Kate at One More Thing is doing a weekly carnival of sorts, choosing a topic for other bloggers to write about.  This week’s topic is “Politics”.

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”  Groucho Marx

I resent every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every year of my life that involves reading about, hearing about, thinking about and worrying about politics.

I can’t stand world politics, national politics, state politics, county politics, city politics, school politics, work politics, playground politics, family politics nor relationship politics.


I would be an irresponsible human to put my head in the sand.  So I read, listen, think and worry about world politics, national politics, state politics, county politics, city politics, school politics, work politics, playground politics, family politics and relationship politics in varying degrees.

Politics are like hemorrhoids.  They’re there.  Nothing I can do about that.  I could get it removed, but the doctor says it would likely grow back and be even more of a nuisance than before.   So,  I avoid it as much as possible.  But every once in awhile they get inflamed and I have to deal with them – the biggest possible pain in my ass.


On the Firing of Carrie Prejean. And World Peace.

Thee California Miss USA pageant has officially fired Carrie Prejean and appointed her runner-up to take over as Miss California for the remainder of her reign.  The official reason for the dismissal is failure to meet contractual obligations.  Not the furor resulting from her controversial answer to Perez Hilton’s gay marriage question during the Miss USA telecast.

I have several thoughts on this subject.

1.  Carrie Prejean was asked her views on same-sex marriage as part of the Miss USA competition.  An unfair and inappropriate competition question.  As were several of the other questions.  Unless you understand that the only appropriate way to respond to these questions is to bring out your best Stepford-wife smile and give the vaguest, simpiest, most politically correct response – and understand that your real views don’t matter.  At all.  World peace!

2.  Carrie Prejean needs to understand that adding, “no offense to anyone…” to her comments does not magically make them inoffensive to those that are, um, offended.  It’s tap-tap-no-erasies.    “I think all Jews should be exterminated because that’s the way I was raised…no offense to anyone!”  Get it now, Carrie?  World Peace!

3.  There is not a doubt in my mind that Carrie Prejean did not fulfill every single of of her contractual obligations.  There’s  also not a doubt in my mind that she really got fired for her comments, her adherence to those comments, and her new association with organizations that feel the same.  Pageant officials were gunning for her, period.  World Peace!

4.  The head of the California Miss USA pageant might get  more people to believe that the contractual obligations WERE the real reason for her ousting if he didn’t – in the same interview – derisively point out that Carrie’s attorney is also the attorney for a group that works to prevent the passage of laws allowing gay marriage.  Um, so what?  We know how she feels on the subject.  Why should she not have an attorney with similar beliefs?  Would Perez Hilton hire an attorney who was against gay marriage?  And while we’re on the subject…

5.  Perez Hilton is an asshat.  You don’t agree with Carrie?  Fine.  Don’t call her the C word.  Don’t make fun of her (and millions of others’) belief in G-d.   I could write pages on his asshatity, but he’s just not worth my time.

6.  Tami Farrell, the pageant 1st runner-up who takes over as Miss California, cannot keep from smiling.  She’s been rubbing her hands together and licking her chops for weeks.   Better mind her p’s and q’s, that one.  World Peace!

Politically correct“.  Dangerous words, those.   People are starting to be afraid to speak their minds in fear of retribution – political, financial, social.  Methinks that’s happened a time or twelve in the history of the world.  Anyone remember The Crusades?  The Inquisition?  The Holocaust?  Tiananman Square?

I think we need to proceed with caution.  And lots of it.

World Peace!

State Farm and the State of Florida Play Poker, Insureds Are the Biggest Losers

It’s been a very large pissing contest, and now it may be over.  Where did the piss wind up?  In the eyes of State Farm’s insureds.

State Farm officials have been playing poker with Florida’s Insurance Commissioner for years as they tried to get unconscionable rate increases approved.  The State told The Farm to go suck a hose.  State Farm has now gone all in, announcing today they are pulling out of the Florida homeowner’s insurance market and will be canceling some 1.5 million policies.   And Florida has called their bluff, saying, “Florida already has new companies who are eagerly looking to grow their businesses and will welcome the opportunity to add more customers.”

Sure, Florida has new companies.  Florida has become  so desperate to attract any new insurer to write business in the state they are accepting pitifully underfunded companies with unproven track records.

