Woman to Woman

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

this is funny! CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (AP) - Shawn Turschak of Chapel Hill was tired of someone stealing McCain-Palin campaign signs from his yard. Turschak, with a degree in electrical engineering, hooked up a third sign to a power source for an electric pet fence Monday and also put up a surveillance camera. The News & Observer of Raleigh reported that a 9-year-old boy with an Obama-Biden sign grabbed the McCain-Palin sign and got a jolt on Tuesday.

The boy’s father, Andrew Noble, upset that his son had been shocked, showed up at Turschak’s door. Soon an Orange County sheriff’s deputy also showed up at the Turschak’s home.

Noble said his son just wanted to see how the sign was put together. Turschak said the boy intended to swap out the signs.

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

All your bases are belong to US! Vote for change we need! Vote McCain/PALIN! ‘08. Paid for by the liberal that still buy this newspaper!

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

Journalists from three major newspapers that endorsed John McCain — the Washington Times, the New York Post and the Dallas Morning News — have been booted from Barack Obama’s campaign plane for the final leg of the presidential race.

The Washington Times reported Friday that it was notified of the Obama campaign’s decision Thursday evening — even though the paper has covered Obama from the start.

Executive Editor John Solomon told FOXNews.com that the Obama campaign said it didn’t have enough seats on the plane, but “I don’t think the explanation makes sense to us.”

“We’ve been traveling since 2007 with him. … We’re a relevant newspaper — every day we break news,” Solomon said. “And to suddenly be kicked off the plane for people who haven’t covered it as aggressively or thoroughly as we are … it sort of feels unfair.”

He said the newspaper protested but was turned down again by the campaign.

“I can only hope that the candidate who describes himself as wanting to unite the nation doesn’t have some sort of litmus test for who he decides gets to cover the campaign,” Solomon said, noting that the Obama campaign’s decision came just two days after the paper endorsed McCain.

According to the Web site The Drudge Report, the three newspapers’ reporters were told to find alternative transportation by Sunday so that the plane could accommodate “network bigwigs” and reporters from two black magazines, Essence and Jet.

Also joining up with the Obama campaign are the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times. According to the campaign, the decision to shuffle around reporters was made because they did not want to add a second plane.

“Unfortunately, demand for seats on the plane during this final weekend has far exceeded supply, and because of logistical issues we made the decision not to add a second plane,” Obama senior adviser Anita Dunn said in a written statement. “This means we’ve had to make hard and unpleasant for all concerned decisions about limiting some news organizations and in some cases not being in a position to offer space to news organizations altogether.”

Campaign aides said they are assisting other news outlets with hotel rooms and buses so they can still cover the race.

Dallas Morning News Editor Bob Mong told FOXNews.com that the “indication” from the Obama campaign was that they were kicked off the plane since they don’t represent a national outlet and they don’t represent a swing state.

“We argued that [considering] the size of the Morning News and stature, we obviously would want to be on board,” Mong said. “We’re obviously not happy about it, and continue to protest.”

He said, in fairness, that the McCain campaign recently pulled Morning News staff off the Republican’s plane when space became an issue — but he said the Morning News would be back on McCain’s plane again this weekend.

Obama is not the only candidate to play hardball with the press. McCain’s campaign has reportedly barred Time columnist Joe Klein and New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, who have been critical of the Republican candidate, from the Republican candidate’s plane.

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

McCAIN wins! McCain wins! YEAH! VICTORY IS SWEET….oops sorry, that is for next WED, please ignore until then!

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!

By JokeDay

October 31, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this

John McCain and Barack Obama somehow ended up at the same barbershop. As they sat there, each being worked on by a different barber, not a word was spoken. The barbers were even afraid to start a conversation, for fear it would turn to politics. As the barbers finished their shaves, the one who had McCain in his chair reached for the aftershave.

McCain was quick to stop him saying, ‘No thanks, my wife will smell that and think I’ve been in a wh-rehouse,’

The second barber turned to Obama and said, ‘How about you?’

Obama replied, ‘Go ahead, my wife doesn’t know what the inside of a wh-rehouse smells like.’

By Logical Dude

October 31, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this

HEY! Both commentators are right today! Many on the left and center will vote for Obama because of Bush. Many on the right will vote for McCain because of the economy.

So, from each side, they are both correct. But each are missing valuable information on many other voters who are voting for the man they feel is best fit to lead the country.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this

Bruno, with all due respect if you don’t believe the campaign promises (which I understand) what do you base your vote on? I know that all politicians lie (on BOTH sides of the aisle) but if you don’t believe anything they say what DOES motivate your vote?

Personally, Sunshine, I try to look at a candidate’s past actions and associations for clues as to how they will behave once in office. Campaign rhetoric is only important to me if a candidate frequently changes their pledges in order to suit whatever audience they are speaking to.

In the case of Barack Obama, he fails on both accounts, IMO. He has seemingly spent his adult life working for and associating himself with people who think the USA is the most horrible, racist, unfair country in the entire world. His own wife stated that for the “first time in her adult life” she was proud of the US because her husband was nominated. She also has groused about how “unfair” it was that she and her husband had to pay back their student loans. The man spent 20 years attending a race-based church which praised Farrakhan. And while many of you here seem to think his years spent as a “community organizer” were noble, I don’t see how his get-out-the-vote efforts for the Dailey political machine in Chicago qualify him for anything other than an investigation into voter fraud. As a US Senator, he has compiled the most liberal voting record of any Senator, bar none.

As for his campaign pledges, he has changed his proposed tax plan more than once, and still hasn’t presented a clear number as to what he thinks the capital gains tax should be. When it was pointed out to him that raising the capital gains tax would likely result in LOWER tax collections, he stated that he didn’t care, that it was more a matter of “fairness”. On at least two occasions, he has openly supported the idea of “income redistribution”, whereby money is taken from one group of people and given to another, plain and simple. This goes way beyond changing the tax code so that the “rich” pay a higher percentage than they are already paying. As for tailoring his speeches to fit his audiences, his comments to the San Fran crowd in which he insulted small-town residents in PA speaks volumes to me.

Right now, the most important issue to most voters is the economy. I strongly believe that raising taxes will extend the recession we are now in. As such, I think that Obama is the wrong man for the job. Do I think that McCain has all the answers?? Heck no, but he appears to be the lesser of the two evils to me. He is proposing a more laissez-faire attitude toward the economy, which I believe will allow the “market correction” to run its course more quickly. Just my opinions, of course.

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

Right now, the most important issue to most voters is the economy. I strongly believe that raising taxes will extend the recession we are now in.

(shakes head…)

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

Will we wait and see what the new guy can do and give him a chance to do it, or will we sabotage every day with calculated disdain and prophetic omen?

Sabotage things?—You mean like all of you liberals have been doing the past 8 years under Bush?

I was crushed after the Supreme court handed over the presidency!

Hopefully you will get your facts straight one day regarding the 2000 election, Sunshine. A Florida District Court of Appeals judge (a registered Democrat) correctly ruled that Gore’s challenge in FL was (1) past the required deadline and (2) violated state and federal laws regarding due process since Gore asked for recounts in only a few specific counties. The FL Supreme court attempted to overturn that ruling when the US Supreme Court stepped in and restored the original ruling. Subsequent recounts by the AP and UPI of the Florida ballots showed that Bush would have won anyway had the recounts gone forward. Yet still, 8 years later, you are still bellyaching about it. What gives?

By h ryder

October 31, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this

I once held the view that all adult citizens of this country should have the right to vote. No longer do I hold this view. The comments of far too many people have led me to understand that these folks are either ignorant, bigoted, uneducated, nonthinking, stupid, greedy, or any combination of these or similar factors. ALL VOTERS should be required to demonstrate a minimum rational thought process that would lead each to vote for the best view or candidate for ALL residents of the country rather than their own totally self-centered interests.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this

shakes head

JokesOn—It is a FACT that Obama stated that he didn’t care if raising the capital gains tax would result in lower tax collections.

You have any real rebuttal to that, or are you going to simply shake your head?

By Gale

October 31, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this

Several things. They vary, of course. Pride, disgust, the war, the economy.

Bruno, I mostly agree with you. But taxes are a delicate matter. I think the tax and spend structure is out of whack. We are going to have to have taxes to pay for the spending excesses and clean up the mess. The war will not evaporate next week. The ecomomy will be in ICU for a while. The economists don’t all agree on what to do.

I believe the folks who say we need to be spending. The spending should not be in the form of checks to people who don’t have jobs. It should be in the form of jobs for people who need jobs. Those should be jobs that produce something and offer dignity and purpose for the workers. People with jobs buy things; spread the wealth. People with jobs are respected. We need jobs that will put people to work sooner than later. Our infrastructure needs work, but we need jobs that will not take years of planning. Architects and engineers still have jobs. Construction workers are hurting now. Obama has talked about green jobs. Let’s see them. I would like to see a big push into recycling, myself.

By louise

October 31, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this

You know I have not heard much this election year about family values. Lets see, I wonder if its because McCain has skelletons in his closet (meaning) an ex-wife, and kids who he left, after she was seriously injured, and disfigured in an auto accident, and married his mistress, oh by the way, they met in a bar while on a trip.

Or is it because Palin’s 16 year old daughter has showed what kind of upbringing she has given her kids, and it took Palin several years to get a college degree. Or is it because, (maybe, just maybe) you good old Boys & Girls cant get an ounce of dirt of Obama & his wife.

Its still a sad day, in this world, that people are so full of hate just because a person is another color, race, or religious background.

One day, hopefully in my lifetime, we’ll see some honest regard for the next person’s views, and beliefs, and not have to resort to lies, and hate mongering.

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this

Sabotage things?—You mean like all of you liberals have been doing the past 8 years under Bush?

For gods sake Bruno!

Bush shot himself in the foot. read back and you will see that both sides were playing nicely, especially after 9/11, until Bush started his with us or against us/Homeland security/extend executive branch’s power more that ANY president ever/lied directly to us in a matter that involves lives and billions of dollars….etc

What marked the day for me was when he folded under the pressure and did exactly what he said we as americans should not do: “They (AQ) only win if we live in fear and change our ways out of that fear.”

By Sunshine

October 31, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this

JokesOn—It is a FACT that Obama stated that he didn’t care if raising the capital gains tax would result in lower tax collections.

