Aside from being a millionaire, Michael Moore’s life must be miserable living in a frame of mind that is so unrealistic and hopeless. Maybe it is just words, that he makes a lot of money for, and when he’s done talking it doesn’t mean anything to him. Yesterday, Mr. Moore published an open letter he sent to President Obama. He is begging the President to reconsider his decision to send over 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. He opens the letter saying, “Do you really want to be the new ‘war president’?” The best part is the seriousness of Mr. Moore’s letter. Apparently he missed the connection between the ongoing war to when Obama stepped into office. Therefore, Yes. Obama is the new Commander of the war. Apologies for the realism, Mr. Moore.

Mr. Moore believes there are “LESS than a hundred al-Qaeda left in Afghanistan,” and says there will be one hundred thousand troops “trying to crush a hundred guys living in caves.” He asks President Obama, “Are you serious? Have you drunk Bush’s Kool-Aid?” Oh, the irony! Are you serious, Mr. Moore? You did not consider the racist insinuation of that question? Dave Chapelle will be all over that material. Forget the Kool-Aid comment. You seriously think Al-Qaeda is the only threat to security? Not the Taliban and other independently operating radical Sunni movements allied with Al-Qaeda? This is why it would be miserable to live in your frame of mind. Where is the reality? And you’re neglecting Pakistan… probably intentionally.

Also, using the people who cried the night of his victory is not legitimate leverage for President Obama’s decision. The people who voted for him were not crying alone because the people who didn’t vote for him were crying as well. I recant my apologies because you can’t fix oblivious. My apologies are for the thousands of people who believe you.

View Michael Moore’s Open Letter to President Obama at MichaelMoore.com.

…Because she loves meat so much!

In Palin’s newly released memoir, she has confessed her love for consuming meat. Her philosophy is that, “If God had not intended for us to eat animals, how come He made them out of meat?” This is a real excerpt from her book; she really wrote this. The intertextuality with Jessica Simpson and “Chicken of the Sea” is uncanny. At least Simpson did not pursue a career in politics. Ms. Palin then continues to say, ” there’s plenty of room for all Alaska’s animals– right next to the mashed potatoes.”

It is easy to laugh at the lack of intelligence in her statement, but the context in which she uses it is quite funny. Ms. Palin’s statement is poking fun at hosting a vegan for dinner at her home. She says, “I could whip them up a salad, then explain my philosophy on being a carnivore.” Most people can appreciate the humor, however she surely has angered a few PETA activists who “would rather go naked.” She continues, “I love meat… I eat pork chops, thick bacon burgers… But I especially love moose and caribou.” At least she didn’t say she likes to hunt and eat polar bear. She might, but she didn’t say it.

This Thanksgiving, Palin and her family will gather around a feast, celebrating gratitude, and she will be thankful that God made turkeys our of meat… so that we can eat them. Happy Thanksgiving to all!

“What’s so crazy about that?” Lou Dobbs replied, when asked about the possibility of a presidential bid. Earlier this month, Mr. Dobbs amicably parted ways with CNN “to pursue new opportunities,” Mr. Dobbs says, “It’s one of the discussions that we’re having.” The last of the original CNN anchors, Lou Dobbs was released from his contract after 29 years. However, he continues to anchor The Lou Dobbs show, his daily radio broadcast.

A loyal supporter launched loudobbsforpresident.org last January, in an effort to rally supporters for a potential bid in 2012. The creator of the website, William Gheen says, “Lou Dobbs would make a good president because he is truly a man of the people.” In nearly three decades as anchor , Mr. Dobbs has cast himself as a “tough, relentless, independent,” however a possible presidential bid may require him to endure “partisan nonsense” and lean right or left. He says, “I just don’t even know what to tell you in terms of where I’m leaning.” He said, “For the first time I’m actually listening to some people about politics,” rather than being listened to.

