Republican Party Akin To Iranian Protestors?

LOL.

Here are some interesting tweets, courtesy of The Fix.

----
First, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), who is running for governor of the Wolverine State, tweeted: "Iranian twitter activity similar to what we did in House last year when Republicans were shut down in the House."

Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) then followed Hoesktra's tweet with two of his own. "Good to see Iranian people move mountains w social media, shining sunlight on their repressive govt -- Texans support their bid for freedom," Culberson wrote, adding in a second tweet: "Oppressed minorities include House Repubs: We are using social media to expose repression such as last night's D clampdown shutting off amends."
----

Uh... I mean, maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see any similarities between fat, rich, white males and disenfranchised Iranians. Do you? I'm sorry but the republican party is completely in shambles right now. They are voting against funding for the military, which is so hypocritical I can't even begin to get into it, but just remember whenever the democrats opposed funding for the wars that Bush started they called it a "vote against the troops". What a nightmare. Then, one of their potential presidential candidates Nevada Sen. John Ensign, a man once quoted, in reference to the Clinton scandal, as saying: “I came to that conclusion recently, and frankly it’s because of what he put his whole Cabinet through and what he has put the country through, he has no credibility left.” Well mister Ensign, I guess you have no credibility left and neither does your party it seems.

Ahmadinejad Is Not The Issue

Foremost I would simply like to point out that I realize Ahmadinejad likely wasn't legitimately re-elected in Iran, but under their political structure the presidential seat is almost powerless, and the policy implications of his rule are negligent at best. Nevertheless, I applaud the outrage over the political corruption and election fixing, surely I consider this a major transgression and recognize the strain it puts on a nation where many strive for legitimacy, peace, and acceptance only to be overshadowed by a menacing figurehead, who despite the medias oft-misquotes, is still a fear-mongering-hate-artist who deserves a life of imprisonment. The real point of this blog though is to explore the quintessential question of, who really runs Iran? It is easy to cast a sole figure into the role of devil, as was done from Bin-Laden and Hussein to Hitler and Stalin and so on and so forth, in this case Ahmadinejad is the face of horror, but my understanding is that he has been sorely miscast for the role. The most important factor in understanding Iran is that their government, while they do hold elections, is not a true democracy, they are more or less a strict Islamic theocracy. What the BBC classifies as a "network of unelected institutions controlled by the highly powerful conservative Supreme Leader" is the pillar of "government" by which all decision making must run through, and while Ahmadinejad may or may not line up with them on certain issues, he -nor any of the elected parliament members- really matter, it seems, because regardless of their efforts, even if they were in favor of change (mild or radical), I have serious doubts as to whether or not they would fly. Basically, my contention is that if Mir Hossein Moussavi were not [potentially] cheated out of office by a rigged election, it doesn't even really matter one way or the next. If you want change, change the system. That's just one mans humble opinion though.

The Current Republican Landscape

I was just reading an article from last Wednesday's edition of USA Today and there are some pretty jarring figures in a Gallup poll they cited. The figures referenced state that the majority of republicans consider Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney to be the leaders of their party. That's a pretty scary thought if you're a republican, or for that matter, any human being who happens to live in this country. Not only are neither of these men viable figureheads for the future, but their status as present mouthpieces for one of the two political parties of note is pretty pathetic. Dick Cheney is somewhere in between a has-been and a never-was, who has spent his recent months bitterly attacking President Obama and making false claims that the country is now "less safe" and condoning methods of torture. Limbaugh, though is the real joke though, not only are his radical right-wing opinions incredibly convoluted and oft-ridiculous, but this is a guy who once (and probably to this day) has an addiction to prescription drugs, and is a KNOWN RACIST. This is the same guy who played a little tune he called "Barack the Magic Negro" on his radio show. Ugh. So there you have it folks, your republican party in 2009. Good luck on putting another right-winger in the oval office next election. Who knows, maybe Mitt Romney is the answer. Ha, or better yet, Sarah Palin?