I’ve been happy with my State Farm policy.  They stood by most of their policyholders after Hurricane Andrew changed the South Florida and Insurance landscapes in August of 1992.  While  Allstate and Prudential did mass cancellations after Andrew, State Farm kept their current policyholders and mostly just stopped writing new business. I was proud to be able to reassure people that their policies were safe.

State Farm insureds enjoy a much better homeowners policy than the standard ISO policy most of these start-up companies offer.   More endorsements are available (things like business property, backup of sewers and drains coverage, increased jewelry and furs, gun coverage, incidental office, etc.), more personal property coverage is available, and our agents have more influence in the underwriting and claims process.

Now they are setting us adrift.  But gee, I’m so glad to know they’re going to be happy to keep my auto, life and other policies.  Thanks, guys!

State Farm or the State could back down and fold their hand, but we’ll still end up losing.  No matter what happens it’s bad news for State Farm insureds.   And for several of  my friends, who are sure to lose their jobs as their employer/agents lose 40- 60% of their income.

Come my renewal I’ll probably need to get a different policy with less coverage and a higher price tag.  I’m just disgusted.

His Presidency’s First Win

Being a white Jewish girl raised in an uber-liberal household, I’ve grown up to become a  surprisingly more moderate woman than one would think.

I’ve never had Obamamania.  I thought long and hard before choosing the candidate who would get my vote.  I felt there was good news and bad news about both candidates and their philosophies.   I rued the injustice of a two-party system and a media that bars all but the most flush candidates the opportunity to debate and garner coverage.  In the end I made the choice I felt would be best for our country, and that’s that.   No matter who won I would not  be jumping for joy.  There are too many challenges awaiting us, too many unknowns.   We all know who won the election, but we have yet to see if we, my fellow Americans, wind up as winners.

Obama finds himself in an interesting position.  Every incoming  President is faced with the task of uniting the country, but it’s never been more important to do so.  The country is facing such dire threats right now that even the  staunchest conservatives I know are warily rooting for him to do well.  That is so very different from past elections.   and in my opinion this gives us a chance to get through these challenges and find a way to win.  I so very much hope we do.

So, for me today is a day of hope, but it is not a victory celebration.  Still, the little Jewish liberal girl inside me is thinking of those who marched on Selma, refused to sit in the back of the bus,  were inspired by the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  I’m thinking of the people who spoke up and risked their lives, and sometimes gave it.  My heart is heavy and my eyes are wet when I think of what this day must mean to them, and their children and grandchildren.  Knowing that when any American child talks about what they want to be when they grow up, and their parents tell them they can be anything they want to be they don’t just hope it or declare it; they mean it.

All of the rhetoric and entreaty and idealization is true.  It is possible.

And that, my friends, is the first win of Obama’s presidency.

The Lynching (in effigy) of Sarah Palin

I wanted to get my son a Halloween t-shirt this year. I wanted a cute one with some pumpkins, or some candy corn, or something equally sweet and benign. Instead all I found were skulls and bats and macabre scenes of death and gore that I just don’t want to see my four-year-old wearing (I also don’t understand why the commercials for Universal Studios Halloween Horror Nights are permitted to be shown early enough in the day for my Son to see them. They are scary, even to me. Have these people no sense?). Just…ick.

Go ahead, roll your eyes at me. I don’t mind. I don’t think the macabre is funny, and the scariest Haunted House I will enter is the one at Disney World. I just don’t think being scared is fun. There’s many other ways to get that same adrenaline rush that are fun.

So perhaps I am not the one to think that a mannequin dressed to look like Sarah Palin being hung in effigy is funny. I wouldn’t think it funny no matter who was depicted.

Chad Michael Morisette, who put up the display, says that the effigy would be out of bounds at any other time of year, but it’s within the spirit of Halloween.


I don’t think it’s ever an appropriate time of year to hang someone in effigy. And I don’t think there’s a person breathing who doesn’t understand that the reaction would be far stronger, swifter and outraged if it was a likeness of Obama hanging from that roof. Would the homeowners not be met with angry mobs demanding the display be removed, demanding the homeowner be charged with a hate crime?

Well, let’s see. Asinine college students at George Fox University hung a cardboard cutout of Obama from a tree on the abundantly Republican campus, and it was immediately removed and absolutely decried as a hate crime. “What happened on campus this week is disheartening to American politics,” said John Archibald, chairman of the College Republicans. “Regardless of your politics, this act of hate cannot be tolerated.” And that’s a Republican talking.