Mr. Dobbs is a strong advocate for legal immigration which could make him a favorable candidate in conservative circles. Run, illegal immigrants, run! Three years left to find a path to citizenship with Obama in the White House. Legal immigration and the broken borders of the U.S. are issues for which Mr. Dobbs is most wholehearted. Maybe Dobbs will remain loyal to his Independent political position, however the likeliness of success for an Independent candidate is marginal.

Recently, Kate Moss interviewed with a fashion website WWD. In that interview, she was asked what her motto is, where she answered one is “nothing tastes as good as skinny feels.” Certainly, Kate Moss has made a very lucrative living as a delicate looking supermodel, which established a sort of trend in the modeling industry. However, there is no reason for her to be publicly criticized for a belief which shaped her life and supported what she has become. There is nothing “very unfortunate” about her words as one eating disorder activist has said. What is unfortunate is the global magnitude of the obesity epidemic, in children and adults.

The number of lives at risk as a result of diseases induced by the state of obesity are far greater than the number of folks suffering from malnourished eating disorders. Yes, they are both clinically diagnosed diseases, however eating disorders can no longer hold a candle to the enormity of obesity. Look at it from the other side, if Kristie Alley were to say, “everything tastes better than being healthy” which as a result becomes a motto on obesity support websites, that is far more concerning to me. If I had an obese child, spouse, parent, brother, or sister living by that motto, I would be very, very concerned. Similarly, there would be mayhem from the “Biggest Loser” trainers in response to something like this.

This is not to determine one is worse than the other, it is just to reveal the bigger picture. Skinny is according to an individual’s state of mind. Skinny is unique to the individual, like fingerprints. If you think about it, Kate Moss’s message could possibly have a positive influence on those battling obesity. Moss’s motto is relative to everyone in their own sense. Personally, her motto is relative because no matter how good the taste of something, nothing is worth carrying an additional 30% or more of weight. The ability to be physically unrestrained, free of heart and blood pressure disease, and diabetes is priceless.

A year has passed since President Barack Obama stood before a crowd in Grant Park as the president-elect. After a long campaign for “hope” and “change” he made dozens of promises to the American people and mainly his supporters. In one year, of those promises, how many promises has Obama kept and how many has be broken? He announced to the emotional crowd, “The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term.” In a year since this declaration, it seems President Obama’s progress is off to a slow start.

The mostly “unchecked” list of promises include immigration reform, health care, and new financial regulations. Many of Obama’s campaign promises are marked as “in the works”, however time is slipping faster than the progress of “change”.

As Obama campaigned his presidency he promised to return the troops in Iraq home in 16 months, and “finish the fight against al Qaeda in Afghanistan.” Those 16 months have turned into 19, and as the troops remain on Iraqi grounds, Obama has deployed an additional 20,000 with consideration of sending thousands more. Obama also promised to oppose mandatory insurance and fining people who do not have insurance. The health care bill is “in the works,” however, both oppositions will likely appear in his health care bill and chalk up broken promises. President Obama also promised that lobbyists “will not work in my White House,” yet they are still present.

Of all Obama’s promises, kept, broken, or in the works, there are also dozens of promises receiving “no action.” Nearly a quarter of his term is complete, and there barely seems to be a dent in the list of promises Obama has made. His presidential clock is ticking and he has about 3 years to start taking action on his list of “no action” and “in the works.” How many promises of “change” will be kept, and how many will be broken? Or how many will receive any action at all at this progressive rate?

Is there really any chance at long term success for bribing the Taliban to join our forces?

Apparently President Barack Obama “hopes” there is a chance, since last week he signed a $680 billion defense appropriations bill to fund the military operations in fiscal 2010. The strategy of paying Taliban members to join American forces against the radical Taliban is an element of this bill to receive a piece of the payout. There is a popular Afghan phrase, “You can rent an Afghan, but you can’t buy him,” but the U.S. Government is willing to spend billions of dollars and try anyway.