Could you pleas site the source for the quote that states this FACT?

By Gale

October 31, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this

n ryder: Now I am shaking my head. I completely understand the position, but it sounds like a vent. My favorite requirement has been that only property owners can vote. Obviously, that is no proof of responsibility anymore. Gandalf and I agreed that military service should be required for the right to vote. That has no chance of becoming reality. I have seen several comments from Australians saying voting should be mandatory for all citizens. Citizens are fined if they fail to vote. And they manage to vote on a single day nationwide. It should not be the circus we make it.

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this

JokesOn—It is a FACT that Obama stated that he didn’t care if raising the capital gains tax would result in lower tax collections.

You have any real rebuttal to that, or are you going to simply shake your head?

Is that what I friggen posted? Or was it: Right now, the most important issue to most voters is the economy. I strongly believe that raising taxes will extend the recession we are now in.

And, as a side note, now you are talking out of both sides of your mouth, no? You are against him because he will (incorrectly) raise your taxes, and is also wrong for lowering some taxes.

Or are you in fact ok with ‘spreading the wealth’ as long as it fits in with your idea of who should get the $$?

I, like most people in the US do not mind taxes as long as they go to people and projects that need it and is well spent. They only people that are against new tax codes are those that are mistaken on Obama’s plan (you and many others that buy the propaganda) and those that are currently benefiting from the tax code (the selfishly rich). Just looking at two of his area of expertise, a community org and teaching constitutional law for ten years, is enough real experience to understand what is constitutional and how to gather/spend money in a way that reaches the people.

It is clear that you have only read/listened to the 10sec sound bites, or you would have concrete, non-scare tactic, basis to vote McCain. You have never cited any real numbers (those youtube vids are cut right after he explains the minor criteria that applies to a person that makes 150k and 200k that results in their taxes going up).

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this

McCain Wins! YEAH! I Love the Headline! “MAJOR UPSET MCCAIN/PALIN WIN!” or “OBAMA? YOUR MOMMA!”

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:09 PM | Link to this

Obama Once Confessed That He Is A Radical - In his book “Dreams from my Father”, Obama confesses that he harbors the same negative racial stereotypes as Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his mentor for 20 years. On pages 198 to 204, Obama says that black nationalism, a steady attack on the white race would be justified if it could deliver. On page 100, Obama says he went out of his way to choose Marxist professors as his friends. Obama wrote: “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully, the more politically active black students, the foreign students, the Chicanos, the Marxist professors and punk rock performance poets.”

From the MLK republicans website!

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this

OBAMA AND ACORN?

NBRA Newsletter - Obama vs McCain Candidate Comparison NBRA’s Denver MLK Billboard Campaign Was A Huge Success Martin Luther King Was A Republican Billboards - Photos An Open Letter To Obama From Black Republicans NBRA At The NAACP Convention 2008 Democrats Smeared MLK in the 1960s For Those With Black RepubIican PAC Questions - Click Here In her article, “A Covenant With Life: Reclaiming MLK’s Legacy”, MLK’s niece, Dr. Alveda C. King, affirms that her uncle Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican See The NBRA Grassroots Activities - click here Order Black Republican Forum Videos National Black Republican Association Featured Commentary

WARNING! A vote for Obama is a vote for Socialism. “An oppressive government is more to be feared than a tiger.” - Confucious

Obama and the law by Thomas Sowell is an article that exposes the type of courts and laws that Barack Obama wants for us. As Thomas Sowell writes “Do we really want judges who decide cases based on who you are, rather than on the facts and the law?”

Obama: Fundamental Change? Count on It by David Limbaugh provides a scary account of how Obama’s promised changes could lead to entrusting this man with unprecedented power, giving him a license to operate with minimum scrutiny and an opposition party effectively impotent to oppose his radical blueprint for America.

Obama and “The Left” by Thomas Sowell is an article that explores how some people who see the fraud in what Obama is saying are amazed that others do not. Sowell explains how Obama knows what con men have long known, that their job is not to convince skeptics but to enable the gullible to continue to believe what they want to believe.

Democrats Denounced Gen. Colin Powell as a “House Negro”. Before Gen Colin Powell adopted the Democratic Party’s socialist policies and endorsed Sen. Barack Obama, the Democrats denigrated him as a “House Negro.”

Uncovered is this video that was shot by WKRN Video Journalist Beau Fleenor at Tennessee State University in Nashville, Tennessee which shows Al Sharpton demeaning Gen. Colin Powell as a “House Negro.” The Question: “Rev. Al Sharpton, do you believe that political leaders such as Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell are viewed as “house negroes” by other African Americans, by going along with the President against their beliefs?”

This article appeared in a Portland, Oregon paper and is one of many exposing how hardly a ripple of protest was made by black Democrats when Harry Belafonte publicly denounced Gen. Colin Powell as a “House Negro.”

Obama Disagrees with Gen. Colin Powell. This is a surprising video wherein Obama makes the candid confession that he is not qualified to be president.

Obama’s Racial Firebomb

With Obama supporter black Democrat Congressman John Lewis leading the charge—comparing Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin to the 1960’s racist Democrat George Wallace—the Obama camp has tossed a racial firebomb into the election, a blatant attempt to intimidate average Americans into voting for Sen. Barack Obama who is a far left-wing radical socialist, or risk being called a racist.

Lewis, A Lazy Media, And Their Race Cards By Bob Parks shows just how predictable the Democrats are in playing the race card when he wrote: “The only question I have for Congressman John Lewis is, ‘What took you so long?”

Will Republicans Wimp Out On Race? By Clarence V. McKee challenges Republican leaders to stand up to this predictable, election year race baiting by Democrats.

In reality, it is the Democrats who have a 150-year history of racism.

WSJ - The Democrats’ Missing History By Jeffrey Lord

WSJ - Whitewash - The racist history the Democratic Party wants you to forget by Bruce Bartlett

The claim that all of the racist Democrats became Republicans is false. The racist Democrats that Republican Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was fighting died Democrats.

Democrats refuse to apologize to blacks by Frances Rice

Today, Democrats continue to practice vile racism against black Republicans. Our “Open Letter to Obama from Black Republicans” calls upon Sen. Obama to apologize for his party’s past and present racism.

See the article “Simple Sambo” and “Ignorant Mammy”: That’s how Democrats view Blacks

History Test (click here)

Who is Barack Obama?

Obama The Slum Lord Scandal - A Boston Globe investigation exposes corrupt Obama with an article and video about poor blacks condemning Obama

Disturbing video - Louis Farakhan calls Obama “The Messiah.”

Obama Once Confessed That He Is A Radical - In his book “Dreams from my Father”, Obama confesses that he harbors the same negative racial stereotypes as Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his mentor for 20 years. On pages 198 to 204, Obama says that black nationalism, a steady attack on the white race would be justified if it could deliver. On page 100, Obama says he went out of his way to choose Marxist professors as his friends. Obama wrote: “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully, the more politically active black students, the foreign students, the Chicanos, the Marxist professors and punk rock performance poets.”

Obama’s Radical Relationships

The Ad Obama does not want you to see

The Bomber as School Reformer By Sol Stern shows how Obama is covering up his relationship with Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist. Obama was not a child, but a grown man when he decided his personal path to power and influence lay through Bill Ayers’ connections. Obama should not be let off the hook and should be held accountable for his relationships with Ayers who bombed the Pentagon and other buildings. A hidden thread in the Obama-Ayers relationship is the socialist revolutionary agenda that they want to impose on our country’s public schools.

The Obama-Ayers connection By Dick Morris raises the question about what kind of president would Obama make since, within the past 10 years, he participated in a radical program of political education conceptualized by an admitted radical terrorists.

Obama Brings Chicago-style Voter Intimidation Tactics to Missouri - Gov. Matt Blunt issued a scathing statement about how Sen. Barack Obama has attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign by attempting to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics in violation of civil rights.

Obama’s Corrupt ACORN Roots

ACORN/Obama Mantra: Let Every Fraudulent Count!

Discovered is this chilling video showing Obama caught saying ACORN and friends will shape his presidential agenda. ACORN endorsed Obama and, as part of a nation-wide voter scam, Obama recently spent $832,000 of his campaign money to subsidize ACORN activities.

These shocking video clips are from ACORN meetings proving the close relationship between Obama and ACORN, the radical group that pushes a 1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism, victimology and dependency on government handouts in poor black communities. The clips show ACORN community organizers chanting “OBAMA!”

Nuts! How ACORN got me into vote scam by Jean MacIntosh provides a report on two Ohio voters, including Domino’s Pizza worker Christopher Barkley, who claimed that they were hounded by ACORN to register to vote several times, even though they made it clear they’d already signed up.

Obama was the attorney for ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), a radical, left-wing group that is under investigation for voter registration fraud in several states and is at the center of our nation’s financial crisis because ACORN, using the Community Reinvestment Act passed by Democrats in Congress, forced banks and mortgage companies to make risky loans to people who could not pay the money back.

Inside Obama’s Acorn By Stanley Kurtz shows that Obama’s most important radical connection has been hiding in plain sight.

More ACORN Vote Fraud Attempts - Article By Warner Todd Huston explores the investigations of ACORN for voter fraud that have been conducted in Ohio, Colorado, Missouri, Michigan, Texas, Connecticut and Washington. According to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Obama’s campaign has been forced to report over $800,000 in donations from ACORN that was not previously reported. ACORN is tied to labor unions and is pulling out all of the stops to get Obama elected.

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:12 PM | Link to this

NBRA Newsletter - Obama vs McCain Candidate Comparison NBRA’s Denver MLK Billboard Campaign Was A Huge Success Martin Luther King Was A Republican Billboards - Photos An Open Letter To Obama From Black Republicans NBRA At The NAACP Convention 2008 Whitewash - The racist history the Democratic Party wants you to forget by Bruce Bartlett The Democrats’ own history with race By Bruce Bartlett In their Own Words: North Carolina Democrats Issue A Resolution of Apology for 1898 Race Riot Democrats Smeared MLK in the 1960s For Those With Black RepubIican PAC Questions - Click Here In her article, “A Covenant With Life: Reclaiming MLK’s Legacy”, MLK’s niece, Dr. Alveda C. King, affirms that her uncle Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican Unveiled: Democrats’ Racist Past by Frances Rice See The NBRA Grassroots Activities - click here Order Black Republican Forum Videos NBRA’s Denver MLK Billboard Campaign Was A Huge Success The Democrats showed up in Denver for their convention to anoint Obama as the “Messiah” and were greeted by our MLK billboards. The Democrats were not happy campers!