Does Mr. Morisette not understand that America’s history of lynching did not make any Greatest American Trends list? Did he think it was okay since it was a white woman and not a black man, or did it never occur to him that depicting a lynching might spark some outrage at all?? Did he think she was fair game because Saturday Night Live does skits poking fun at her twice each week? Did he think this was the same thing? Heck, I’m surprised he didn’t set up a diorama of a concentration camp with McCain walking to the chambers. That wouldn’t have been offensive because McCain isn’t Jewish, right?

Are these acts of hate? What if the students’ display had also been a politically motivated Halloween decoration? Does it matter that one is a protest against a policy the pranksters see as unfair and the other is “satire”?

When did violence become funny?

My view is clear. Hanging a likeness of a real person? Not funny. Even if they are a political figure. Even if you don’t like them. Even if you do like them. No matter their color, gender or sexual orientation. Oh, and a concentration camp diorama is off limits, too.

I just don’t understand why we feel the need to vilify those with whom we disagree. And to take a child’s holiday, one that many of us are using to escape the constant noise and mud-slinging of the election process, and turn it into a political statement (Psst! Republican Party! Please, please tell me this rumor I’m hearing about you putting political pamphlets in the kids’ treat bags isn’t true. Please!) is just maddening.

I’m all for Halloween pranks. I’m all for political statements. I’m all for pushing the envelope. I’m all for free speech. But with the right of free speech comes responsibility. This is a self-serving, tasteless, irresponsible display that may get you on the Today Show, Mr. Morrisette, and has certainly gotten you your fifteen minutes of fame. Congratulations.

I’d rather get mine in the pages of Good Housekeeping.

Ban Ki-moon, Have I Got a Speech For You!

Three and a half hours.

That’s how long I spent at our homeowners association meeting last night, between the meeting itself and the commentary afterwards.

My attendance at said meeting was precipitated by a knock on my door this past Saturday night whilst having the in-laws over for dinner. One of my neighbors wanted to warn us to move my in-laws car, which was parked on the street in front of our unit. Parking is not allowed on the streets, as they are very narrow. Unfortunately guest parking is very limited, and as long as people don’t make a habit of parking in the street it’s always been generally overlooked.

We are in the situation, however, where a new board is in power (the old president -a very effective president – had some medical problems and wanted to step down), and they are wanting to flex their mighty muscles to show residents and the past board that there is a new sheriff in town. Apparently this neighbor had just stopped a towing company from towing a car out of his own driveway. It’s a car they do not use and is properly covered with a car cover. It had the gall to get a flat tire, which is against the rules. No warning letter was sent, just the tow truck.

You just cannot do that.

The neighbor had to pay sixty dollars for the tow company to release his car (which is now going to have to be reimbursed by the board). According to this neighbor the tow driver told him they were 4 other vehicles to be towed from driveways, and he was also contracted to come back at midnight to tow any car on the street.

The next day another neighbor (one that was on the tow driver’s hit list) knocked on our door asking us sign a recall petition, which would attempt to dump 3 of the 4 members of the board. I’d not been to a board meeting for several months, and the neighbor filled me in on all the errors that the new board was making. She told me that the old president had agreed to get back on the board, another ex-member wanted to also, and the wife of the neighbor whose car was nearly towed (never a member) would be President. A coup, as it were.

Husband, a fierce defender of individual rights, thought everyone on the new board should be drawn and quartered. He wanted to sign so badly his body was nearly convulsing. In a cruel twist of fate it turns out that I am the only one on the deed (I bought when I was single), so I am the one to sign, or not.

And I chose not. Much to Husband’s chagrin.

I didn’t sign because the emotions were so high, and I didn’t think I could completely trust the information I’d been given. I also think that a new board is going to make mistakes, and that doesn’t mean you burn them at the stake. Hopefully they are coachable, and can learn from their errors (sorry, it’s a wonderfully frugal thought, but a board member should not be cutting down trees himself, as there are huge liability issues!). And I wanted to go to a meeting to get my own take on it. I already knew I wanted the old president back on the board because of her expertise, but I wasn’t sure that everyone on the new board needed to go. And I just didn’t think there had to be a war to make things better.

And that’s basically what I told the old president when she knocked on my door, petition in hand. I explained that tempers were so high that I thought it would accomplish much more if I walked into the meeting neutrally. And she ultimately agreed.

