You Asked! Okay... You Didn't

But you're getting it anyway...

My friend led me to an article posted by Andrew Sullivan at The Daily Dish. And I see some problems with it and it's basic premise.

First of all, a true Conservative (as understood in the United States today) will NEVER vote for a Democrat. Simply reading this document should prove my point. A conservative DOES NOT share those ideas.

Secondly, I am sick and tired of hearing, "I'm conservative economically, but more liberal socially." This line is complete bullshit. The two viewpoints CANNOT overlap. You cannot be economically conservative and socially liberal AT THE SAME TIME!!! It does not work! You can't at least from the governmental point of view.

Personally, one can do with his money what he pleases - this is a point of a free society. If you want to give half of it to a charity so they can help the homeless or get a family back on it's feet, God bless you. But when the government starts taking my money, involuntarily, and thinking they are going to make those decisions for me... fuck them.

But back to the article. The main difference between the presidential candidates is their tax policies. It may sound like small potatoes, but taxes have a big effect on the economy and employment. This is the basis in which I disagree with Barry Hussein's 'plan' for his presidency.


Here's the link again to the article I'm going to opine about. Give 'er a glance, then come read...

10. Maybe the end of Jesse Jackson in black America is a good thing. But racial identify politics only come about when you speak OF them. I'm not a black man unless you call me a black man, I'm just a man, maybe just a person. What does my penis/vagina have anything to do with my politics. Why suddenly a 'black' man is a candidate for president is some historic event I'll never know. Maybe I'm just not old enough.

9. Less debt. Tax revenue has little to do with debt. Federal revenue has been a constant percentage of GDP for 50 years. But Barry says he's only going to raise taxes on the rich. THIS IS A BOLD FACED LIE. What is Barry up to? He's going to raise taxes on EVERYONE. Debt will not be decreased, because government revenue will DECREASE, and spending will continue to INCREASE. Simple second grade math should tell you this will not work.

8. The one line in this group that gets me is, "McCain's knee-jerk reaction to the Georgian conflict." McCain was spot on on this remark. BHO was twiddling and waiting for polls to tell him what to say. Georgia is a burgeoning free republic in the middle of the old USSR. Their president was educated and worked in the USA before becoming president. He respects and admires the founding principles of our country - which more Americans should also. Saying that both sides should have restraint is complete bullshit when another country invades a free republic to attempt to control energy flow. Georgia had every right to do what was necessary to defend itself, and the US should have been there with them. I would trust McCain with foreign policy over a community organizer and junior senator from Illinois any day.

7. The office of President of the United States of America comes with another title: commander-in-chief. One may not like it, but he/she has the decision making power over the US military. This isn't a fuhrer-like system, but still a very rigid structure. And again, a decorated (and tortured) veteran would be light years better at the helm of that system then Barry. I don't know why this is even an argument.

6. "The irrational impulsiveness of McCain." Ignorance brings with it a calm temperament that would only be exemplified by the most inexperienced Presidential candidate in a long time... I enjoy McCain's temperament, it assures me that he's also 'feeling' what he's saying, not just spitting out talking points.

5. The very idea that a presidents faith is some sort of 'bridge' to unite those on either side of religion is the very argument that his supporters would use. Americans have the faith they practice because they are free to do so. If one thinks that "Christianity and reason" are somehow separated, you welcome some theological education.

4. "Truce in the culture war." I don't even know what this means, and I don't have time to read the linked document he has posted. But seems like another saving grace of 'The One' that has been attributed to him by 'his followers.'

3. Two words: President Obama (shudder)

2. I sort of agree with this one. REAL Conservatism has lost is focus and needs a kick in the pants. This is something that can come within the party, but people need to be on board. Electing Barry would be a sign to this point, but not the sign I want to see.

1. I completely disagree with this point. Research the history of the Iraq and Afghanistan 'wars' and you'll see that things are going well in Iraq, and Afghanistan could use a boost. This boost only comes with completion in Iraq, not a cut-and-run. As Iraq goes, so goes the region.


Does any of this change my vote, my opinions on the candidates or the future of this country? No. I felt it prudent to share my thoughts on these topics and hope you can see my point.

My final point of the Presidential election of 2008: If Barry Hussein is elected, it will be quickly shown (to intelligent Americans) to be one of the biggest mistakes of the early 21st century. That sounds prophetic and quite bold, but I can only hope that I don't have to be proven right.

-HypnotistOfLadies :-\


Next Point: I will make my point on Taxes as relating to the 2008 Presidential candidates and what it means for the US.

The Map Says: Yeah Yeah Yeah!

What I'm presenting here are the results for the 2008 US Presidential election. I have zero political education beyond what I have found out myself and my own political preferences. So I don't pretend that these selections are educated in any fashion, but who's ever are:

Below are two situations that could erupt in this years presidential election: (I created these maps with NPR's 2008 Election Map)

First - A McCain win

This would be my preferred outcome, and how I cast my vote.

Second - A Tie

With all states but two (Nebraska and Maine) casting all their electoral votes for the popular vote winner, and barring any faithless electors, this could be the electoral map when we wake up on Wednesday. Which then is the House of Representatives decision (oh no!).
Will we know who the president is on Tuesday night? No. We won't. I will make that call now.

Will we know who the president is on Wednesday? Possibly, but could be a long day.

BUT: There is always that chance that the Democrats (read: socialists) are hoping (Hope for Change of the Change of Hope) for: a 'landslide' for Barry Hussein... what would that look like? I really don't want to know.

-HypnotistOfLadies :-\

Next Point: A rant before election day 2008

Nucleation: The Counterproductive Marxist Suit

I was going to outline my own thoughts on what a Barack Obama presidency would bring to this country, but NRO did it for me! Read on patriots!