An indication of the success of our MKL billboard campaign came from an unlikely source. One liberal pundit, Jeffrey Toobin, lamented on CNN that “Barack Obama will not assume the mantle of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.” YES!

Our MLK billboard campaign worked and stopped Obama dead in his tracks. Obama was poised to give his political acceptance speech on the 45th anniversary of MLK’s inspirational “I Have a Dream” civil rights speech. Obama is no MLK. Obama is a far left-wing radical Democrat who does not share our values. MLK was a minister and a Republican who embraced our traditional values.

Thanks to all of our supporters who helped to rain on Obama’s parade and expose the fallacy of Obama’s comparing himself to MLK!

By Sunshine

October 31, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this

This whole “He’s a socialist, he wants to spread the wealth” bad guy Obama nonsense is a joke. We “spread the wealth” every day in this country, as has already been said here, on roads, schools, police departments, fire departments, community centers, public parks, public beaches, public transportation, national monuments, the military, mayor’s to president’s salaries and pensions. Almost every tax plan that Mr. Obama has proposed is only taking away the things put in place by GW Bush. And you know what? We were doing really well with a balanced budget, a lower to no national dept and a stronger economy then. Bush has done nothing but F* up the system. And you want to sing his praises and talk about someone saying “this didn’t work, lets go back to something that did” is a socialist. This is crazy, how could anyone ANYONE look at our governments spending/taxation from the last eight years and agree that it has helped us?

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

GTG,

It is bad enough you plaguing the blog with your childish DUMBO routine, but please do not spam it and solidify your total worthlessness.

really. Please just stay content posting your 3 sentence retarded drivel.

By Gale

October 31, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this

My goodness, Gandalf. May we assume you will be voting?

By fmoolten

October 31, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

That the presidential contest in Georgia this year is even close testifies to a trend few would have predicted. Support for Obama among Democrats is not surprising, but a striking development recently has been Barack Obama’s endorsement by prominent Republicans. The most notable was Colin Powell, but others include former Republican Governors, as well as Charles Fried, who was Ronald Reagan’s Solicitor General. Despite some policy differences with Obama, they have seen him as more stable, better informed, better qualified, and less impulsive on critical issues, including the nation’s economic crisis.

Possibly more important, as the election nears, some conservatives have grown terrified at the thought that Sarah Palin might become president in a complicated and dangerous world where her incompetence would put the nation at unprecedented risk. Even with the hope that a Palin presidency would never occur, that same alarm has impelled them to lose faith in the judgment of Senator McCain, based on his selection of an unqualified candidate for the second place on the ticket. It would be a mistake to confuse their preference for Obama with a permanent shift in political allegiance. At this point, their overriding concern appears to be the nation’s safety, but their support for Obama in this election may not be a good predictor of how they will vote in the future.

Fred Moolten

By Sunshine

October 31, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this

“To suggest that Martin could identify with a party that affirms preemptive, predatory war, and whose religious partners hint that God affirms war and favors the rich at the expense of the poor, is to revile Martin,” said the Rev. Joseph Lowery, the former president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, which the slain civil rights leader helped establish.

The younger King voted for Kennedy, and for Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson four years later. In that election, King publicly denounced the Republican candidate, Barry Goldwater.

That is why the ad was “a joke,” said Christopher Arps, a former spokesman for Rice and the association. “Anyone with any sense knows that most black people were Republican at one time. But it’s a far stretch to think that in the ’60s Martin Luther King was a Republican.”

(www. washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/18/AR2006101801754.html) Remove one space after www and btw this crap is 2 years old.

Go sell Crazy somewhere else Gandolf, we are all stocked up here!

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:37 PM | Link to this

Ancient 8th Grader, it’s education day! Sorry, just trying to spread the WEALTH OF KNOWLEDGE! OPEN your mind and see the futility of Mr. Obamas ways. HE is a SOCIALIST SUNSHINE. REMEMBER “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!” That the one! OBAMA IS A PUNKTARD!

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this

SS,

This is crazy, how could anyone ANYONE look at our governments spending/taxation from the last eight years and agree that it has helped us?

We should be very appreciative for all he did and feel bad for sabotaging his efforts.

You see, if we did not get in the way:

• they would have found WMDs

• we would be out of iraq

• they would not have to spy on us if we were loyal serfs…um….citizens

Not much different than when the abusive husband says: I only hit you because I loooooove you.

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this

Your truly are Crazy Funshine! MLK was a GOP member! How amazing is that! Washington Post is one step below PRAVDA! U crazy girl! Only a DUM BASS!!!! would thing the MLK would vote for that Socialist POS NOBAMA!

By Sunshine

October 31, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this

Ok, I didn’t think you would so let me do the homework for you Bruno:

April 17, 2008-In last night’s Democratic presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, moderator Charlie Gibson and Obama had the following exchange

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year — $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That’s not fair.

And what I want is not oppressive taxation. I want businesses to thrive, and I want people to be rewarded for their success. But what I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don’t have it and that we’re able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can’t do that for free.

OBAMA: And you can’t take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children and our grandchildren, and then say that you’re cutting taxes, which is essentially what John McCain has been talking about.

And that is irresponsible. I believe in the principle that you pay as you go. And, you know, you don’t propose tax cuts, unless you are closing other tax breaks for individuals. And you don’t increase spending, unless you’re eliminating some spending or you’re finding some new revenue. That’s how we got an additional $4 trillion worth of debt under George Bush. That is helping to undermine our economy. And it’s going to change when I’m president of the United States.

GIBSON: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.

OBAMA: Well, that might happen, or it might not. It depends on what’s happening on Wall Street and how business is going. I think the biggest problem that we’ve got on Wall Street right now is the fact that we got have a housing crisis that this president has not been attentive to and that it took John McCain three tries before he got it right.

And if we can stabilize that market, and we can get credit flowing again, then I think we’ll see stocks do well. And once again, I think we can generate the revenue that we need to run this government and hopefully to pay down some of this debt.

See, if you look past the headline and look at what them man really says, it makes a lot of sense, unless you agree we should mortgage our country to China for the next 3 generations?

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

KING OF THE 8TH GRADE! That reminds me of a very funny joke!
What do you tell a woman with 2 black eyes?

Nothin! You done told her twice!

By Gandalf, the Grey

October 31, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this

McCain/Palin win! McCain has a stroke! PALIN IS THE NEW PRES!

By Sunshine

October 31, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

Oh I didn’t site my source, the debate quote above was from (www. taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23137.html) again remove one space after www

By Abel Ochoa, McAllen, TX

October 31, 2008 3:27 PM | Link to this

The problem with McCain and the GOP is that the American people simply do not believe them anymore. The American people know that if it’s OK to “bail out” Market Street, then what’s wrong with also “bailing out” Main Street? The same old GOP tactics aren’t going to work anymore. The only chance left for the GOP is to attempt to steal the 2008 election like they did in 2000 and once again in 2004. But even that will probably not work as Senator Obama is a lot smarter than Senator Gore and Senator Kerry were to allow that to happen.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

JokesOn and Sunshine—I’ve been busy working, so will fill in the blanks as I am able today:

We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year — $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That’s not fair.

Exactly what is unclear about his statement here? He directly states that he believes the current capital gains tax rate is, in his own words, unfair. His comparison of investors to secretaries is invalid, however. When a person invests money, they are taking a significant risk that they will lose money. Someone earning a salary is taking no risk at all. Furthermore, unless the secretaries are earning top bucks, they likely are paying an overall tax rate that is less than 15% of their income.

Capital investors (risk takers) are the life-blood of the economy. Bet them down with higher taxes and the results are historically predictable: Less investment, less overall tax revenue collected.

And what I want is not oppressive taxation. I want businesses to thrive, and I want people to be rewarded for their success. But what I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don’t have it and that we’re able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

Again, I’m not sure what you read into this statement, but out of one side of his mouth, Obama pays lip service to businesses thriving, then out of the other side of his mouth he again references “fairness” and the ability to “finance” health care. Sounds like higher taxes to me.

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

Again, I’m not sure what you read into this statement, but out of one side of his mouth, Obama pays lip service to businesses thriving, then out of the other side of his mouth he again references “fairness” and the ability to “finance” health care. Sounds like higher taxes to me.

Sounds like he understands it would be an algorithm if you wrote it out, not an absolute number or final resting place. That is what I would have thought you could appreciate about him: he knows there is not a single correct answer in most all of these areas, but unfortunately people like quick simple answers.

That is the theme I see each time he speaks. He is sure to convey that these are multifaceted issues that are complex to begin with (if one is honest) and will always need to be tweaked over time.

You simply have bought into the propaganda that he won’t answer directly.

Let’s try this: what is the k value of I-75?

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 4:18 PM | Link to this

And, as a side note, now you are talking out of both sides of your mouth, no? You are against him because he will (incorrectly) raise your taxes, and is also wrong for lowering some taxes. Or are you in fact ok with ‘spreading the wealth’ as long as it fits in with your idea of who should get the $$?

This whole “He’s a socialist, he wants to spread the wealth” bad guy Obama nonsense is a joke. We “spread the wealth” every day in this country, as has already been said here, on roads, schools, police departments, fire departments, community centers, public parks, public beaches, public transportation, national monuments, the military, mayor’s to president’s salaries and pensions.

For clarity’s sake, I need to define “spreading the wealth” around for you. Taxes which are collected to pay for legitimate governmental expenses such as building roads is NOT spreading the wealth around, whomever said taxes are collected from. And for those of you who think the “rich” aren’t paying enough, on oft-quoted figure I hear is that the top 10% of wage earners are currently paying 70% of all taxes collected.

“Spreading the wealth around” in an Obama world will mean “refundable tax credits for the poor”, which means direct checks to the bottom wage earners, and not simply a reduction in the taxes they pay. Another tax figure I’ve heard quoted on talk radio is that the bottom 50% of wage earners pay less thatn 5% of the total amount of taxes collected. It’s not like they are paying much anyway.