So the meeting started, and there were accusations and grievances and angry words and even one idiot who started throwing profanity. Things were deteriorating quickly, and I threw out a few, “Can we stop shouting, please?”s that ebbed things for a moment or two before things heated up again.

Finally I got up and spoke for about ten minutes about working together and how things aren’t always as they appear and how there’s always going to be “selective enforcement” of rules because no one can see every breaking rule all the time, and it’s always going to look selective to the ones who are caught. I reminded them there no one involved is evil, that what everyone wants is what’s best for the community. I talked about how tough times are and how tough they are going to be (what with 5% of our community in foreclosure), how we didn’t have to war with each other, etc, etc.

Really, I was quite brilliant.

The entire tone of the meeting shifted. The anger was still there, but now they were talking to each other instead of screaming. The prevailing defensiveness stopped. They were listening. Things were accomplished.

Damn, I’m good.

After the meeting I was asked several times by people on both sides to be on the board. Thanks, but I’d rather pour acid in my eye. Fifteen years as an insurance agent dealing with thirty-five different condo boards on a daily basis cured me of any desire to ever serve in that capacity. Ev-er. Ever.

So, there will still be a recall meeting. And grievances will still be aired. And I do hope the new president steps down, because you cannot simply answer “I don’t know,” and “”Because I felt like it,” to nearly every question presented to you. The rest of the new board seems fine, they just need the assistance of someone experienced to help them.

My work here is not done. Ban Ki-moon and I know and understand that. Tomorrow is another day. Diplomacy is king.

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics: Get Your Facts Straight Edition

Last night was the greatly anticipated debate between Vice Presidential candidates Palin and Biden. The entire world was either waiting for or fearing Palin falling flat on her political face, repeating her dismal performances in the recent interviews conducted by the see-if-we-can-make-her-look-stupid-then-revel-when-we-do media. And Joe Biden was expected to put us all into a catatonic stupor as he talked, and talked, and talked and talked.

I did watch the debates last night, but I can’t claim to have paid rapt attention. I was playing Texas Hold ’em poker at the same time. Sue me.

There was so much hoopla surrounding a debate that really doesn’t matter all that much, and lots of people were disappointed. Why?

Both candidates did well.

Here’s what I came away with:

Sarah Palin is a hell of a public speaker. She’s eloquent, personable, and she has a way of connecting with people that makes you feel like she’s speaking directly, and only, to you.

Sarah Palin did not fall flat on her face. She shined.

Joe Biden did not induce catatonia. He showed his intelligence and experience, as usual. But he also showed warmth, vulnerability (showing that his wounds are still fresh when speaking of his first wife and daughter, killed in a long ago accident, and his seriously injured but surviving sons), respect and humor.

I do not like in the least little bit Sarah Palin’s alignment with Dick Cheney’s contention that the Vice President has more powers than any reasonable person’s interpretation of our Constitution would suggest. No, ma’am.

I hate that both Biden and Palin told incomplete truths about several of their contentions. If you are like me you know that what you’re hearing isn’t the complete truth. That what you’re hearing is spin, and that if you only had the time or the inclination you could find out what the real truth is.

Well, it’s not that hard to find out. Check out this link for some fact checking results, and while you’re at it bookmark the site to help you wade through the spin and rhetoric.

And, on a separate but kind of related note, I do not like anyone’s contention that people who are caught in the sub-prime mess should get to renegotiate their principal. I have no issue with them getting a better interest rate, but their principal should not be forgiven, even if they have to give half of the profits from some later sale of their house back to the government. That is totally unfair to all of the rest of the people whose home values have plummeted – and to the institutions who lent them the money. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong! (Okay, that wasn’t really debated, but it was part of the bailout that really pisses me off.)

I came away from last night’s debate knowing both candidates better. I’m still officially undecided, but I’m leaning one way pretty heavily at this point, and the night’s debate didn’t change that.

I lost all my virtual chips playing poker last night, but I’m not worried. In real life I’d never be so impulsive as to go all in on a pair of 2s when there’s a flush draw on the board. I’m just not that much of a gambler. I promise to be more careful than that when my money is really on the table – and on November 4th.


Read the rest of this series:

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics – Sarah Palin Edition

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics – Hypocrisy Edition

My Own Cynical Take on Politics: Going to the United Nations Does Not Foreign Policy Experience Make

Why a Bailout May Not Be In Our Best Interest

I am nervous.