The defense of the strategy reveals the Taliban members of Afghanistan are dissimilar to those in Iraq. They are less motivated by the extreme ideologies and religious fervor, and more motivated by employment or income. To them, their loyalty to the Taliban is conditional and can be reversed if their conditions from American forces are better. Senator Carl Levin said, “They believe an effort to attract these fighters to the governments side could succeed, if they are offered security for themselves and their families,” as well as granted amnesty. The offering of amnesty is not a new concept to separate Taliban members from their leaders, however offering monetary compensation is.

A similar tactic was applied in Iraq, however these “bribes” we called “employment opportunities.” Of the Taliban in Afghanistan, General McChrystal says, “Most are operating for pay; some are under a commander’s charismatic leadership; some are frustrated with local leaders.” Certainly, there is a lot of truth to this statement. However, relying solely on bribing the Taliban to join positive forces has little promise for long term stability for Afghanistan.

Long term success for Afghanistan and their people does not reflect some Blockbuster movie scene where some nations chalk up the “W” and others defeat. This has more to do with Afghanistan’s ability to maintain a stable government after the separated Taliban members are no longer on the American payroll. An expert on the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, Nicholas Schmidle, said “So long as the Americans are keenly aware of this, you’re buying a very, very, very temporary allegiance… If that’s the foundation for moving forward, it’s a shaky foundation.” At this point, there is a clear effort to rent some Afghans, however there is no promise we can buy them out permanently.

After the unfortunate events Monday, where 18 Americans were killed in Afghanistan, President Obama departed D.C by Marine One to Dover Air Force Base in the late hours Wednesday night to meet the bodies. Those 18 Americans add to the death toll as the most fatal month in Afghanistan for Americans. In the current events leading up to this Dover visit, Obama has received much criticism for his actions on proceeding in Afghanistan.

In mixed responses, some praise the President’s efforts for paying respect to the American heroes upon their arrival to their homeland, and appreciate the humanity of the Commander in Chief. Sadly, others believe it is just another publicity stunt as if Obama is still campaigning to the Americans and is beating around the Bush (no pun intended) in his decision for Afghanistan. Regardless of Obama’s agenda, those fallen sons and daughters deserve the utmost respect and honor for their service to our nation.

The GOP is really laying the pressure on Obama because they believe the troops overseas are in danger if they do not get more help. The additional 18 Americans killed Monday only reinforce their beliefs. Senator John McCain (AZ) is one who has strongly criticized Obama for taking too much time in his decision making, as he believes if decisions are made more swiftly, the President has an opportunity to prevent similar events.

Even the lefts are supporting the troop surge, as Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) stated on the deployment of more troops, ” In my mind, you should pay for the cost whatever way.” This is a valid statement from chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, in control of funding operations in Afghanistan. Murtha says, “You can take it out of other programs or you can raise taxes.”

From the White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, who accompanied Obama to Dover Air Force Base, stated the President’s decision proceeding in Afghanistan is near its end. But has it already been to long?

In the opinion of former Vice President Dick Cheney, President Obama appears “afraid to make a decision” on the proceedings in Afghanistan. Thank you Captain Obvious!

During a conservative gathering, President Barack Obama’s harshest critic, Cheney, is never hesitant to spare his two cents when it comes to the President’s actions. He declared, “The White House must stop dithering while America’s armed force are in danger.” Yes, it would seem impulsive for Obama to pull the trigger without much consideration (i.e. he doesn’t want to shoot his friend in the face). However, with the recommendations of General Stanley McChrystal, commander of troops in Afghanistan, this certainly is a time sensitive matter.

Obama does have an obligation to generate a solution or come to consensus for his commander. Cheney said, “Having announced his Afghanistan strategy last March, President Obama now seems afraid to make a decision, and unable to provide his commander on the ground with the troops he needs to complete his mission.” Surely, General McChrystal offered a lengthy explanation for his recommendation to deploy more troops, therefore Cheney’s statements are redundant. Cheney, have you been in a cave for the last two weeks?