I’m not sure how y’all define “fair”, but it appears to me that the vast majority of the current tax burden already falls on the shoulders of the “rich”. On a side note to JokesOn, since I am no longer a business owner, I’m not going to be socked as hard this year on the SSI matching taxes along with the other various sundry taxes that DeKalb County likes to hit the business owners with. I do, however, plan to sell a property next year in order to survive, and don’t feel like paying a higher capital gains tax. The 1031 exchange “loophole” has already been closed, so I’m looking at paying the full capital gains plus depreciation “recapture”.

By 2BFree

October 31, 2008 4:20 PM | Link to this

You know what is scarier than the thought of Sarah Palin being “a heartbeat” away from the Presidency?

The thought of Obama being President in the first place. Biden has even confessed that there will be an international event to “test the mettles of this guy” (funny he didn’t even say Obama. He has already confided to the fact that the action taken will not appear to be the correct form of action but he is asking for support none-the-less.

In other words Biden still believes as he did earlier in the year that Obama does not have the experience or skills to handle foreign issues. The economy will be back up in due time since it always goes in cycles. The war in Iraq is coming to a close, no thanks to Obama. But foreign affairs and terrorism is always going to be a constant threat and to have a candidate think that Russia and Iran “are no threat to the U.S.” is scarier than a vice-President that “can see Russia from her State”. Of Course Obama was corrected by his advisors and now admits Iran and Russia maybe more of a threat than he thought. But how many other lame ideas are in his head. The fact is, he has avoided any interviews that would ask him the hard questions on foreign policy and other things he knows little about. His propaganda machine is in full force and now he tosses any reporter than is associated with a media outlet supporting McCain. I guess censorship will be one of his first courses of action (actually the Dems have a Bill ready to cut off right wing radio shows) of the Obama Presidency. Then we will get “redistribution of wealth” as the upper middle class (last projection is $150,000 or more) and businesses right checks to those watching Oprah. Of course next will be a National Health Care sytem replacing private practice except for those still holding on to enough of their pay to afford it (this works great in Canada and Europe..not!!!). And of course I’m a “racist” and “hater” since I see this as Socialist and I’m willing to put it in writing.

Fact is, it doesn’t matter if this was Hillary Clinton or Jimmy Carter or any other left wing liberal. This is not right for our country and will be the beginning of the end. Oh well, at least I can hang on to my Bible and gun (wait Obama wants those to). Well maybe the end is near and God will deliver us from the evils of Washington.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 4:23 PM | Link to this

Sunshine, since you’re so good at googling, why don’t you take a moment and discover the true facts regarding the 2000 election. If you’re still going to insist that the US Supreme Court “gave” anything to Bush, you owe it to yourself to see the truth. I actually watched the Florida case personally, and remember the lame Democratic arguments that “more people intended to vote for Gore” than the actual votes showed. They tried to bring in some statistical “expert” to prove that point, but it backfired when the lawyer for the Republicans showed him how the Democrats actually changed his findings without his knowledge or approval.

Any reason you keep dodging this issue? Tell me again how supportive the Dems were for Bush, despite the fact that he won the election fair and square.

By yankee

October 31, 2008 4:24 PM | Link to this

Any chance a limit could be put on the number of posts made in one day?

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this

Sounds like he understands it would be an algorithm if you wrote it out, not an absolute number or final resting place. That is what I would have thought you could appreciate about him: he knows there is not a single correct answer in most all of these areas, but unfortunately people like quick simple answers.

I can appreciate that, JokesOn, but would be more comfortable with some straight talk regarding taxes. I wouldn’t be so concerned except for the fact that it appears likely that the Dems will have a filibuster-proof majority in both the House and Senate with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid leading the parade. Who knows what they will come up with?? I don’t, but don’t have a good feeling about it based on past experience with Democratically controlled Congresses (including the current one who completely ignored the impending housing/credit problems until we reached crisis level).

Am I chewing on sour grapes today?? You bet ya, I am. The biggest thorn in my side is that we are on the verge of electing the most liberal President since Jimmy Carter, and the Republican Party is strictly to blame for it. And, to add insult to injury, my (for now) GF has been displaying a glossy photo of Obama and Biden in her living room!! It’s too much for one man to bear…… ; > }

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this

For clarity’s sake, I need to define “spreading the wealth” around for you. Taxes which are collected to pay for legitimate governmental expenses such as building roads is NOT spreading the wealth around, whomever said taxes are collected from.

Ummmm….MANY roads are built purely to create jobs = spreading the wealth.

“Spreading the wealth around” in an Obama world will mean “refundable tax credits for the poor” To you it does because it fits your definition. Cite a source that shows his stated that.

Also, what was the rebate that just went on? And that they are talking about again?

on oft-quoted figure I hear is that the top 10% of wage earners are currently paying 70% of all taxes collected.

Yes, I know that figure well. If you have $10 and I have $10,000,000, and we both anti up 50% of our money; who is worse off? Who can still get medical coverage/a home/etc? If you look at the ability to prosper, who is more able, or is it even?

I do, however, plan to sell a property next year in order to survive, and don’t feel like paying a higher capital gains tax. The 1031 exchange “loophole” has already been closed, so I’m looking at paying the full capital gains plus depreciation “recapture”.

And this is what it comes down to… What’s the Pink Floyd line? “Share it fairly, but don’t take a slice of my pie!”

This selfishness results in the demise of almost all complex relationships - which is what a society is. Try having a relationship where everything is always policed to be 50/50. You will be single pretty fast.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this

The economy will be back up in due time since it always goes in cycles. The war in Iraq is coming to a close, no thanks to Obama. But foreign affairs and terrorism is always going to be a constant threat and to have a candidate think that Russia and Iran “are no threat to the U.S.” is scarier than a vice-President that “can see Russia from her State”.

2BFree: Excellent post, and very thoughtful commentary. I fully understand everyone’s disgust for Bush and the Republican Party in general. But, and a big but here, I still don’t see how electing the most liberal Senator we have is the answer. All I envision is more spending, more governmental control of our lives, and higher taxes. Just my opinions, of course.

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 4:40 PM | Link to this

Any reason you keep dodging this issue? Tell me again how supportive the Dems were for Bush, despite the fact that he won the election fair and square.

Once again, look at actual history. Both sides played nice until WB went all gun-ho with the with us/against us. Then lied. Then lied about lying…..rinse repeat. All while Repub congress rubber stamped his every wish. The current majority still does not have enough people to even filibuster. So, the compliant that Dims have been in control for 2 years is bs. It is a tenuous majority at best.

Now, he is trying to push through a boat load of deregulation before jumping ship to help out all his oil/big business buddies in a manner which will be VERY hard to reverse.

By h ryder

October 31, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

If you have read my post regarding voters demonstrating competency in the exercise, one only needs to read many of the other postings to ascertain that my conclusion is valid. And yes, I do have a vent opposed to people who exhibit one or more of my listed disqualifications for voting.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

This selfishness results in the demise of almost all complex relationships - which is what a society is.

The bottom line, JokesOn, is that I’ve already paid a small fortune in taxes in my lifetime, all because I dared to go to eight years of college (which I financed myself), then worked myself to the bone in order to build a secure future. In return, I’ve had the “privilege” of driving on the public roads and the (for now) freedom from atack from crazed Muslims. Call me selfish if you want, but I feel no obligation to fund other people’s health care.

You will be single pretty fast.

Right now, that doesn’t sound like such a bad idea.

BTW, since you seem to be setting yourself as an arbiter of “fairness”, have you ever owned a small business?? If you did, I don’t think you would be singing the same tune.

Try having a relationship where everything is always policed to be 50/50. You will be single pretty fast.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 4:48 PM | Link to this

JokesOn, Here is a direct quote from FactCheck.org:

The “welfare” claim rests on the argument, made in an Oct. 13 editorial in the Wall Street Journal, about refundable tax credits. Obama proposes to grant a number of refundable tax credits to low- and middle-income workers. For example, he would give a $500 tax credit ($1,000 for a couple) for workers, which would phase out for single workers making $75,000 or for couples making $150,000 per year. As the Journal editorial says: “You can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability.” That’s true enough. Whether or not that makes them “welfare” is a matter of interpretation, however. As the Journal editorial also says in its headline, “It depends on what the meaning of ‘tax cut’ is.”

For more sources, simply google in Obama refundable tax credits.

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

But, and a big but here, I still don’t see how electing the most liberal Senator we have is the answer.

For example, you think he is the MOST liberal senator???? Or are you exaggerating for effect?

Kind of railroads the discussion if not accurate.

Kind of like the actual socialist that is mad at people calling Obama one. He is not. He is not afraid of looking at functions from other countries/cultures to replace our broken ones. You have recommended a theory that is not practiced anywhere; and the repubs either want to prop up a dead horse or let it ride. But this is one more issue that does not effect you and the TOJs of the world so you do not care and only see it as $ out of your pocket.

When you have a mother/sister/loved one that is on the verge of being on the streets, in constant pain for the last 3 months from having shingles but cannot be treated for it, and they hear that there is no assistance beyond the shoddy help available now, come back to me and explain how not helping those in need is a good thing.

Or, the wonderful VA system that clintons pushed to new levels and BW ignored…

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 4:54 PM | Link to this

Both sides played nice until WB went all gun-ho with the with us/against us.

That, my friend, is a matter of interpretation. I began hearing the negative drumbeats from the press even before Bush took office, with only a small reprieve following the 9/11 attacks. Ditto for my “liberal” acquaintances.

All I can say is that I hope you are right about Obama being the savior of the US. I can’t defend the Republican rule the past few years, but don’t view the Dems as a better alternative. Once again, just my opinion.

By JokesOn

October 31, 2008 5:05 PM | Link to this

BTW, since you seem to be setting yourself as an arbiter of “fairness”, have you ever owned a small business?? If you did, I don’t think you would be singing the same tune.

Yes. Three over my life time now.

I, as stated, have found that you treat people good and they treat you good as well. The couple that come across and screw you are insignificant compared to what you gain. I believe this because it worked for me three times in practice which spans 25 years.

By Bruno

October 31, 2008 5:16 PM | Link to this

When you have a mother/sister/loved one that is on the verge of being on the streets, in constant pain for the last 3 months from having shingles but cannot be treated for it, and they hear that there is no assistance beyond the shoddy help available now, come back to me and explain how not helping those in need is a good thing.