Blagojevich on Letterman

I love Letterman and he does not disappoint with a lot of his zingers in his interview with former Illinois politician Rod Blagojevich.

On The Record: My Super Bowl Winner

I hate to toot my own horn (I don't really hate to do that), but last year I was probably the only guy who - before the championship round games in each division were played - picked the Giants to topple the Patriots in the super bowl. Proof you say? This is why we have archives, click me. Not only that, but I am on a string of moneyline winners the likes you've never seen dating back to 1998 believe it or not... granted a lot of the earlier picks were pure luck, but there's something to be said for a decade long streak of winners. For whatever reason I just get vibes on upset games, like last years Giants win and even the Patriots over the Rams in '02. Anyway, onto tonight's game, I had planned on making this post about a week ago but I've been back and forth the entire time. My pure, unadulterated hope that the Arizona Cardinals stomp out the Pittsburgh Steelers and spiral that dreadful city into a bout of misery the likes of which they haven't faced since the steel industry came crashing down, seems to be clouding my judgment on this game. I tended to lean towards Pittsburgh based on the fact that I wanted to protect my streak and make the safe play, but that's just not the kind of guy I am. Here's what I see happening, Dick Le'Beau and his Steelers defense have been hearing all week how brilliant Kurt Warner is at picking up the blitz, instead of heeding the advice of analysts nationwide, their hubris will lead them to come full throttle at Warner. If they get to him - and they will get to him - they look like geniuses. But, their arrogance to stay in attack mode will let Warner make one quick pass underneath to Boldin who will look to distribute punishment to the Steelers secondary as much as they will look to distribute punishment on him (I like Boldin in that match up by the way), or one quick down field strike to the potent Larry Fitzgerald and this game could fundamentally change in a heart beat. If you put the Steelers down by 7 or 14 early, they will have a hard time devoting themselves to the run and the Cardinals will be able to drop back into coverage with their highly skilled, if not over-anxious, secondary will have ample opportunities to make a play on one of Roethlisberger's down field balls. I like the Cardinals in this one. Thats my pick, I'm sticking to it. Enjoy the game!

Super Bowl Movie Trailers

Transformers 2:


Fast and Furious 4:

Williams, Terps Responds With a Win

Amidst all the turmoil in College Park, Maryland came away with a solid 73-68 in conference win over Miami. Greivis Vasquez (11 points, 10 rebounds, 9 assists) was one missed Adrian Bowie layup away from a triple double, but Landon Milbourne was really the key to the game making a bevy of huge buckets down the stretch. Top ten recruit, Lance Stephenson, shockingly enough was in the building even though there has been no evidence whatsoever of him having one iota of interest in being a Terp. Good game for him to be at. Now, the reason I posted this is because I wanted to take a glass half full look at the season. If you're an optimist you could reasonably argue, with some merit, that Maryland really only should have three losses this season, those being to Duke, Georgetown, and Gonzaga. That's a record of 18-3 (6-1 in ACC). The one out of conference loss at home was to Morgan State who overcame a 17 point deficit to win. Then, Maryland managed to blow a 14 point lead at Miami with under 8 minutes to go. Follow that up with an overtime loss at Florida State and another 14 point 2nd half blown lead to Boston College at home and you have a recipe for disaster. Honestly, Maryland, though undermanned clearly has the talent to build 2nd half double digit leads, so something is missing. These losses all seem somewhat flukey to me, and yes a loss is a loss, but the team isn't necessarily doomed for next season, considering everyone is returning with the exception of Dave Neal, who will be replaced by two 6-10 freshmen bigs. Sean Mosley looks incredibly promising as a freshman and will be a fourth point guard next year along with Vasquez, Hayes, and Bowie. Milbourne is steadily improving as well, hopefully Dino Gregory and Cliff Tucker can add some seasoning to their games and we'll see what happens. Maybe even Burney and Dupree... ok, now I'm getting out of control. You get the point, though.