s also historic campaign derogatorily as hullabaloo, suggesting that Hilary’s campaign was more historic, more serious, more important. Bullshit!

I guarantee you that if Hilary had won the nomination there would be zero tolerance for even a fraction of the griping coming from disappointed Obama supporters. It would be squashed, effectively telling the young black buck to stay in his place and wait his turn until the white dame of the nation has had her turn. But in the case of Hilary having won that would not have been necessary. Obama supporters, though disappointed, would have come around to support Hilary without all this pissing and moaning.

But that isn’t what happened; Hilary didn’t win. It may be sad for some but it is fact. Obama won because he got more votes, which is how it works not, as some of Hilary’s supporters would have it, by said supporters throwing a big enough fit to get their way. Obama will be the Democratic nominee. All this grand gesturing making is an unnecessary distraction. But it seems like it may be a distraction that Obama will unfortunately have to endure, as will we all.

If Obama does except this condition by Hilary and her legion, it won’t be because it is the “right thing to do,” as Cottle puts it. It will be because he was forced to comply by a bunch of whiners who claim they were treated unfairly while at the same time demand special treatment that no male candidate would ever receive.

Gen X vs Traditionalist

This blog post frames the current Presidential Election as a contest between Generation X and the Traditionalist Generation. I found it interesting, but I wonder just how important this sort of thing really is to people? Perhaps more then many would admit. I think much of generational allegiances are subconscious. We don’t really think too much about them. They just are. Because we identify with those who remind us of ourselves. Makes sense.

I was not aware that the age difference between McCain and Obama constitutes the biggest age disparity between candidates (25 years) in US Presidential Election history. The next biggest age difference was from the 1856 election between James Buchanan (65) and John C Fremont (43) – they were 22 years apart. Perhaps that isn’t that relevant but I found it to be an interesting factoid.

I think McCain’s age is something of an issue. He may be a hearty guy and end up living to be over a hundred but that’s not a selling point for me. I want someone younger, more vigorous. Someone more in touch with modern life. John McCain is too much the old guard. It is time for a change.

Of course, ultimately, the best thing about this election is that there is almost no chance that we can have another Baby Boomer in the White House. You’ll not my use of “almost.” In typical GenX fashion, I cannot entirely set aside my pessimism. There is still some part of me that worries that this will not work out, that our first Gen X candidate will end up getting tossed over by, oh, I don’t know, some kind of Hilary coup or something like that.

I know there are still those that refuse to allow Gen X to lay claim to Barack. But he is not a Boomer and I do not recognize the term Generation Jones. He is a GenXer, and this blogger agrees with me.

Now you might say, “Well, Obama was born in 1961, so technically he’s a Baby Boomer.” The experts sometimes define Generation X as 1961-1981, even if the standard for Baby Boomers is 1946-1964. But whether Obama fits a technical definition is missing the big picture – Obama speaks and acts like Generation X.

Fuckin’ A right!

However, I find him/her to be a bit too soft on Boomers:

And this isn’t a knock against Baby Boomers, but we need a fresh perspective on the woes of our country. And we need a non-Baby-Boomer perspective. The Baby Boomers did try to change the world 40 years ago, and we still applaud their actions. For those who sold out, their performance lately has been sad. Short-term visions, pandering to middle-class tax cuts, even Bill Clinton’s obsession with school uniforms were part of the Baby Boomer leadership mentality. And this isn’t even counting the travesties of George W. Bush’s short-sightedness.

Dude, the Boomers need some knocking, upside the head any anyplace else you can land a shot. So do it to em, man!

Damn right, though, that we need a non-Boomer perspective. But that doesn’t mean that McCain’s agenda — what is it exactly? I mean, besides staying in Iraq and dealing with economic problems by telling the American people to stop whining and snap out of it — will suffice. It won’t.

To wit:

The seminar presenter was talking about how her generation (Baby Boomers) wasn’t as comfortable with technology as younger generations. Obama’s use of the Internet to raise money is an excellent example where a younger generation’s perspective is useful.