To my understanding, there has always been public charity available to those who are truly in need. I understand the compassion which underlies your seeming desire to move toward a more socialistic system. Call me a scrooge, but I think the system which has allowed us to become the most prosperous nation on Earth is still a good model. As is well-documented, there are many down-sides to socialism, especially socialized medicine. As such, I don’t see it as being quite so open-and-shut as you do.

But, obviously, I only have one vote to cast, so will have to live with what the majority of voters decide.

By Abel Ochoa, McAllen, TX

October 31, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

Apparently, from reading some of the comments above, it’s still not common knowledge that Mr. George W. Bush stole the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. Let me tell you how he did it. In 2000, a very large number of votes were never, I repeat, never counted. When they held the “recounts,” they simply recounted the same votes, over and over again. In end, the US Supreme Court unconstitutionally voted Mr. Bush in as US President on a 5 to 4 vote. In doing this, the 2000 Presidential Election was stolen from the American people. In 2004, Mr. George W. Bush and cohorts kept thousands of American voters from casting their ballots, Remember the long lines? These voters were mostly minority voters which, as most of us know, represented votes going to Senator Kerry. Yep, Mr.George W. Bush and cohorts stole the election from the American people once again. If the 2008 election is a close one, the GOP may try using this tactic once again.

By Sunshine

October 31, 2008 5:28 PM | Link to this

Maybe you should get better at Googling: From Wiki:

Gore, who had privately conceded the election to Bush, now withdrew his concession and announced that he would wait for a recount in Florida before any further action. After the first recount by the morning of Wednesday, November 8 Bush’s margin in Florida had dwindled to about 500 votes, narrow enough to trigger a mandatory recount in that state. In addition, Gore asked for hand recounts in four counties (Broward, Miami Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia), as provided under Florida state law. This set into motion a series of recounts (portions by machine, and portions by hand), questions about portions of the Florida vote, and finally lawsuits.

These ultimately resulted in a December 12 7-2 United States Supreme Court decision stating that the Florida Supreme Court’s plan for recounting ballots was unconstitutional, as well as a 5-4 United States Supreme Court decision that ended the Florida recounts and allowed Florida to certify its vote. The vote was certified according to Florida state election law by Katherine Harris, the Republican Secretary of State who had been the Florida co-chair of Bush’s campaign.[32]

By RF

November 2, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this

To my understanding, there has always been public charity available to those who are truly in need

Bruno, let me give you a personal perspective on that “charity”. My brother, who battled throat cancer, has heart problems, and is possibly becoming diabetic is now out of work because of permanent damage from radiation treatment and his heart issues. He is physically, certifiably, unable to work. He has been turned down for disability and can’t afford a lawyer to fight it (which is the only way to force the issue—in court). His wife has divorced him and he is forced to pay child support by Florida law even though he has ZERO income. My parents brought him home and my mother went back to work full-time to try and help. While I emphatically DO NOT support “socialized medicine”, here’s what happens to my brother.

He can only get care through public resources currently funded by ineffective govt. agencies. He does not get Medicare or Medicaid again because he is not officially disabled (see previous issue with disability). My mother stayed on the phone and beat the bushes to find ways to get him very basic care. His teeth are all rotting from dead nerves after radiation and he cannot find help to get dentures. He has constant infections from that. He cannot get followup on his cancer status, which symptoms suggest is returning. When he can get an actual doctor’s appt. in the current “charity” system, he waits for hours even with an appointment to see a doctor who tells him he needs tests done but can’t get him a referral because the waiting list is over a year long now. The only recourse we have is to pay full price for a family doctor to see him and treat the constant infections in his gums. We cannot afford, even with the entire family chipping in, to get him to a cancer doctor. He’s dying, he’s suffering, and when he gets really sick, we have to wade through the Grady system to try and get him at least a modicum of relief from pain much less any actual treatment that just might be able to save his life. He worked for nearly thirty years, paid taxes, and never once tried to cut corners or cheat the system.

So there’s what “charity” gets you. You suffer and you die. Now while I don’t support fully government controlled “insurance”, I do believe there has to be some reasonably organized system put in place, perhaps with some degree of federal funding, to help people who cannot work and cannot get health care. Watch a loved one dying sometime in my brother’s position and then let’s discuss what “charity” can do. Believe me, if there a possible source of help, we’ve tapped it. It isn’t as easy as you think.

By Lee K

November 2, 2008 4:19 PM | Link to this

I think there are a couple of things we are all starting to forget.
1. John McCain has not offered us any other ideology for the financial crisis than has been offered for the last 8 years. He may try to distance himself from Bush W. but where is the reality there? I fear that his talk will not be his walk. We are in a time where we need more controls, we don’t need any more freedom for the big boys on Wall Street. We are losing our jobs, we are losing our pensions, we have to help pay back bailouts we didn’t cause…….hmmmmm…Obama is NOT planning to give money to the welfare folks.,…get real… that’s a McCain ridiculous remark…. but Obama does believe controls are necessary so we, the taxpayers, don’t have to bail out the banks again.

Think about it……eeeeeeek. I think even conservative Republicans should think about voting differently this election.

By chuck

November 2, 2008 4:33 PM | Link to this

Well big joke, you’ve done it again:

Ummmm….MANY roads are built purely to create jobs = spreading the wealth.

I didn’t think you could come up with another gem like this, but you did it. You are either being deliberately idiotic, OR you really are idiotic. At this point I’m not sure I can tell the difference, but if you really think that that was a strong argument to what Brudog was talking about, then the water really is too deep for you in here and you need to go back to the kiddie pool.

INFRASTRUCTURE is a legitimate government function. Taking money from me because I have a lot of it to give it to a poor person IS SOCIALISM.

Barack HUSSEIN HAMAS Obama, is a socialist and I can’t believe that the American people will be so stupid as to elect him president. You expect that from Chicago, but the rest of the country has usually been smarter than that. I really do fear for our country, if there are enough people out there who don’t understand what socialism is and how to recognize it that he even has a chance of being elected. EVEN A MAJORITY was against the bailout bill. That SHOULD be an indication that the American people will do the right thing on Tuesday, but I don’t think it is.

Then you made this little comment:

For example, you think he is the MOST liberal senator???? Or are you exaggerating for effect?

Do you ever watch the news…ANY NEWS?

By EVERY organization that keeps track of Senate votes, Barack HUSSEIN HAMAS Obama has been named the most liberal senator in the senate. He has a 100% liberal voting record…EVERY ISSUE, EVERY TIME.

AND, SUNSHINE, you should have googled a little bit more. News organizations PAID to have ALL OF THE VOTES recounted in Florida. They did 3 separate recounts and BUSH STILL WON. Gore only wanted to recount the votes WHERE HE THOUGHT HE MIGHT DO BETTER. He fought AGAINST recounting ALL OF THE VOTES. In addition, his lawyers tried to get ALL of the absentee votes from members of the armed forces overseas disqualified. He was and is a true scumbag and not worthy of the office of president.

Finally, this little ditty from “The world’s oldes 8th grader” as GtG refers to him:

And this is what it comes down to… What’s the Pink Floyd line? “Share it fairly, but don’t take a slice of my pie!”

Joe Biden contributed about $3000.00 on over $2 million dollars in income. Just about EVERYBODY I know donated more to charity than that. I guess those lyrics were meant for democrats like Biden who are perfectly willing to SHARE MY MONEY but not their own.

You people make me sick.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 8:20 AM | Link to this

Chuck

Explaining things to the big joke is a lot like yelling at other drivers in traffic. You will never make him a better poster and you will certainly not make him any smarter.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this

RF

Really sorry to hear about your brother.

I would like some sort of solution to a very real health crisis. But people like your brother are on the bottom of the list of anyone that would receive any benefits from any plan that the democrats have offered. It’s the same old mantra of helping the children and the poor. Of course they offer almost no help to them either, but middle aged men are not even on the radar scope.

If Democrats did what the claimed to want to do, I would never vote Republican. They lie to get elected. We won’t get health coverage. I could make payments on a new HD camera for what I pay for health insurance, but since I already have health insurance, I will get no relief, even if they finally attempt to actually do something instead of just blather about doing something.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 8:32 AM | Link to this

Lee K

You are wrong. Obama claims to want to give a tax break to people who do not pay taxes. That means getting a check for doing nothing. THAT is welfare.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

Perfect example of Democrats vs Republicans

Democrats had owned PBS for decades. Unless a film maker was tied in with some very liberal foundations, the chances of getting their work aired on PBS was nil. And if that film maker was a conservative with a message that countered the constant string of liberal propaganda, there was never a chance.

The Republicans changed that. They restructured PBS to allow the stations a much wider FREE scope of work by allowing a minute at the head and tail of the shows, enabling any film maker the opportunity to have their work aired on our government owned PBS.

The Democrats? They are already talking about taking PBS back to the pre-1994 standards, which should bankrupt the system in a couple of years, unless of course they take more of our tax money to propagate their mantra. They also push the “fairness act”.

Republicans open the doors for all opinions. Democrats try to stop any mantra except their own. So Democrats … what are you afraid of?

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

Barack HUSSEIN HAMAS Obama, is a socialist Talk about gems! This si an exaggeration that is bs. The actual socialists rebut this every time. Even McCain said he does not think he is a socialist when pressed and admitted that it was for effect because of a few of his beliefs.

INFRASTRUCTURE is a legitimate government function. Taking money from me because I have a lot of it to give it to a poor person IS SOCIALISM.

Have you told that to your church when they pass around the collection plate? Your church is a socialists institution.

Joe Biden contributed about $3000.00 on over $2 million dollars in income. Just about EVERYBODY I know donated more to charity than that. I guess those lyrics were meant for democrats like Biden who are perfectly willing to SHARE MY MONEY but not their own.

Not talking about giving to charity, although that is a nice thing for people to do.

By EVERY organization that keeps track of Senate votes, Barack HUSSEIN HAMAS Obama has been named the most liberal senator in the senate. He has a 100% liberal voting record…EVERY ISSUE, EVERY TIME.

By every organization you look at…biased.

You people make me sick.

Well we might all be in luck if you choke on it one night;)

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

Chuck

See what I mean. First he compares governmental functions with socialism and now he thinks that giving to your church is socialism. Does he realize that we HAVE to pay taxes but giving to a charity is voluntary? Like I said, he will never be any smarter.

