Former President Clinton will give a speech at the UO EMU Ballroom tomorrow night at 8:30. Be sure to thank him for helping torpedo his wife’s campaign and his party’s chances in the general election! Good work, big fella. Just remember to stay away from those girls at the soft serve in Carson.

And if you have $1,000 to $33,100 to spend on a man who voted for campaign finance reform, why not attend the John McCain “Portland Finance Reception” tomorrow night at the beautiful airport Sheraton? Because nothing defines a straight talkin’ man of the people better than holding a closed door $33,100/head dinner at a crappy airport hotel.

Update: More on McCain’s speech here.

You can send Hillary Clinton an e-card wishing her a happy Mother’s Day. But what to say? There’s so many possibilities. I was thinking maybe: “Congratulations on fulfilling one of the seven phenomena of life. Only six more to go to prove you’re not a satan-robot!”

Hat tip to the always classy gals at Wonkette.

Well, Vincent, Katy and I tried to get press access to the Obama rally yesterday. We didn’t have press passes, but that didn’t seem to be a problem last time. Unfortunately, some irate Obama staffer told us that having our names in the masthead of the magazine wasn’t good enough. So much for the audacity of hope. Vincent and I decided we didn’t really want to see Obama anyways, especially if he was going to be such a dick. Properly embittered, we left to cling to our guns and religion. (Actually, being deficient in both areas, we mainly ended up clinging to booze).

Okay, so I’m not a big fan of Barack Obama (and his dick of a handler not letting the Commentator through the press line last night didn’t help score any points, but I’ll let CJ post about that…). I don’t think he’s the best choice for President, and I don’t like the messianic everything-to-everyone posturing of his campaign. As far as I’m concerned, there are tons of perfectly legitimate criticisms of the man. Nevertheless, I’m beyond tired of all the drummed-up “controversies” that keep cropping up every couple of weeks or so on right-leaning blogs. Until now, the most idiotic of these was the Case of the Missing Flag Lapel Pin. Heinous!

Alas, after dragging my hung-over self out of bed this morning to check my usual blogs, I see that not one but two silly new stories are making the rounds. First off, evidently Senator Obama mis-spoke during a speech up in Beaverton and said that he’d visited 57 states.The horror! How can he not even know how many states there are in the Union he wants to lead?! How such a dolt could ever be considered qualified for the Presidency is impossible to imagine.

Second, scholars of history are savaging the benighted Senator for suggesting that he would consider meeting with unfriendly heads of state, in the tradition of other American Presidents like FDR, Truman, and Kennedy. Evidently FDR and Truman meeting with Stalin doesn’t count, despite the fact that the United States had been staunchly anti-Soviet from the very start, because we were both fighting Nazi Germany at the time. Citing Kennedy’s meetings with Khruschev is also apparently off-limits because um… Kennedy had more experience in politics than Obama does… or something. And never mind Nixon going to China or Reagan meeting with Gorbachev. None of that matters, you see,  because Senator Obama clearly needs a history lesson, otherwise he’ll end up just like poor old Neville Chamberlain.

Jack Kelly ends his post on Real Clear Politics thusly: “The lack of historical knowledge among journalists is merely appalling.” I couldn’t agree more, chum.

Apparently, Obama is returning to campus to speak tomorrow in the Memorial Quad outside Knight Library. Doors (?) open at 5:45 p.m. The only source I have for this is a Facebook Event, but it appears to be hosted by Students for Obama. I’ll keep you updated. If it’s true, you’ll be able to watch the whole thing (sans sound) through the old Obelisk Cam.

UPDATE: Yep, it’s confirmed on Obama’s website.

In Lil’ Wayne’s newest single Lollipop he states, “I get on top, and drop it like it’s hot, but when I’m on the bottom she’s Hillary Rodham.”

Personally I’d pinned Mr. Weezy as an Obama man, but this got me wondering: How many men will vote for Hil just because she’s a woman in power and they’re attracted to it?

I know all about voting based on sex appeal, I’m a Ron Paul girl, but I’d rather vote for Obama simply because (Ty Schwoeffermann, cover your eyes) I’d like to fuck him.

Perhaps this explains why I am also such a fan of Colin Powell?

According to the Huffington Post’s nifty little campaign donation tracker, people who identified themselves as employees of the University of Oregon have so far donated $24,962 to political campaigns in the ’08 election cycle. It doesn’t look like the first quarter reports have been added yet, so the real number is most likely much higher by now. How does it break down?

Of that $24,962, only two contributions went to Republicans, totalling $956. Actually, I should say Republican because both of those went to … Ron Paul. The majority of the Dem donations went to Obama with only one donation to Hillary Clinton. No contributions were listed from Frohnmayer, although his pals Melinda Grier and John Moseley both donated to Obama.

Tony Marino, a Tigard Republican running for the Oregon House, issued a letter to several newspapers that extensively describes his myriad failures in life, including bankruptcy, divorces, IRS trouble and a fake degree. Marino is spinning it as a “honesty is the best policy” move, but you can bet the Democrats were going to dig all this up anyways.

According to the Oregonian, Marino earned a doctorate in Marketing in under three months from Ashwood University, which gives its students credit for their “life experiences.” Later he discovered the shocking truth that the “university” wasn’t accredited in the state of Oregon.

Marino did leave out a few other tidbits, though. From the Oregonian:

A background check unearthed other financial run-ins, including a $12,300 civil judgment from 2001 that he contests and that he says he didn’t know about until Thursday. He’s also making monthly installments on a $4,900 judgment from 2002, filed by Ford Motor Co.