I am not an alarmist, a conspiracy theorist, a pessimist or a nut.  I am a political moderate, I’m annoyingly fair, and my head sits squarely on my shoulders.

Still, I’m worried about our economy, our government, our country, and so are many like me.

I worried that we were moving too swiftly with this bailout plan, but I don’t know enough about economics to question why it isn’t a good idea. I know I didn’t want the yahoos who created this mess rewarded, but at the same time I couldn’t see what else could be done to stop the bleeding. Lots of people I spoke to were equally confused.

Husband, an avowed Libertarian-ish kind of guy, forwarded to me a CNN article written by a Libertarian economist that gives his reasons why the bailout is a bad idea. Jeffrey A. Miron is senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University. A Libertarian, he was one of 166 academic economists who signed a letter to congressional leaders last week opposing the government bailout plan.

Did you hear about that? I didn’t.

At any rate, here I am reprinting the article. I hope CNN will allow me to keep it here, but if they ask I’ll take it down and just link it. I applaud CNN for allowing a point of view different than what I’ve seen elsewhere.

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) Congress has balked at the Bush administration’s proposed $700 billion bailout of Wall Street. Under this plan, the Treasury would have bought the “troubled assets” of financial institutions in an attempt to avoid economic meltdown.

This bailout was a terrible idea. Here’s why.

The current mess would never have occurred in the absence of ill-conceived federal policies. The federal government chartered Fannie Mae in 1938 and Freddie Mac in 1970; these two mortgage lending institutions are at the center of the crisis. The government implicitly promised these institutions that it would make good on their debts, so Fannie and Freddie took on huge amounts of excessive risk.

Worse, beginning in 1977 and even more in the 1990s and the early part of this century, Congress pushed mortgage lenders and Fannie/Freddie to expand subprime lending. The industry was happy to oblige, given the implicit promise of federal backing, and subprime lending soared.

This subprime lending was more than a minor relaxation of existing credit guidelines. This lending was a wholesale abandonment of reasonable lending practices in which borrowers with poor credit characteristics got mortgages they were ill-equipped to handle.

Once housing prices declined and economic conditions worsened, defaults and delinquencies soared, leaving the industry holding large amounts of severely depreciated mortgage assets.

The fact that government bears such a huge responsibility for the current mess means any response should eliminate the conditions that created this situation in the first place, not attempt to fix bad government with more government.

The obvious alternative to a bailout is letting troubled financial institutions declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy means that shareholders typically get wiped out and the creditors own the company.

Bankruptcy does not mean the company disappears; it is just owned by someone new (as has occurred with several airlines). Bankruptcy punishes those who took excessive risks while preserving those aspects of a businesses that remain profitable.

In contrast, a bailout transfers enormous wealth from taxpayers to those who knowingly engaged in risky subprime lending. Thus, the bailout encourages companies to take large, imprudent risks and count on getting bailed out by government. This “moral hazard” generates enormous distortions in an economy’s allocation of its financial resources.

Thoughtful advocates of the bailout might concede this perspective, but they argue that a bailout is necessary to prevent economic collapse. According to this view, lenders are not making loans, even for worthy projects, because they cannot get capital. This view has a grain of truth; if the bailout does not occur, more bankruptcies are possible and credit conditions may worsen for a time.

Talk of Armageddon, however, is ridiculous scare-mongering. If financial institutions cannot make productive loans, a profit opportunity exists for someone else. This might not happen instantly, but it will happen.

Further, the current credit freeze is likely due to Wall Street’s hope of a bailout; bankers will not sell their lousy assets for 20 cents on the dollar if the government might pay 30, 50, or 80 cents.

The costs of the bailout, moreover, are almost certainly being understated. The administration’s claim is that many mortgage assets are merely illiquid, not truly worthless, implying taxpayers will recoup much of their $700 billion.

If these assets are worth something, however, private parties should want to buy them, and they would do so if the owners would accept fair market value. Far more likely is that current owners have brushed under the rug how little their assets are worth.

The bailout has more problems. The final legislation will probably include numerous side conditions and special dealings that reward Washington lobbyists and their clients.

Anticipation of the bailout will engender strategic behavior by Wall Street institutions as they shuffle their assets and position their balance sheets to maximize their take. The bailout will open the door to further federal meddling in financial markets.