Next Point: "Kill Whitey!"

You Mean Shenanigans?

"Hey Farva what's the name of that restaurant you like with all the goofy shit on the walls and the mozzarella sticks?"

(I know it's been quite a while, but I've been yelling at my TV too much lately to have the time to type here.)

[NOTE: If the layout of this post is fucked up, I'm sorry, the 'Post Blog' thing is wacky spacing today.]


You have your choices for President, I have mine. I will say yours is wrong, as will you - lest you agree with me, as you probably should. But this is little to do with who you should choose versus who you shouldn't. It's really a comparison of all the major candidates' for president web sites. Or, the introduction page, to be more specific. I will point out the differences and similarities between them and an amateur analysis of why they are set up this way.

Most of the candidates sites start with an introduction page that allows you to fill in some information and sign up for notifications from the candidate and/or party. What I will be pointing out is the quite different (and similar) methods undertaken for these introduction pages, and how they are presented to the visitor.


This analysis will start with three numbers from 0-10 (zero to ten):

Appeal: is this an appealing page? Does it look professional?
(0: my mom laid this out; 10: this must have cost a fortune)

Usability: Can I sign up quickly and easily? Is everything presented in a quick-to-find format and easy to read?
(0: ahh, seizures; 10: clicky, clicky)

Hidden: This is the sole reason I started this "analysis." Is the "continue to site" link easy to find and readable?
(0: where the fuck is it, 10: OMG there it is)


The candidates I chose to include in this analysis (yea right!) were all the Major Candidates listed on the Project Vote Smart site that have an introduction page on their web site. Here's the names and major party affiliation (these candidates will not appear on all ballots in all states):

• Robert L. Barr Jr. - Libertarian
• John S. McCain, III - Republican
• Ralph Nader - Independent
• Barack H. Obama, Jr. - Democratic

Robert L. Barr Jr. - Libertarian

Appeal: 9
Usability: 7
Hidden: 7
Total: 23

This site only has two options: "sign up" and "continue." In this case, both links are right next to each other and not separated by anything prominent. The "continue" link is easy to find and takes you right to the site. The "sign up" link is a red - albeit classy - button that stands out but doesn't scream at me.Note: this is one of two that actually have the candidates picture on the intro page.




John S. McCain, III - Republican
Appeal: 8 Usability: 9

Hidden: 8
Total: 25



This page has multiple options: the normal "continue" and "sign up," as well as "Why John McCain," "Recruit Friends," and "Call Voters." The sheer number of options on this simple page warrants the higher Usability rating. All are topics and things that a campaign needs from the people to succeed. Two of these options take you to other sign up pages, and the "why" page provides a text and video summary of the candidate.

A video is provided on this into page, giving the visitor an option to hang around a while and watch. Very good, in my opinion, as this will give a longer view of the contents, and could lead to more contacts for the candidate.

Note: This is the only page with a video. Is that a plus? I don't know.




Ralph Nader - Independent

Appeal: 6
Usability: 6
Hidden: 3
Total: 15

This page contains five (5) separate options for the visitor; "sign up," "continue," "contribute," and two I didn't see at first, "volunteer," and "spread the word." Not being one of the two (2) "major parties" in US politics, actually getting on the ballot in all fifty states is a priority.

The main problem with this page is the odd layout and weird blue and black map. I can see this confusing some of the "less-intelligent" (and that's being polite) Americans who look at it as a electoral map.

"Sign up" and "contribute" are the major options on the page. But, as is common with others, the "sign up" is the most prominent, in an odd green star burst hanging on the corner of the main section. The "continue" link is there, but is simply text on the page background and blends in so as to not look like anything important. This is most likely on purpose to get more sign ups from visitors not paying complete attention.

Note: This is the only candidate listed here not yet on the ballot in all 50 states.

Barack H. Obama, Jr. - Democratic

Appeal: 7

Usability: 6Hidden: 0.5Total: 11.5Of all the sites 'analyzed' here, this one is by far the worst. The layout is good, logo at the top, [propaganda] slogan in huge letters at the top of the candidates picture - with his family - sign up link beneath that with the big 'ol button. The only other color on the page is red, and this color is completely contained within the "sign up" button. This button, at first glance, appears to be the only option on this page, and has probably fooled many a [democratic, read: stupid] visitor into giving up their information when not necessary. It does draw your eye right to it though, which is the point of most of these sites.

Here we come to the very reason for this analysis in the first place. Go ahead and try to find the "continue" link on that page.... I'll wait........ really........... go ahead...................... what? you can't find it? Look again, it's there, I promise.............. find it yet? Well, if you didn't, it's on the bottom right of the box and it says, "Skip sign up, go to the website." I bet you couldn't find it at first...

The reason for hiding this link so blatantly speaks a lot for this specific candidate and his interactions with the people. (That's as far as I'll take that for now.)

Note: Don't vote for this candidate, you will get change, but not the way you think.



----------
I would welcome an official psychological analysis/discussion as to why one candidate would make this link so much harder to find than another. My 'analysis' is merely a subjective observation, but I think it shows what each candidate expects from visitors to their site and how they decide to truely interact with them.


Some candidates apparently believe visitors are intelligent people who can handle themselves whichever option they decide to go with. Others, however, feel they need to guide the visitor to the correct place, either by accentuating one part, or blatantly hiding others.


Do I believe the intro page will change the mind of 'undecided' (read: stupid) voters? No, they're already dumb enough, if a pretty web site is all it takes for them to make up their mind, then fuck 'em.


God bless a country where the dumbest among us can sway the decisions that affect hard-working intelligent (read: conservative) Americans. :-\




Next Point: Remember "The Empty Suit?" Oh yea, he's next.