Whoops! It will be interesting to see if Marino’s “only human” strategy works. I for one would like to see more detailed confessions from politicians. Imagine the letters coming out of DC: “This one time Arlen Specter got drunk and passed out on my couch, so I drew penises all over his face with a Sharpie. He woke up the next morning and rushed straight to the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting. Everyone laughed at him, and I felt really guilty.”

A fascinating article in the Economist says that people in this country identifying themselves as “Conservative” or “Very Conservative” have a higher likelihood of being happier.

Some have hypothesized that it’s because liberals are miserable with President Bush’s administration, but apparently the evidence traces back 35 years. The article points to the fact that conservative people tend to go to church more and have more children, which leads to more long-term happiness.

While I’m not sure about that, I do like that they point out that the conservative perspective is more about taking responsibility, working hard, and succeeding through individualism. Whereas the liberal view points to societal issues, injustices, and huge “crushing impersonal forces that keep the little guy down”, conservatism acknowledges those issues (I hope) as history and seeks to solve them by discrediting them and living in spite of them.

So this election season, vote Republican and be happier.

The Washington Post outlines some of the details of John McCain’s health plan. If I’m understanding it right, the key points are:

1.  Unlike the Democratic plan, his plan is market-based
2. It dissociates health insurance from the workplace, which McCain argues will force insurance companies to “no longer take your business for granted, offering narrow plans with escalating costs.”
3. It provides tax credits to individuals, rather than employers, for health insurance.
4. It will create a “GAP” (guaranteed access program) in the short-term to provide for “high-risk” patients until the “market matures”.
5. Lowering costs through a variety of methods such as tort reform and encouraging the prescription of generic drugs.
6. McCain also advocates the “health savings account” idea.
7. Interestingly, he also says “[g]overnment should promote greater access through walk-in clinics in retail outlets” to facilitate easier access to basic, preventative care.

As the Post notes, a lot of the McCain plan echoes President Bush’s spectacularly failed attempt at health care reform. Indeed, McCain is probably going to have a relatively difficult time selling his health care plan, whatever its merits, since he’s going to have to compete against either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, both of which are promising “free” health care for the masses. For McCain to succeed on this issue against his opponent (especially if he runs against Barack Obama), he’s going to have to find a simple, sensible way to explain to people how setting them adrift and trusting market forces is going to result in better health care at a lower cost than anything a massive, tax-funded government bureaucracy  can hope to provide.

Unfortunately for McCain, explaining economics to people is a lot more difficult than saying “the government will take care of you”.

The statewide voting pamphlets have been mailed out recently. Inside, a letter from Secretary of State Bill Bradbury urges citizens to call a certain 800 number if they need voting assistance. However, rather than electoral information, callers are directed to a phone sex line. An automated voice promises callers “an exciting new way to go live one on one with hot . . . girls.” Bill Bradbury, you ‘ol polecat!

Hat tip to my mom for the story.

Well, the results are in, and Hillary Clinton has taken Pennsylvania with a margin of roughly 10%. This means, of course that the Democratic Primary will continue to drag on with no clear winner. While I don’t have a whole lot to say about the primary in general, I found this report somewhat strange:

But Clinton still can’t break Obama’s hold on black and young voters. He won 92 percent of the black vote, according to exit polls, and between 56 percent and 58 percent of voters under 45.

Similarly, however, Obama can’t shake that a lot of whites are uncomfortable with a black as president, as exit polls showed him losing the white vote by 60-40 percent — a consistent trend in recent primaries. (emphasis added)

Really? Seriously?

So, Obama thinks poor folks are bitter, but Hillary knows they’re mostly just looking for someone to buy them a shot of mid-shelf booze. That’s why she sprang for a shot of Crown Royal at a media event relaxing evening with close friends at her neighborhood bar (in Indiana). But wait, you say, Crown Royal is Canadian whisky… there’s no “e” before the “y” or anything. While the pundits desperately analyze “the shot heard ’round the world” for implications on Clinton’s NAFTA position, we applaud Clinton for simply making booze an issue in this election. And for providing the evil spirit which is currently possessing our copy of Photoshop with some fresh meat. Cheers!

Editor-in-Chief of the Oregon Daily Emerald Laura Powers is filing a grievance against Con Court for their recent ruling declaring that ASUO candidates can’t advertise with campus media. Powers is appealing the ruling on grounds of factual accuracy, since she can’t argue the Court’s actual reasoning. Powers, along with us, believes the ruling is complete bullshit:

“We’re not a university facility, we don’t reject ads based on politics and everybody has equal access,” Powers said. “Bitch, please!”

Con Court’s ruling seems to imply (although they won’t come out and say it) that since some people [read: Rock the Yellow] couldn’t afford advertisements it wasn’t equal access. I agree with Powers. Bitch, please!

P.S. How great is it that a grievance is being filed against Con Court to be decided by Con Court?

An initiative sponsored by Republican Kevin Mannix that would set three-year mandatory minimum prison sentences for first-time drug dealers, burglars and identity thieves will appear on the November ballot in Oregon.

According to the Oregonian, the measure “would increase Oregon’s prison population by an estimated 4,000 to 6,000 inmates and cost $128 million to $200 million a year.” Righto, sounds peachy keen! Sure, we already have a strained budget and strained prison system, but dammit, someone’s got to teach those dopers a lesson.

Of course, if voters disagree with the initiative, they will have another, more sympathetic way to waste vast amounts of money. A second initiative sponsored by the Democrat-controlled legislature, which targets repeat offenders, would only incarcerate a projected 1,600 people and cost roughly $50 million a year. It would also include $20 million a year for drug treatment programs and local jails.

If both initiatives are passed by voters, the one with the most votes will become law. (THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE!)