fine! i was perfectly happy to talk about the past, but now you've gone and made me do it!! let's fing talk election!!

ok, i know i've done 2 political blogs to date. one about how much i like hillary (you have to give me that that was months and months ago- before her air of desperation started smelling less like campaign fervor and more like bad b.o.), and one about the fact that i thought that they both needed to stop talking less crap about each other and start talking more about the important issues that they weren't talking about (i STILL haven't heard anything substantive from either of them about the environment- what the fuck is up with that? is this not an important issue? where is al? why has he not called them out on this?!?). but there is so much more to say here... oh, so much more.

as opposed to spending even MORE time bitching about how much both of these wankers are really starting to piss me off (and about how glad i am that i'm leaving this bloody country just a few months after the election) i am going to go through the IMPORTANT things that people seem to be missing out on.

first, for the sake of this discussion we are going to say that both of our candidates are telletubbies. they are genderless, race-less, weirdo blobs who don't really even talk (and neither of them are the gay one, that would be a whole different complication that i don't want to get into). so, you can't vote for one person because he or she is a better orator, or because he is black, or she has a vagina. these things are now TOTALLY irrelevant!! what matters now is ONLY (and i mean ONLY) what they stand for. what are their platforms? what differentiates them from one another (other than skin color and genitalia)?

so, we're going for platforms (and i know that most of you will be able to identify the candidate by certain aspects of their platforms, but i'm going to keep them anonymous. so, just read what they say they'll do and THEN decide. really, try to keep the actual person OUT OF YOUR MIND).

ok- we have two democratic candidates, dipsy and lala (i'm pretty sure neither of them is the gay one, but don't quote me on that).

Dipsy

LaLa

here's a bit of a run down--

HEALTH CARE

Dipsy states on its web site, and in numerous debates, that it plans to create a national health care program. What sets its program apart from others proposed is that the plan would be for everyone, not just a select few. It would then go a step further to create a National Health insurance Board for those who would like to buy their own private insurance. By doing so, the prices of the health care plans would be better regulated

Lala favors a universal health care package which it calls the American Health Choices Plan. It would give tax credits to families to help cover costs and would not attach any preexisting medical conditions. Some have stated that Lala's plan is a more comprehensive plan, but it simply provides tax credits rather than providing a national health care program.

IRAQ (and how much do i hate that this is something i even have to talk about? I TOLD YOU PEOPLE IN 02 THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE A HUGE MISTAKE AND THAT WE SHOULD NOT GET INVOLVED...DID YOU LISTEN TO ME? NO!! AND NOW LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE!! FUCKERS!!)

Dipsy states that its time frame is 16 months. However, it would keep some troops in Iraq to protect the United State employees already in position in the country in the Embassy and other diplomatic positions. It then would move a step further to create a Middle East Compact in order to create an international group that would address issues in Iraq, including violations of humanitarian issues.

Lala would bring back our troops in a faster format than Dipsy would. Its plan takes place in three phases. The first phase would begin to bring the troops back to the states within 60 days of it taking office. The second phase would look at stabilizing the area. The last phase of its plan would create diplomatic goals that would help Iraq to gain independence once the military has exited the arena. Its plan does not mention if it would retain any peace keeping forces, however it has referred to the need for peace keeping forces in recent debates.

ECONOMY (god help us, is anyone going to be able to get us out of THIS mess? i swear, if the dollar gets any weaker i'll end up moving to scotland and a thousand saved dollars won't buy my a bloody can of coke).

Dipsy will concentrate on initiatives that will make American workers more competitive in the work place market of the 21st century. Immediately, it would provide an additional tax break for Americans. The tax break is called the " Making Work Pay Tax Credit." Individuals would receive an additional $500 in their pockets and a family would receive $1000. It is felt that this extra cash in the hands of Americans would help to stimulate the economy as Americans would have a bit of extra cash to use for bills and to spend on extras.

Lala states that it has a plan to restore America's middle class. This is its main agenda. It states that it will put in place a middle class tax cut by increasing the child tax credit and offering an extra tax cut for those in the middle income range. It also states that part of the problem is a lack of competitive jobs for the new century. It plans on doing this by investing in some of the new sources of energy which will create more jobs. It also is looking at creative partnerships to create new jobs, and is offering a tax break to companies that will keep jobs in America rather than shipping them overseas for cheaper labor.