So what should the government do? Eliminate those policies that generated the current mess. This means, at a general level, abandoning the goal of home ownership independent of ability to pay. This means, in particular, getting rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that pressure banks into subprime lending.

The right view of the financial mess is that an enormous fraction of subprime lending should never have occurred in the first place. Someone has to pay for that. That someone should not be, and does not need to be, the U.S. taxpayer.

A lot of that makes sense to me. I’m still not sure how I feel about this, and I sure as heck don’t know the right thing to do. What is truly scary to me is that people whose opinion I trust are just as confused.

Most Americans don’t truly know hardship. We don’t know what it’s like to have no food or water, no gas to heat our homes. Some of us that have lived in the aftermath of storms have a taste of what so many in the world consider normal life, but it’s different for us because we always knew there was an end in sight.

We’re scrappy, but we’re also fat and happy, living in an illusion of our own making. I hope we never have to face truly bad times, and I hope the leaders we’ve elected can put aside politics and do what is truly in the best interest of out country.

I hope, but I’m not confident.

My Own Cynical Take on Politics: Going to the United Nations Does Not Foreign Policy Experience Make

I am a staunch No Party Affiliation registered voter that grew up in a very liberal Jewish household. I am on the mailing list for both Obama and McCain’s campaigns. The spin is just incredible. This article is part of an occasional series on this year’s Presidential Politics.

Each morning I’ve been watching the Today Show, and my ears bleed as I hear the their obligatory updates on what the candidates are doing that day. Here are some of my impressions:

1. Apparently there’s big controversy over Obama allowing Babs to throw a big shindig for him and raise a brazilian dollars. The Repub rhetoricians say that Obama should not raise that kind of huge money on the eve of Lehman Brothers, AIG and a 20% loss of value in the stock market.

As if John McCain hasn’t raised a brazilian dollars, too. And just because the financial world has uncontrollable diarrhea doesn’t mean that fundraising stops – for either side. And anyone who even tries to use that to discredit the other side is just a political hack, jealous that Babs isn’t raising money for their side.


2. They interviewed John McCain about the state of the market and his contention that the foundations of the economy were fine, when anyone who is not dead, or not Paris Hilton, knows it is not. John just did not answer the questions asked. With every question he answered that American workers were good. American workers were great. He loooooooooooooves AMERICAN WORKERS. AMERICAN WORKERS can do no wrong! It was so very painfully obvious that someone said to him, “Hey, John. You have totally screwed yourself with the people whose vote you need to get – the AMERICAN WORKERS. Make sure you get across the message that things are tough for AMERICAN WORKERS, and that you’re the one who can make it all better.”

Pssssst. Hey John! He didn’t mean for you to infuse that into EVERY FRICKIN SENTENCE.

Dadgum, I hate when you can see the puppeteer’s strings.


3. They mention that Sarah Palin has rejoined McCain on his campaign stops, and that she’ll be visiting the UN to meet with some world leaders in “an attempt to bolster her foreign affairs experience”, or something that means exactly that.

Wow! I didn’t know that going to the UN could give foreign affairs experience! I wonder how much experience I can put on my resume. After all, I toured the UN in 5th grade, and I lived three short blocks from the UN when I lived in NYC!!!!

Also, I didn’t realize that simply meeting dignitaries counts as experience for Sarah Palin and qualifies her to be on the dignitaries’ level! I’ve met Jon Bon Jovi (he even kissed my cheek when his band played my 8th grade St. Valentine’s Day Dance – go ahead, be jealous), so I guess that makes me a terrific singer with great hair.

Anyone who has heard me sing will tell you that just ain’t so. I couldn’t carry a tune in a suitcase.

But I do have great hair.


Read the rest of this series:

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics – Sarah Palin Edition

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics – Hypocrisy Edition

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics: Get Your Facts Straight Edition

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics – Hypocrisy Edition

Let me preface this by saying that I’m sure, sure this type of hypocrisy goes on with liberal windbags rhetoricians, too.

But this is why I want to have Jon Stewart’s children.

Okay, not really. But I’d love to have him over for dinner. I’d even serve gefilte fish.

Vodpod videos no longer available.


Read the rest of this series:

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics – Sarah Palin Edition

My Own Cynical Take on Politics: Going to the United Nations Does Not Foreign Policy Experience Make

My Own Cynical Take on Presidential Politics: Get Your Facts Straight Edition

%d bloggers like this: