ndmckinney|net

A soon-to-be internet sensation: John Cleese comments on the absurity of Sarah Palin running for VP of the United States.

[From John Cleese on Sarah Palin: "Monty Python Could Have Written This." - Boing Boing]

A painfully funny commentary about McCain supporters.

I love that Sarah Palin not only cannot backup her foreign policy experience with Russia. It shows a level of evasiveness we haven’t seen in politics in a long, long time. Commentators have tried to call her out on this, late-night humorists have mocked her. Now, she has gained a new enemy: Russia.

Turns out, the Russians aren’t buying this claim, either. They are attacking not only this claim, but her entire qualifications to serve in office. One outlet has even dubbed her “Mrs. Nobody Know-it-All”.

If she thinks the NY Times hates her, wait until she feels the wrath of media outlets who could care less about winning her approval. She’s losing credibility at home; abroad, it seems, it’s already gone.

[From SAIS Next Europe: PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com]

Hillary Clinton today stated that “When it comes to finishing a fight, Rocky and I have a lot in common. I never quit.”

I would like to point out that in the movie Rocky, he lost.

[From BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Clinton will fight 'like Rocky']

Congratulations to Barack Obama for obliterating Hillary Clinton in Maryland, Virginia, and the District. Now that you’ve won the delegates in the District (90% registered democrats), we won’t be seeing you again until January 20, 2009.

I know it seems like I’m really against Hillary Clinton for President, and maybe I am. But in reality, the rationale for voting for Clinton isn’t much more than “well, she’s a woman.”

Take, for example, this page from the BBC. The Beeb posted photos and testimonials from Baltimore voters. The woman in this photo pretty much encapsulates why I hate Clinton supporters:

[Obama]‘s more of a visionary but it’d be very exciting to have a woman in the White House.

If I understand her point of view, she’s voting for Clinton not because she think’s Hillary’s the best candidate, but because she thinks a woman would be “exciting”?

To be fair, motivations for voting for Obama aren’t always fair, either. Consider this post from the same BBC spread.

*sigh*

I’ve been going through the DC Voter Guide for the primary election on the 12th. In the booklet, each candidate has the high-school-student-government statement about “why I should be president”.

For comparison:

Barack Obama

At this defining moment, we need to unite this nation around a common purpose. That’s why I’m running for President.

I’m running to tell special interests that their days of setting the agenda are over. I’ll invest in jobs and affordable housing. I’ll forge bipartisan solutions, and pass universal health care. I’ll make world-class education affordable from birth through college. And I’ll end the Iraq war.

Over my two decades in public service, I brought people together to solve problems and make a difference in peoples’ lives. Let’s stop settling and reach for what we know is possible.

Hillary Clinton

Hilary Rodham Clinton, 60, graduated from Wellesley College in 1969 and Yale Law School in 1973. She was the First Lady of Arkansas from 1979 to 1992 and the First Lady of the United States from 1993 to 2001. She was elected twice, in 2000 and 2006, to the U.S. Senate to represent New York. She is a proud supporter of the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act and the No Taxation without Representation Act. She believes District residents should have the right to elect two Senators and a Representative whose political powers equal those of other Members of Congress.

That’s right, Hillary Clinton just copied and pasted from her resumé. I haven’t gone looking for similar statements in other states, but I image the template looks something like this:

Hillary Rodham Clinton:

[insert resumé material here]

[Reference Bill Clinton here]

[If not in south, Mention I live in New York]

[Insert pandering state issue #1 here]

[Insert pandering state issue #2 here (space permitting)]

Vote Obama, DC. He’s not running as ‘First Lady’.

Sometimes, the best way to take a look at yourself comes from outside. This is why I think it is important for everyone to read the foreign press, especially foreign-language press.

Le Monde has a section on their website on the US election. While the French are no experts on the US electoral process (neither are Americans, but that’s another topic of discussion), the articles they provide

In partucular, I would suggest reading the article regarding the Iowa primaries. It gives a fairly concise description of the process, the timeframe for the primaries. For the French, the primaries on 5 February are the end of the story (and to some extent, they’re right).

The interesting bits come from the difference in interpreting what is important. For example, the French seem to suggest that more weight should go to the 22 primary on 5 Feb. but acknowledge that “[t]he parties – and the press – attach extreme importance to Iowa, which is the first poll after a year of campaigning.“

Le Monde does not seem to endorse a particular candidate, but it does spend far more time discussing the position of the democratic candidates than the republican candidates, suggesting that may give an endorsement to whomever wins the party nomination.

The paper also acknowledges that Obama and Edwards have a far more difficult challenge with the election, noting that these candidates must win or at least have a very strong showing in Iowa in order to convince other states of their importance.

[From Le Monde.fr : Les élections américaines]