By chuck

November 3, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this

Have you told that to your church when they pass around the collection plate? Your church is a socialists institution.

Another stupid statement. LISTEN UP NUMBNUTS, WHEN I GIVE MY MONEY TO A CHARITY IT IS MY CHOICE. THE CHURCH IS NOT TAKING IT FROM ME, I AM GIVING IT OF MY OWN FREE WILL. THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY IS NOT FORCIBLY TAKING IT FROM ME. THE BOY SCOUTS ARE NOT FORCIBLY TAKING IT FROM ME UNDER PENALTY OF LAW. THE FOOD BANK IS NOT TAKING IT FROM ME.

What an idiot.

TOJ, point well taken. I can ignore him now that I’ve gotten that rant off of my chest.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this

Chuck

He is a lot of fun to watch. I read where he just shook his head at a post from Bruno. He just don’t get it. If a person had any credibility, shaking their head might mean something. He has none.

If McCain loses, this might be good. The SCOTUS is very troubling, but this will fix the Congress. In two years, look for a definite flip like we saw in 1994. Clinton and a semi-sane centrist to liberal Congress screwed up everything so much that even the press couldn’t avoid their incompetence. Wait until we get two years of an empty suit ($10,000 - $12,000 hand made Brooks Brothers tailored suits, but empty) and a Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed Congress. That bat eyed bimbo will look like the fool she is and Angry Harry is just as foolish.

I saw where Bill Maher has announced that he will be changing his programming format, concentrating on making fun of ordinary people instead of politicians. That will last about two weeks and Uncle Billy will be looking for a job.

I think that will be the best thing. Limbaugh and The National View will enter their golden years. FOX News will make billions, but all the whining little politicos like Maher will need to actually be funny. What will Jon Scott make his stupid little faces about?

Just hunker down. Watch the stock market. Buy now, if you have any extra cash. There are bargains out there like there have never been. I have dumped about $6,000 in the past month. I’m sure some of it will disappear, but I been doing OK, so far.

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 9:43 AM | Link to this

See what I mean. First he compares governmental functions with socialism and now he thinks that giving to your church is socialism. Does he realize that we HAVE to pay taxes but giving to a charity is voluntary? Like I said, he will never be any smarter.

Keeping true to form and making this personal? Remember this when you cry foul.

I guess it is too much to expect either of you to see that survival of the fittest is not what you practice in church, yet flip out when society considers being helpful to those who are struggling. Sounds like a fraternity that helps out their own and screw all others. Very xian of you.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Sounds like a fraternity that helps out their own and screw all others.

Is that what giving in church sounds like to you? LOL.

That’s a good one. LOL.

I’ll chuckle about that all day.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Republicans open the doors for all opinions. Democrats try to stop any mantra except their own.

This is the BIGGEST joke ever told on this board! Yeah that is why the Republicans fight to have voters disqualified from voting, that is why they want the polls closed AT EXACTLY the MINUET they say they should, no one else in line, never mind if you are in the parking lot, that is why they oppose early voting, and registering and voting on the same day! Yeah it’s because the GOP wants all opinions heard! ROTFLMAO!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 10:00 AM | Link to this

BARRY IS A SOCIALIST? MARXIST? COMMUNIST? YES! CHURCHES AREN’T GOVERMENTS! YOU GIVE FREELY AT YOU CHURCH, NOT BEING THREATENED WITH JAIL AT THE END OF A GUN! YOU SILLY CANIDATES DON’T GIVE TO CHARITY, SO, THEY SEE IT AS THE GOVERMENTS JOB! lIES LIES AND MORE LIES! FROM THE FATHER OF LIES! BARRY OBAMA!
KING OF THE 8TH GRADERS! YOU CROSS THE LINE WISHING HARM TO A FELLOW BLOGGER, ALL I EVER WISHED FOR YOU WAS THAT YOU COMPUTER GOT A VIRUS AND DIED, AND I NEVER WISHED THAT ALOUD TILL NOW. YOU HAVE PROVEN AGAIN THAT YOU TRULY ARE A DUM BASS!
McCAIN/PALIN ‘08!

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

TOJ—if you are going to try and slam someone at least get your facts strait!

The Sun-Times reported Tuesday that Obama ordered five new suits from Chicago-based menswear maker Hartmarx. Obama paid full-price, spokesmen for Hartmarx and the Obama campaign said Wednesday. The suits retail for $1,500 apiece.

“Neither the campaign nor the DNC [Democratic National Committee] has paid for clothing,” spokesman Ben LaBolt said Wednesday in response to news reports that the Republican National Committee spent $150,000 on a makeover for Sarah Palin.

Barack Obama, running mate Joe Biden and their wives get no campaign or DNC money for clothes, LaBolt said.

Stop believing all the Rush BS, read for yourself! (from: www. suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1238030,CST-NWS-pside23.article) Remove one space after www.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

So you are comparing the need for a controlled voting environment to the domination of the only state owned media outlet by one of the two political parties. You so “don’t get it” that I just don’t want to spend the time to teach it to you.

By Ladilovely

November 3, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

I Didn’t Vote For Obama

‘I Didn’t Vote For Obama’ by Kentucky Scott

I’m a middle-class white guy living in Jacksonville , Florida . I’ve got a wife and two kids. Because the kids had no school today, I took a vacation day from work, and took the kids downtown to vote early. Fifty-nine minutes later, two smiling children and I proudly sported ‘I Voted’ stickers.
But I didn’t vote for Obama.

I voted for my ancestors, who believed in the promise of this country and came with nothing as immigrants. I voted for my parents, who taught in the public schools for decades. I voted for Steve, an acquaintance of mine from Kentucky . (Killed by an IED two years ago in Iraq ). I voted for Shawn, another who’s been to Iraq twice, and Afghanistan once, and who’ll be going back to Afghanistan again soon — and whose family earned eleven bucks a month too much to qualify for food stamps when the war started. I voted for April, the only African-American girl in my high school — it was years before it occurred to me how different her experience of our school must have been. I voted for my college friends who are Christian, Jewish, Mormon, and yes — Muslim. I voted for my grandfathers, who worked hard in factories and died too young. I voted for the plumber who worked on my house, because I want him to get a REAL tax break. I voted for four little angels from Birmingham . I voted for a bunch of dead white men who, although personally flawed, were willing to pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor, and used a time of great crisis to expand freedom rather than suspend it. I voted for all those people and more, and I voted for all of you, too.

But mostly, I voted selfishly: I voted for two little kids, one who has ballet in an hour, and one who has baseball practice at the same time. I voted for a world where they can be confident that their government will represent the best that is in this country, and that will in turn demand the best of them.
I voted for a government that will be respected in the world. I voted for an economy that will reward work above guile. I voted for everything I believe in. Sure, I filled in the circle next to the name Obama, but it wasn’t him I was voting for — it was every single one of us, and those I love most of all.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

Straight stupid spell check!

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

So what proof do you have that Obama always buys $1,500 suits? You have none other than what they are telling you. But to be honest, the fact that the woman is being attacked for the amount of money that was spent on her clothes is sexist.

Obama prepared a parallel attack to the media’s sexist attacks on Palin’s show clothes. In releasing the facts about the order of five of his suits. Just because they are great at campaigning, doesn’t mean that everybody is dumb enough to buy what they claim. The Chicago Sun Times as proof. Now THAT’s Funny!

Every speech Obama makes looks like Nurenberg. His inner circle is made up of people who do not want the best for this country. As if that is not enough, look at the congress that he is about to unleash that has a 10% approval rating. Then let’s look at the claims he has made and the lies he has been caught in.

You are about to get what you want. I wonder how long that future human will need to pay for what Obama is about to do to this country?

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

Republicans open the doors for all opinions. Democrats try to stop any mantra except their own.

So you are comparing the need for a controlled voting environment to the domination of the only state owned media outlet by one of the two political parties. You so “don’t get it” that I just don’t want to spend the time to teach it to you.

No I am not, I am refuting the absolutely undeniably untrue statement you made. Of course I am sure you do consider black armbands and sidearms clearly visible “a controlled voting environment” hell I am sure that some people considered the Jim Crow laws a “controlled voting environment” but its not. The republicans spend all of their time and effort shutting down ANYONE who does not agree with them. For as liberal as MSNBC is I have NEVER heard one of their hosts angrily shout “TURN THEIR MIC OFF, TURN IT OFF NOW!!!”

By Palmer Hanson

November 3, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

Shaunti writes that a poll by the University of Akron’s National Survey of Religion and Politics “… interviewed 1,200 people, and no one offered antipathy toward Bush.” Please! ! ! Did they happen to interview John McCain or any of the other Republicans who are running for office and are running away from Bush?

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this

Sorry Kentucky Scott

You bought into the political rhetoric of a state of the art Democratic presidential Candidate. What a waste of time in voting for those things. None of that will happen.

Your little kids are about to watch companies move away from our high taxes and horrible education. Maybe they can get a job with the government. That’s all that’s going to be left.

And they have their Daddy’s gullibility to thank for that.

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this

For as liberal as MSNBC is I have NEVER heard one of their hosts angrily shout “TURN THEIR MIC OFF, TURN IT OFF NOW!!!”

or….get personal, get rude, told they are spewing bile, kick people off the show because of views…

Funny, when I listen to NPR I hear them interviewing people that work for both candidates, they are respectful to both, ask honest but hard questions. I have yet to see that on FOX…

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

You refuted nothing. I’m talking about broadcasting and you are talking about voting. Aparently you just aren’t capible of discussing broadcasting so let’s talk about voting.

So why do you think it would be an advantage for the Republicans to close the polls at the scheduled time? if the stereotypes are true, Republicans work all day in order to hold down the little guy. They would be coming to vote after work. So why would the RNC want the polls closed at the time that most Republicans would vote?

Please give me a reference to the open firearms and black arm bands. Blathering proves nothing.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 10:54 AM | Link to this

NPR? Eldest Grade Schooler! Please, please, please STFU! It’s pure liberal propoganda. Pure and simple. Even Elmo teaches socailism. Go pound sand you longest lasting of middleshoolers! Sunshiine, really girl, look for some reinforcements this morning, you normally foolish rhetoric is weaker than normal.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

Oh TOJ/Chicken Little, So what proof do you have that Obama always buys $1,500 suits? a little thing called google, you should try it sometime. Multiple papers have reported on it, remember Mrs. Obama’s appearance on the view in her $150.00 black and white dress, that was long before the GOP robbed from the coffers and took money that was supposed be be for an election campaign and spent it on Mrs. Palin’s children’s wardrobe (wonder how much paid for Maternity clothes for Bristol, those get expensive!) We are talking about $5000 for one jacket, come on get real!

