Wednesday, November 5, 2008

I Love It When I'm Right

I predicted a landslide and tonight I read the headline in CNN "World Cheers Obama Landslide." I'm enjoying watching and listening to the different reactions.

On Weer'd Beard's site I read a wonderful post which should be a lesson to all those who did not vote for Obama. This post was as gracious as McCain's speech last night.

Now that the election is over I can only hope for the best. I knew this day might come so I've been thinking about this post for a little while. So here are Weer'ds Ground Rules for President Obama.

Precedent-Elect Obama has earned his title, and shall wear here, and hopefully everywhere. There will be no-more "Senator Obama" or "Mr. Obama", on January 20th he will officially be President Obama, until then it shall be "President-Elect Obama", and I might just shorten it for brevity.

Right on, Weer'd. Let's hope for the best.

I came across this story about an Obama supporter who got carried away with himself and then carried away by the police.

A Burlington man was so happy at the news that Barack Obama will be the next president that he fired a gun inside his home some 18 times, sending a hail of bullets into neighboring homes, according to the Burlington Police Department.

James G. Dewalt, 34, faces three counts of reckless endangerment in connection with the Tuesday night shooting.


There are lots of interesting angles on this one. I'll leave them to the readers to sort out.

15 comments:

  1. Honestly, even tho all the predictions said it would be like it was, i didnt beleive it until i saw it..

    ReplyDelete
  2. Glad you enjoyed the post. It's 8 years in the making, glad it meant as much to you as it did for me.

    I am saddened that you felt the need to juxtapose it with that bizzare "man bites dog" story.

    I fail to see how its of any relevance except in cheapening your own feelings of an Obama victory, and my own words.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What grabs me about that story is that he fired 18 times *inside* his own home.

    I think it shows that he's so confident in Obama's ability to reign in the current financial crisis that he's counting on being able to secure a home equity loan against his mortgage to repair all the damage--and maybe upgrade a few rooms while he's at it. :)

    I interpreted Mike's inclusion of the story more as an olive branch that there are idiots on both sides of the aisle. After all, all those anti-gay marriage and gay adoption ballot initiatives didn't pass solely based on Republican votes.

    I was touched by McCain's gracious concession speech and amused by the chilly pseudo-hug he gave Palin. Those two will never, ever, ever talk to e/o again.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike,

    Say you are picked to be on Obama's transition team as an adviser.

    What policies would you have him focus on during the magically first 100 days?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's a fabulous day in history...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Vicki, Thanks for understanding my intentions in the post.

    Bob, I hope to see Obama live up to his promises. The three main ones as I heard them were 1. Out of Iraq, 2. Health care for everyone, 3. Tax breaks for most (95% was it?). Now allowing for some unavoidable hyperbole during the campaign, which I would allow for any politician, even expect, I'll be happy to see even partial success in these three areas.

    Since we've got a new administration and I'm an advisor, I need to think about the gun control situation. I know it's of great importance to so many of you, I'll try to be fair.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mike:
    #1 we can save for another day (and actually the state of Iraq, I don't see an immidiate withdrawal to be at all a problem)

    But how can 2 & 3 Co-Exist?

    That goes double for the fact that nearly 50% of Americans pay NO federal taxes at all (They may have a decution on their paycheck, but it all comes back in their refund check)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mike,

    Since you mentioned looking at gun control, I'll raise the point.

    I hear the phrase "reasonable restrictions"
    (on something that 'shall not be infringed- which makes me wonder if reading comprehension shouldn't be a priority)often.

    So, how can reasonable restrictions prevent criminals from getting firearms but not law abiding folks.

    In the news this morning in Dallas, a 75 year old man was beaten with a hammer for his social security check. Two weeks earlier an 81 year old man was robbed. Seeing how Delaware held up the purchase of a firearm because the buyer was 81 years old and female; you can see why I question "reasonable restrictions".

    ReplyDelete
  9. Just to add to Bob's points. And to painfully dry in my observation. How is it possible "to think about the gun control situation." without actually thinking about it.

    Again comes the gauntlet of my accusation of you being a troll on this issue.

    I'm still here because I suspect could be wrong...dispite all the evedence gathered.

    Can you look at the issue objectivly, rather than simply further replicate your own bias with hand-picked news stories and avoidance of statistics and tough questions?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Listen Weer'd, why don't you lighten up with the accusations, man? Maybe you're the one who's biased, did you ever consider that? Maybe you're the one who cannot "look at the issue objectivly, rather than simply further replicate your own bias."

    Actually, since I'm not the one who's passionate about this subject like you are, I'm more likely to be objective. Passion, which is not necessarily a bad thing, can easily make a person biased and close-minded, wouldn't you say?

    In all these posts and comments I have not called you close-minded, biased, at least I don't think I have, but you've become a broken record lately accusing me. So, why don't you knock it off and let's continue the dialogue. Or is your new position, unless I agree with you I'm biased and unable to be open-minded?

    That doesn't sound fair. I'm not demanding it of you.

    And besides, I thought I was the one asking tough questions.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "why don't you knock it off and let's continue the dialogue. Or is your new position, unless I agree with you I'm biased and unable to be open-minded?"

    #1 OK let's have a dialog. We have some valid points that you avoid. Really you post similar snipes, then essentially walk away from the dialogue, occasionally hand-picking the issues you'd like to address.

    If you do admit or prove you are closed minded, I don't see a point in wasting my time with you.

    The fact that I'm still here is because I don't believe that while you appear to be taking a comfortable approach on the issue, that you aren't beyond taking some bigger steps on the issue.

    But if you prove that (albeit thin) theory wrong you'll leave me more time to read other blogs.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Mike,

    Sorry but I fully understand where Weer'd is coming from and agree with him.

    You say So, why don't you knock it off and let's continue the dialogue but we are trying to do that. It's very difficult to have a dialog when one side ignores questions, refuses to discuss points, disregards information posted.

    You've done all those things, go back and look at the number of posts that end with a question to you about your beliefs, a response to you that is just left dangling.

    It's you blog, you can do as you want but don't say that we aren't trying to continue the dialog.
    I can appreciate that you've kept some what of an open mind. I do see some changes in at least how you are phrasing things. It's disconcerting though to see the same "easy availability of guns" meme pop up over and over again.

    I appreciate you keeping an open blog, not censoring or deleting comments.

    You challenge Weer'd to look at his own bias (we all have our bias, that should be obvious). Can you look at your own bias and admit where you are being closed minded? (hint, how many times has "easy availability" been mentioned,etc)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Been mentioned...and openly refuted with both numbers and logic

    Only to be ignored and repeated again.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Bob and Weer'd, I promise to try to answer the questions. You know, sometimes I just don't have an answer; I never pretended to have them all. Other times I may have just been too busy to get back to some questions that we were already pursuing on another thread. I'm really not picking and choosing in an attempt to manipulate.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I appreciate your Redoubled efforts, Mike. Hopefully we'll bridge this gap of frustration and *hopefully* misunderstanding, by continuing the dialogue.

    ReplyDelete