Very true. But how does this relate to McCain precisely? Well…

If the Baby Boomers are clueless about technology, you can imagine what McCain thinks about IM and text messaging LOL.

There were some comments to this blog. Here is an ignorant on that I particularly enjoyed:

Who cares? Obama is full of it!

Submitted by h1072 on Thu, 05/29/2008 – 1:26am.

Yes I get irritated with the baby boomers. I’ll admit it. I’m in Generation X but there is no way on God’s “green” earth I would EVER vote for Obama Lama Ding Dong! A large chunk of Gen X’ers are not warped or idiotic enough to vote for Obama. Better luck with “Y,” because many of us are smarter than that. In my generation, some of the parents still insisted on teaching morals. I’m most likely voting for Keyes. MAYBE and I mean a BIG maybe McCain. But Obama? No way! I’m still praying Hillary will pull it off some how. At least there is “some” hope in her-not much but some.

It’s derogatory tone qualifies it for dismissal but there are more reasons. What does this person by “a large chunk of GenXers” anyway? I mean, has he/she take a poll or something? No on called me. That’s all I know. Then awkwardly transitioning from mocking Obama supporters, calling them stupid basically, to making some half-assed statement about his/her parents teaching him morals, whatever that is supposed to mean. And finally, sinking himself/herself for good by announcing support for Keyes, and praying that Hilary will still pull it off. The person who commented to this comment directly hit it right on the head:

Who typed this for you?

Submitted by bettysdad on Thu, 05/29/2008 – 3:17am.

Anyone that is considering voting for Alan Keyes is not a serious political person to start with, so your comments about Obama have as much validity as McCain’s.

Still, it wasn’t nearly as annoying as the Boomer commenter who wanted to be sure we GenXer’s know that she’s down with us.

You’re painting the Boomers with an awfully broad brush…

Submitted by phatkhat on Thu, 05/29/2008 – 12:47am.

There are plenty of Boomers who haven’t lost their 60′s roots, and who are totally into computers and other technology. I’m retired, living a voluntarily simplified life, have no credit cards, and spend a LOT of time involved in political/environmental activism. I am much like your description of a Gen Xer, in fact.

Every generation has people who run the gamut from right to left wing and everything between. Every generation has people who are activists, and others who are pretty inert. I do think that the increasing dependence on technology for social interaction has changed us all, and not always for the better. Watching PBS’ series on the presidents brought it to mind – we don’t much do crowds anymore, like the ticker-tape parades, etc. in the 40s. Diversity is good, but the fragmentation of society is maybe not so good.

Try not to pigeonhole people so much. Some of us old farts are pretty savvy! ;>) Oh, and just so’s you know, I’m an older woman, a feminist, and an Obama supporter. I’m also an avid gamer, do webpage design/graphic design, and am a former professional film photographer who loves digital and Photoshop. I do admit to not owning an iPod, but I am satisfied with XM. I don’t download ringtones, either, LOL.

Honey (yeah, I used the term on purpose to offend Boomer, Feminist sensibilities; what you gonna do about it, huh? Please don’t hit me!) if “haven’t lost your 60s roots…and are retired” then you are about as far from being a GenXer as can be imagined. GenX doesn’t do 60s revolutions; we aren’t trying to change the world for the whole world to see, we’re working quietly on the fringes and sometimes, but not always, spurring change. We do, but don’t blow our horn about it.

This whole comment smacks of an aging Boomer in denial of the fact they she is fast approaching irrelevancy.

Oakland County, Michigan’s role in Prez Election

Time magazine is running an article about the significance of Michigan in the upcoming Presidential Election, particularly Oakland County, where I happen to live.

It’s funny. Back when I lived in Warren, in Macomb County, and attended Macomb Community College, Macomb county was the bellwether county. Back then, in the 80s, the saying was something like this: as goes Macomb County so goes Michigan and as goes Michigan so goes the country. Now. I don’t know about that. But I do recall the 88 election, which I covered for the MCC newspaper, when they still had one, and all the candidates hit Macomb  hard. I covered press conferences for Dukakis, Bush and Regan. It was pretty cool.

So now the focus is on Oakland County, my new home. It’s almost as if the Presidential Elections are following me. Well, accept for those lost years when I lived in Kalamazoo.

Anyhoo… Oakland County has been skewing increasingly Democratic in the past several elections. And no Republican Pres. candidate has won the state of Michigan since Reagan. However, the article points on some other issues at play here. McCain was hugely popular in Michigan back in 2000. And Michigan has got two pretty unpopular Dem leaders in Gov. Granholm, whos aproval rating is something like 20%. Yikes! And I thought Bush’s numbers were low. And of course Kwame “The Hip Hop Mayor” Killpatrick. That knuckled head.

Even so Obama has a slight edge in the polls, but not nearly enough. And some people seem to think that McCain selecting Romney will give him a boost here, especially in Oakland County where Romney grew up.

The only thing I can add personally is that my wife and I are currently Obama supporters.  But then we know more than a few who are not likely to vote for Obama. Whether they vote for McCain is a different story. And, I’ve seen at least two Obama for Prez signs. No McCain signs yet. Although I have seen a few McCain bumper stickers. These will no doubt increase as we get closer to November. Also, I there is one Romney/Devos sign on the lawn of the house that I pass every day when I got to pick up  my daugher from day camp. It is a homemade sign. And a lone Ron Paul sign. For what any of that is worth.

Cracker assassins rising!

CNN reports that a man in Florida is being held for threatening to kill Barack Obama if he is elected President.

No doubt this is the first (as far as I know anyway) of what will be many such nut cases.

Well, it was only a matter of time, wasn’t it.

And lest you think my use of the term cracker is out of line, just check out the mug shot of Mr. Raymond Hunter Geisel, a cracker killer name if I ever heard one. Why are these dudes alway referred to by all three names anyway? Like John Norman Collins, John Wayne Gacey, Mark David Chapman. Is that like part of the profile or something? Can you not be considered a twisted killer if you don’t happen to have a middle name? How many people do not have a middle name, anyway? I’m not sure I’ve ever met anyone who doesn’t? I’m just curious? Of course, there is  Jeffery Dahmer — anyone know his middles name? And Charles Manson, so I suppose it isn’t a hard and fast rule. Still.

Anyhoo… Mr. Raymond Hunter Geisel, please stand up, please stand, please stand up…

But to be fair to Mr. Geisel, he also reportedly claimed to want to put a bullet in the head of now President Bush. So he’s an equaly opportunity assassin, I guess.

In any case, the guys is definitely whack, telling agents that ”if he wanted to kill Senator Obama he would simply shoot him with a sniper rifle.”

Yikes! Smooth move Ex-Lax!

Of course, later he claimed it was all just a joke.

Ha ha! Very funny mother fucker!

 

 

Jon Voight is an idiot

Jon Voight’s recent op-ed piece in The Washing Times is pretty pathetic. It isn’t just that it is ignorant, reactionary bullshit, which it is of course. It is simply poorly written. I mean, who edited this thing? Seriously. Did he pay to have it pubbed as is.

Right from the first sentence it is clumsy:

We, as parents, are well aware of the importance of our teachers who teach and program our children.

Program our children? Yikes! Talk about paranoid.

The irony is that The Washing Times is a conservative propaganda rag that was established by the founder of the Unification Church, Sun Myung Moon. Yeah. That’s right — the fucking Moonies! Moon believes that he is second coming of Christ and knows a thing or two about programming young people, I’m sure.

But back to Voight’s bullshit. His very next sentences reads:

We also know how important it is for our children to play with good-thinking children growing up.

Is it just me or does that sound elitist if not racist? If not then what does he mean by “good-thinking children?”