EDUCATION

Dipsy's first step would be to revise the No Child Left Behind policy. It states that the policy is a step in the correct direction . However there often is not funding to support the plan. It also feels that children should not be spending most of their years, learning to fill in bubbles on a test. The way the policies read, the schools with the highest standardized test scores are the schools that get the most money. So districts, principals and teachers are all forced to focus mainly on helping children to bring their scores up on these tests. Dipsy questions if this technique is true education. Also, Dipsy says that more and more Americans are unable to go to college because of the cost of higher education. It proposes adding a 44,000 tax credit called the American Opportunity Tax Credit that will offset the first $4,000 that a parent or student spend on higher education. It also would look into a similar plan that California has where city or Junior colleges are often free to the cities residents. Its plan would provide for all community colleges to allow free tuition to most of it's students.

Lala has proposed several items to enhance education both at the secondary level and at the higher education level. With our youngest children, it proposes expanding Head Start by putting more money into the program. It is a strong believer in reading literacy and states that the earlier the better. It would end No Child Left Behind which is a policy with ideas but no funding. It would put a plan in action to reach the poor and at risk youth by expanding after school enrichment programs. At the higher education level, Lala would provide a $3,500 tax credit to help parents trying to fund a college education for their children. It also would increase the Pell Grant maximum and would increase the guidelines for qualifying so more families could benefit. It also states it would invest more money into our Junior colleges.

NOW- who's ideas do you like more? Dipsy's or Lala's? This has nothing to do with who has more experience, or who speaks better in public, or who looks better, or what race or sex anyone is. It comes down to WHAT THEY WOULD DO TO FIX THIS SHIT HOLE OF A COUNTRY THAT W HAS LEFT US WITH.

i hope that you all comment and explain the policies you like and why. i hope that this actually gets the point across that the vast majority of this country and the vast majority of democrats are looking at this thing ALL WRONG. it's not about anything but what these people will do for our country if elected. it should be about what they believe in, how they're going to fix this mess, and if their plans to fix these messes are viable.

Of course, there are some issues that have been left out. Both are Pro-Choice. Both believe in a sustained system of gun control. Both think that we have major work to do to repair our reputation on the global stage.

As for their stands on the environment, both have been very vague- laying out some ideas, and then proposing others that contradict those ideas. Your guess is as good as mine on that one. There are so many other issues that should be being discussed but aren't. These two are too busy attacking one another, and the press is too busy asking the same stupid fucking questions over and over and over again. If we all got our heads on straight and said, "wait a second, what do you think about the environment? what are you going to do about North Korea? what about Iran? how are you going to mend our relationship with Russia? what about our relationship with EU member countries? can you stop the dollar from it's CRAZY FREE FALL?!?" then maybe we would be able to get somewhere. we need to stop judging our candidates on surface issues and personality contests (which is, after all, why al and john both lost to W- because assholes thought that W was more of a 'normal guy'. i don't want my president to be normal. i want him or her to be smart. very smart. smarter than me, smarter than you. i don't care if it's someone i would want to have a drink with, i want someone who KNOWS THINGS- i'm looking at you, here, W!).

so, let's focus! what are the issues and what do you think of where the candidates stand on them? we're all moderately intelligent, let's fucking use those brains and pick a candidate who is good for this country because of their ideas, not because of their skin or reproductive systems.

now where were we? oh yeah... henry!!

Henry I ascended the throne when his brother, William II was struck down by an arrow (again, will these kings never learn? this WILL come up again- idiots!). He ascended in 1100. He was the youngest and certainly the most able of William I's sons. Henry was no fool, and shortly after his accession he married the niece of of the last surviving mail of the House of Wessex. He did this because he recognized the importance of English support against his elder brother and even his own barons.

In 1106, Henry's army, composed largely of Saxons, defeated an uprising by his elder brother. Henry gained further popularity when he issued the Charter of Liberties, in which he promised to abolish the evil practices of his brother, William II.

Once his kingdom was secured, Henry reorganized the judicial system and the methods of raising taxes. He created a royal court-of-all-work, the Curia Regis (King's Court), which acted as an advisory body and as a court of law. It also supervised taxation. Members of this court were sent out to bring even the remote districts into contact with royal taxation, as well as to make the people familiar with royal justice.

in 1120 Henry's two legitimate sons were drowned in the tragedy of the 'White Ship'. He nominated as his successor his daughter Matilda (or Maude, as some historians call her- a move which was to prove controversial to say the least), who had married Geoffrey, Count of Anjou (Geoffry Plantagenet).

When Henry died in 1135, the Council, considering a woman unfit to rule (bastards), offered the throne to Stephen of Blois, nephew of Henry and grandson of William I.

This caused a major kerfuffle and led to a civil war that would last the length of the reign of King Stephen.

next time... the mess of matilda vs stephen I.

question-- how many of you knew that there was a king stephen? the first time i heard that i thought someone was playing a joke on me.