Certainly, the President is playing a bit of a waiting game, however Obama’s decision truly will reflect whether he can “make good on his promise” as Cheney said. The critical element in this situation is prioritizing the support of the men and women overseas. If they need more support as General McChrystal recommends, it would be in the President’s best interest to act swiftly and responsibly.

Does the president really deserve to be titled a peacemaker?

The president, of just nine months, receiving a Nobel Peace Prize brings a lot of shock value. However, Barack Obama is not the first nor the last president to receive this prestigious prize. The real shock is what has he accomplished to receive this honor? It seems premature to award someone for their plans and ideas to win hearts and minds which don’t have much to be supported by at this point in time. Obama’s mouth has signed a check his actions can’t cash, yet. What happens if his presidential term finishes before anything positive results from his “ideas”? Does the Nobel Committee take his prize back, or give him a pat on the back and say, “Good effort, anyway”? He has received praise and congratulations from both Democrats and Republicans, but he has also drawn a lot of criticism.

The underlying element is Obama’s vision to end extreme ideologies isn’t his own. The desire to establish Israeli-Palestinian peace is not breaking news. Not only was it not Obama’s idea to fight extreme ideologies in Iraq and Afghanistan, receiving a Nobel Peace Prize on the same day as meeting with his war council to deploy 40,000 additional troops to a war seems worse than ironic. Did he define what winning would mean? He received an honor for something he figuratively represents. If he is in fact such a peacemaker, and worthy of this honor, why would he agree to deploy more troops? Not only is he pissing off the people who support him, he’s still pissing off the people who don’t. However, many people believe he should end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or at least establish some success, in order to be awarded this prize. Public opinion varies as some say his prize is well deserved, and some say it is a Nobel Speech Prize.

As if the demands from General McChrystal to deploy more troops were not enough pressure for the president, he is now holding the weight of this controversial peace prize as he makes a significant decision affecting the future of the war in Afghanistan. Therefore in the wake of this prize, the United States has a commander in chief playing rocks, paper, scissors in the Oval Office.

In his speech at the Rose Garden, Obama’s statement was, “I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments”. We understand Mr. President, that’s because nothing has been accomplished. Congratulations President Obama… for not being George Bush. Only the future will tell, but for now it appears a Nobel Peace Prize can just fall out of a Cracker Jacks box.

Setting a “supreme” example for all Americans selected to jury duty, recently appointed Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor, was summoned to jury duty this week. After throwing away several letters, she finally appeared when she received the threat of facing serious penalties, “whatever that means” she said. She exhausted a list of excuses to be relieved of her civil duty, fabricating an infirm grandmother, claiming she has “psychological problems”, sciatica issues, and she didn’t think she “could be fair and impartial if the defendant was white”. No, I’m not making this up. She then goes on to say, “The guy is totally guilty, by the way. You can tell just by looking at him”. Therefore, the defendant is probably white. She adds, “this all just goes to show what a huge joke the justice system is”. Has she heard that she works for the justice system?

Adding to her list of complaints, she claims the payout at $80 a day isn’t nearly enough to cover living expenses. Hopefully, her $208,100 salary as Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court can assist with her financial troubles. Sotomayor additionally complains, “It’s so boring. I’m totally daydreaming most of the time,” she continues “Honestly, I don’t know how anyone could possibly pay attention to all that testimony and evidence and legal mumbo jumbo all day long.”

Justice system aside for the moment, this interview is a joke. As President Obama’s nominated Associate Justice, Sotomayor publicly claiming psychological problems and professing racism is not going help resolve the issues in the justice system or the American civil duty as a juror for that matter. How did she qualify for jury duty, let alone the Supreme Court?

As if Sotomayor had a choice, she has accepted serving as a juror and she prays “to God this thing doesn’t make it all the way to the Supreme Court.” Is she done talking yet?