Then Voight states:

Sen. Barack Obama has grown up with the teaching of very angry, militant white and black people: the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers and Rev. Michael Pfleger. We cannot say we are not affected by teachers who are militant and angry. We know too well that we become like them, and Mr. Obama will run this country in their mindset.

Who is this “we” that he speaks of? How do “We know too well that we become like them?” Of course, he offers not proof, no example, not even a fucking anecdote. What is Mr. Voight really taking about anyway? One might suspect that there is something roiling just beneath the surface here. But what? What could it be?

The rambling article continues:

The Democratic Party, in its quest for power, has managed a propaganda campaign with subliminal messages, creating a God-like figure in a man who falls short in every way. It seems to me that if Mr. Obama wins the presidential election, then Messrs. Farrakhan, Wright, Ayers and Pfleger will gain power for their need to demoralize this country and help create a socialist America.

Oh, please! What a fucking drama queen. Sounds like he’s been having chats with Dick Cheney down in the VP’s underground lair, sitting around a smoking cauldron, sipping goats blood or some shit like that.

Of course, Voight knows the score. It is because young people are so weak-minded that they have decided to support Obama. They are all so easily duped. As was he in his youth.

The Democrats have targeted young people, knowing how easy it is to bring forth whatever is needed to program their minds. I know this process well. I was caught up in the hysteria during the Vietnam era, which was brought about through Marxist propaganda underlying the so-called peace movement. The radicals of that era were successful in giving the communists power to bring forth the killing fields and slaughter 2.5 million people in Cambodia and South Vietnam. Did they stop the war, or did they bring the war to those innocent people? In the end, they turned their backs on all the horror and suffering they helped create and walked away.

Hmm. What do you suppose the process is anyway? Doesn’t Mr. Voight feel an obligation to detail it for the public, so that we might be better informed to guard our young against it. Apparently not.

Of course, I wouldn’t argue that their was plenty of hysteria during the Vietnam era. But if everyone was so hysterical how did they manage to successfully give the communists power? OMG was it all just a diversion? All the protests and marches and blah blah blah just a ploy to distract the publics’ attention so that the Marxist propaganda machine could bring forth the killing fields. Damn you Jane Fonda! Trickery is thy name, wench!

And then the poor writing just continues:

Those same leaders who were in the streets in the ’60s are very powerful today in their work to bring down the Iraq war and to attack our president, and they have found their way into our schools. William Ayers is a good example of that.

I used to teach Freshman comp and that first sentence is so fucked up that if I read it in a student essay I’d simply mark it and instruct the student to re-write it for clarity sake, preferably while not high this time around. And while the second sentence is a nice declarative one, it needs supporting information otherwise it pointless.

Anyhoo… the remainder of the piece is more of the same crap. It is pretty easy to understand why IMDB lists only two writing credits for Mr. Voight, on two forgotten films not surprisingly. And still, on each one of those projects Voight wasn’t the only writer, which leads one to speculate that his name as screenwriter is probably more of a vanity listing then anything else.

I’m sure I’m not the only one to note that the publication of this piece of moronic tripe comes coincidentally close on the heels of the birth of Angelina Jolie’s and Brad Pitt’s babies. Jolie is Voight’s daughter and she does not speak to him, from what I understand. Not to mention Jolie and Pitt are a power couple in Hollywood while Voight is a working actor on the verge of verge of being a has been. Could this be a psychotically vain attempt to not only gain some attention but to place himself in the public eye at the same time that said eyes if so obsessively focused on his estranged daughter and now estranged grandchildren? If so, the dude is losing it. And we should all be afraid, very afraid. Eeep!

Of course, they hypocrisy of the whole thing is that Republicans and Conservatives are, oh, so willing to bark at Hollywood types to shut the fuck up when what is being said runs counter to their agenda, but when some once-was-slightly famous shlub wants to mouth off on their behalf they got no problem providing a platform, even for such a pathetic attempts at political commentary.

Hey, Voight! Nice move. If your daughter wasn’t already embarrassed by you, she certainly has reason to be now.