But to be honest, the fact that the woman is being attacked for the amount of money that was spent on her clothes is sexist.—BS, the one ones saying this are the GOP-ers, was attacking Edwards $400 dollar haircut sexist? NO it was a legitimate outrage over excess, as is this story!

Palin’s show clothes—Now this is funny, what is she a pony, a Barbie doll, is she in a play? This is not dress up the VP! She is supposed to be able to be the leader of the free world, she is unqualified for that position and no amount of “show clothes” will make that FACT go away. The only reason you are defending her is because she is Republican, if Mr. Obama had chosen such an unqualified running mate as his first decision about who would help him lead you would be SCREAMING about it!

His inner circle is made up of people who do not want the best for this country. That is your opinion. I do not believe that. I don’t think people like Colin Powell would endorse someone who does not want the best for this country or have people around him who don’t.

I wonder how long that future human will need to pay for what Obama is about to do to this country? The real question is how long will all of suffer because people like you voted twice to put a dumb redneck hillbilly in the Whitehouse who has mortgaged our country to China?

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this

Funny, when I listen to NPR I hear them interviewing people that work for both candidates, they are respectful to both, ask honest but hard questions. I have yet to see that on FOX…

That IS funny. Have you ever watched FOX in your life? FOX pioneered cross interviews between opposing viewpoints. It is and has been the basic format of the network. On FOX News Sunday, Chris Wallace interviewed David Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager. Not an assistant, the guy. The manager, someone who has rarely spoke to any media. Hillary Clinton said that FOX was the only network that treated her fairly. She once refused to even appear on the network, but has now become a regular and will probably be a paid contributor after the election. Many, many Democrats are regulars on, not only the news programming, but also the political opinion shows such as Hannity and Colmes.

I could go on and on, but like I told Chuck …

By chuck

November 3, 2008 11:07 AM | Link to this

This is the BIGGEST joke ever told on this board! Yeah that is why the Republicans fight to have voters disqualified from voting, that is why they want the polls closed AT EXACTLY the MINUET they say they should, no one else in line, never mind if you are in the parking lot, that is why they oppose early voting, and registering and voting on the same day!

Nice try Sunny, but no cigar. Republicans want EVERY VOICE HEARD, but we alsoBELIEVE IN FOLLOWING THE RULES!!!!

Have you not heard what ACORN has been doing? In Georgia, voters must register 3 weeks before the election. That gives the registrar time to check VOTER ELIGIBILITY. What is to prevent a “voter” from registering and voting MORE THAN ONCE in different locales? Once the vote is cast, how can the elections office know that they have registered somewhere else. I think we need stricter rules on voting PERIOD. I like the thumb print rules in Iran elections for instance. Then we could PROSECUTE voter fraud and possibly end it.

I also think that absentee ballots should require a picture ID. We also should have no early voting. Let’s buy enough machines to do it all on one day.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

Please give me a reference to the open firearms and black arm bands. Thats right you couldn’t find it because it isn’t on a right wing blog, here you go my dear:

“Examples of proven political caging

From the Washington Post: “In 1981, the Republican National Committee sent letters to predominantly black neighborhoods in New Jersey, and when 45,000 letters were returned as undeliverable, the committee compiled a challenge list to remove those voters from the rolls. The RNC sent off-duty law enforcement officials to the polls and hung posters in heavily black neighborhoods warning that violating election laws is a crime.”

The armed officers were drawn from the ranks of off-duty county deputy sheriffs and local police, and prominently displayed revolvers, two-way radios and BSTF armbands. BSTF patrols challenged and questioned voters at the polls and blocked the way of some prospective voters.[4]

A civil lawsuit was filed after the election, charging the RNC with illegal harassment and voter intimidation.[6] The suit was settled in 1982, when the state and national Republican parties signed a pledge in U.S. District Court that they would not allow tactics that could intimidate Democratic voters.”

From Wiki (en. wikipedia.org/wiki/BallotSecurityTask_Force) (again remove one space)

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

The only reason you are defending her is because she is Republican, if Mr. Obama had chosen such an unqualified running mate as his first decision about who would help him lead you would be SCREAMING about it!

That is all “The Truth” and nothing but “The Truth.”

By Sarah P.

November 3, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this

Well I think that…. Oh, wait, excuse me. President Sarkozy is on the phone. I think he wants to take the helicopter out this weekend. I have that effect on men. Hope his wife isn’t too jealous.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

Who cares that multiple papers have reported it. That was one order. You don’t buy the suits that he normally wears for $1500. Period. Personally, if he is going to represent my country, make sure he is wearing the very best.

GOP robbed themselves? Try to get yourself under control. It was their money, a small part of which was my money, but certainly not yours. It’s none of your business what they did with my money. Why is this even an issue? Do you have any idea of the money spent to secure a stadium for one of Obama’s Nurenberg speeches? That is the tax payer’s money, not the DNC. One more time, we are getting robbed for millions and millions and you are worried about a $5,000 suit that you didn’t have to pay for. What the hell is wrong with you?

Yes, show clothes. She is a politician. Get it? Big crowds, lights, cameras. It’s a show. But compared to the Third Riech extravaganzas that Obama launches, it’s small time. Don’t you get it? It’s politics. Obama don’t give a cr^p about you or your future human. Once you accept that and actually have to look at what he stands for and you still vote for him, well, that’s your problem.

I find it amusing that the only credible person you can come up with that is considered in his inner circle is a Republican.

So Bush mortgaged us, huh? So what was that 2 TRILLION dollars that the Democratically Controlled Congress just threw out the window? Do you realize that they spent three times more money in one month than the Iraq War will cost?

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this

Here’s some more example of you “good guys” just trying to follow the rules:

The Washington Post[9]: “In 1986, the RNC tried to have 31,000 voters, most of them black, removed from the rolls in Louisiana when a party mailer was returned. The consent decrees that resulted prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that target minorities or conduct mail campaigns to ‘compile voter challenge lists.’” The Republican National Committee reportedly stopped the practice following the consent decree in the 1986 case, but allegations of RNC-conducted voter caging arose once again in the 2004 elections.

*In October 2004, the BBC Newsnight program reported on an alleged George W. Bush campaign caging list, the existence of which suggested that the campaign might have been planning illegal disruption of African American voting in Jacksonville, Florida. The BBC obtained a document from George W. Bush’s Florida campaign headquarters that was inadvertently e-mailed to the parody website GeorgeWBush.org. The program reported that the e-mail attachment contained a list of 1,886 voter names and addresses in largely African-American and Democratic areas of Jacksonville. *

Court documents produced during limited discovery in a challenge to use of cagings list in Ohio, revealed clear intent to use caging lists to challenge voters. Specifically, in the US District Court, District of New Jersey, Civil Action No. 81-3876, exhibit D, filed 10/29/04 and entitled “Declaration_of_Caroline_Hunter_and_emails_exh_d”, emails exchanged between RNC operatives (Blaise Hazlewood, Caroline Hunter, Terry Nelson, and Tim Griffin), Bush-Cheney ‘04 campaign workers (Christopher Guith, Coddy Johnson, Robert Paduchik, and Dave DenHerder) and the Ohio Republican Party personnel (Mike Magan) revealed involvement of these entities in caging operations and intent to utilize the caging lists to challenge ballots in Ohio and other states[10].

in a 2007 interview has drawn a link to the scandal surrounding the Alberto Gonzales U.S. Attorney firings, claiming that the firings are part of a wider effort by Republicans to use caging to “steal the 2008 election.”[14]

In December 2007, Kansas GOP Chair Kris Kobach sent an email boasting that “to date, the Kansas GOP has identified and caged more voters in the last 11 months than the previous two years!”[15]

On October 5, 2008 the Republican Lt. Governor of Montana, John Bohlinger, accused the Montana Republican Party of vote caging to purge 6,000 voters from three counties which trend Democratic. These purges included decorated war veterans and active duty soldiers.[19]

The United States is the only democracy in the world that bans its felons from voting. Other countries including Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Norway, Peru, Sweden, and Zimbabwe all allow their prisoners to vote.[4] This form of vote suppression disproportionately affects minorities including African-Americans and Latinos.[4]

Elections in the United States are funded at the local level, often unequally. In the 2004 elections, Wyoming spent $2.15 per voter while California spent $3.99 per voter. In contrast, Canada spends $9.51 per voter. This can result in long lines at the polls resulting in wait times of multiple hours predominantly in urban areas.[5][6]

From wiki (en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression) (remove one space)

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this

you OBAMANITES! REJOICE! Hugo Chavez will meet with your savior “only on equal and respectful terms.” How lucky would be be to have an ally like him! Maybe we can get Raul on board next! As Barry loves to say in the mirror each morning, “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!” then smirk, “all animal are created equal, some animals are more equal than others!” God help us tomorrow! Please Lord, make a lot of potential voters for Obama have a sudden clarity to the peril we may face and switch to McCain, and help others to suddenly have car trouble or forget what day the election is, Amen!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this

Obamastan or Obamanation? Which do you prefer?

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

1981

25 years ago.

25 years ago, we were having riots in Boston over busing. Do you have any idea of how stupid that is to even mention that? What, are you afraid the Republicans are also going to bring back segregated drinking fountains? And this is your argument that is supposed to refute the Democrats CURRENT threats to repeal the standards in PBS that has allowed thousands of new film makers of all political backgrounds to produce and air important programming?

OK!!! LOL. You win. I guess it’s fine that film makers should be restricted to walking the party line in order to have access to our only state sponsored TV network. Sounds a little Third Reich to me, but whatever …

Your illogical and twisted arguments certainly remind me of another poster that is usually here when you are here, so you guys must be related. I understand my limitations. If you want to believe that Republicans are going to have armed guards with black arm bands (o-o-o-o-o. Scary!!) patrolling the polls to intimidate Black folks away from the polls, then more power to you. See if you can get some pictures. I’m sure every news station would pay a fortune for that one.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this

Sunshine, your post is truly Socialistic! Thanks and have fun in the Obamation. Too bad you unborn nearly human fetus will never know true freedom in Obamistan!

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Voter suppression historically tends to be a GOP objective, as Democrats have long out-registered Republicans (with exception). This year’s voter registration clearly favors the Democratic ticket (see Virginia); therefore, voter suppression tends to be more systematic in the GOP (e.g. caging) because polarization and low turnout historically favors GOP candidates.

Allen Raymond is a Republican political consultant in the United States

Question from people about Mr. Raymond’s new book “How To Rig an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative”

New York: Why does it seem like the GOP’s modus operandi is to deny as many people as possible the vote, while the Democrats’ modus operandi is to register as many as possible? Is there something that the GOP fears if a lot of people vote? Wouldn’t the numbers just go up proportionally? I don’t understand their constant (and continuous) efforts to disenfranchise voters. Do you?

Allen Raymond: This is one of several reasons: Low turnout is an advantage to the candidate/party with the most money. Elections are a cost-per-contact business (television gross rating points, price of a stamp/bulk rate mail, cost of a radio spot, etc.). Therefore, smaller turnout allows the better-financed campaign the ability to more effectively target and turnout voters predisposed to vote for them or their issue. It’s perceived to be to the Democratic Party’s advantage to expand participation among groups that have been less likely to vote in the past, especially young people.

(www. washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/10/05/DI2008100502672.html) (Remove one space)

It will be interesting to see if now that the Democratic candidate has the most funds (for once) if this will still ring true!

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

1981

25 years ago.

I know it hurts your brain but keep reading, that was history (and since we only have elections once every 2 or 4 years that is only a few election cycles ago) and if you keep reading I listed examples all the way up to last MONTH! But I know that you are WAY too far into the Kool-Aid to believe anything thing other than that the GOP is the most pristine, lily white harbingers of goodness, so I don’t know why I waste my breath, you CERTAINLY don’t EVER site your sources of information!

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this

Have you ever watched FOX in your life?

A few times a week.

have you ever seen someone yelled at, kicked off, demeaned on FOX? If you ever listened to NPR (which I doubt since you did not even watch Obama’s speeches and referred to 5sec GOP soundbites for info), have you EVER heard someone treated the equivalent?

I have watched every shows angle, most do not have much of one unless you count what is considered “current”; be it Palin’s suits or Obama’s aunt, except for FOX. Seems that FOX does not cover the news, but make personal comments on the news.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

TOJ- OF COURSE you are going to run away and stick your head in the sand!! It is not that I “want to believe that Republicans are going to have armed guards with black arm bands (o-o-o-o-o. Scary!!) patrolling the polls to intimidate Black folks away from the polls, then more power to you.” IT IS THE FACT THAT IT DID HAPPEN! It is real, and you want to ignore it!

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 12:00 PM | Link to this

But I know that you are WAY too far into the Kool-Aid to believe anything thing other than that the GOP is the most pristine, lily white harbingers of goodness, so I don’t know why I waste my breath, you CERTAINLY don’t EVER site your sources of information!

He flounders between balking when asked to cite references, claiming this is an opinion blog and he does not need to. Then, the times he does cite a url, we check it out and find he cannot even read his own references (ie. wiki; number of trimesters).

We have the trinity (truth, chuckles, GTG) from the Turd Reich here…they cannot listen and learn. It is against their doctrine.

By Gandalf, the Rastafarian

November 3, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

“Don’t you worry ‘bout a thing, every little ting, going to be all right mon….” McCain will prevail and our way of life will be preserved!

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

Put your money where you mouth is, Prove this:

And this is your argument that is supposed to refute the Democrats CURRENT threats to repeal the standards in PBS that has allowed thousands of new film makers of all political backgrounds to produce and air important programming?

Show me one source that that says this, come on I dare you!

By Gandalf, the Rastafarian

November 3, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

This is still fun!!!!

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (AP) - Shawn Turschak of Chapel Hill was tired of someone stealing McCain-Palin campaign signs from his yard. Turschak, with a degree in electrical engineering, hooked up a third sign to a power source for an electric pet fence Monday and also put up a surveillance camera. The News & Observer of Raleigh reported that a 9-year-old boy with an Obama-Biden sign grabbed the McCain-Palin sign and got a jolt on Tuesday.

The boy’s father, Andrew Noble, upset that his son had been shocked, showed up at Turschak’s door. Soon an Orange County sheriff’s deputy also showed up at the Turschak’s home.

Noble said his son just wanted to see how the sign was put together. Turschak said the boy intended to swap out the signs.

By Gandalf, the Rastafarian

November 3, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

All your bases are belong to US! Vote for change we need! Vote McCain/PALIN! ‘08. Paid for by the liberal that still buy this newspaper! Republcian don’t suck, Obamanites do!!

By Gandalf, the Rastafarian

November 3, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this

Jokes on! Go suck a donkey’s balls!

By Gandalf, the Rastafarian

November 3, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

sunshine, go join him!

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

Thanks for taking the time. I don’t care that much. We can talk about the fact that the Democrats always try to restrict the number of military votes, but I don’t want to watch you get slobberingly angry.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

Yes. It happened. It was real. Now what does that have to do with PBS and my assertion that the Democrats want to repeal the fairer standard that the Republicans enacted?

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

Calm down. I’m not posting anything to a slobbering maniac.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

Joke

Nah. Once you tell me that FOX never does what they actually pioneered, you have said too much. You are just blabbering about something else that you know nothing about.

I usually listen to XM. Great blues and some really nice Jazz.

Maybe Obama will get everyone that voted for him, XM. it will be the latest evil corporation he will take over.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

We can talk about the fact that the Democrats always try to restrict the number of military votes ohhhh really, stick this in your pipe and smoke it!:

According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain’s haul.

(www. opensecrets.org/news/2008/08/troops-deployed-abroad-give-61.html) Bet the Democrats are trying to restrict these military votes!

And because you don’t care that much that is why this country is in the shape that it is in. So go vote for McCain/Palin, it is truly the way you can show us all that you “don’t care that much”.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this

Now what does that have to do with PBS and my assertion that the Democrats want to repeal the fairer standard that the Republicans enacted? See my 12:04. Now put up or shut up!

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this

Hey JokesOn, you were right!

He flounders between balking when asked to cite references, claiming this is an opinion blog and he does not need to. Then, the times he does cite a url, we check it out and find he cannot even read his own references (ie. wiki; number of trimesters).

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

Who cares how much money Obama gets from troops. Can’t you address a single issue with a relevant response.

And don’t order me around. You are sounding a lot like the big joke today. You guys related?

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

And because you don’t care that much that is why this country is in the shape that it is in. So go vote for McCain/Palin, it is truly the way you can show us all that you “don’t care that much

I have never heard a single response from you to any claims that Obama will be unleashing a Congress with a 10% approval rating. You avoid answering whatever you want and then stand screaming at others to do as you command. Are you on any sort of medication?

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this

You guys related? Second reference to this today, you really should get out more TOJ, just because two people both have a democratic POV does not mean they are related. About 50% (or more, we will see tomorrow) of America have that POV.

By Bruno

November 3, 2008 1:15 PM | Link to this

RF—I’m truly sorry to learn of your brother’s plight. In reading your post, however, I’m somewhat confused as to why you would want even more government-controlled health care, considering the difficulties your brother has faced in navigating through the “system”.

He does not get Medicare or Medicaid again because he is not officially disabled (see previous issue with disability).

The reason that SSI automatically turns down every applicant the first time they apply is simply a matter of numbers. Sadly, for every legitimate applicant trying to get permanent disability, there seemingly are three or four people who simply don’t want to work anymore. As such, SSI is forced to “weed out” the fakers by erecting significant barriers in getting disability. When SSI was started, the “disability” component of the program was small in proportion to the “retirement” component. Over the years, that has changed dramatically, however.

He has been turned down for disability and can’t afford a lawyer to fight it (which is the only way to force the issue—in court).

I don’t want to dispense legal advice here, but my understanding is that attorneys who specialize in disability DO NOT require any up-front fees, but instead work on a “contingency” basis—i.e. they only collect a fee if they are successful in getting the disability certified by SSI. Even then, their fees are paid directly by SSI, and do not result in a reduction of benefits.

When he can get an actual doctor’s appt. in the current “charity” system, he waits for hours even with an appointment to see a doctor who tells him he needs tests done but can’t get him a referral because the waiting list is over a year long now.

In countries which utilize “socialized medicine”, waiting lists are the rule and not the exception, even for those who are facing serious health issues like your brother.

So there’s what “charity” gets you. You suffer and you die.

Please don’t think I’m being insensitive, but I blame your brother’s suffering on the cancer and after-effects of the radiation, and not the type of health care system we have in the US. Unfortunately, “bad things” often happen to “good people”.

Now while I don’t support fully government controlled “insurance”, I do believe there has to be some reasonably organized system put in place, perhaps with some degree of federal funding, to help people who cannot work and cannot get health care.

To my knowledge, the US already has one of the most generous—if not the most generous—disability system in place. The problem is, whenever something becomes “free”, people want lots of it, which “clogs” the system, leading to the rationing and inefficency that your brother and family have faced.

Once again, my idea to make health care more affordable is to allow market forces to truly be part of the system. The fact that your brother is unable to find a cancer specialist to work with him for a reasonable, affordable fee is nothing short of criminal on the part of the MDs. Best of luck to him and your family.

By HeeHaw

November 3, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

speaking of relatives, we all glad TOJ’s probably nephews got busted up there in Tennessee?

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

Nah. Once you tell me that FOX never does what they actually pioneered, you have said too much. You are just blabbering about something else that you know nothing about.

I usually listen to XM. Great blues and some really nice Jazz.

First, a lie: Once you tell me that FOX never does what they actually pioneered, (cite where I said those words…)

Second, “Nah” coupled by a meaningless sentence and then followed by a tangent to inane info.

You are truly my debating hero. That is like poetry!

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this

I have never heard a single response from you to any claims that Obama will be unleashing a Congress with a 10% approval rating. what response would you like? You are the one ranting and raving with out any info to back up anything you say.

A democratic congress will be voted in because the American people are not happy with the way that the Republicans have been running the country.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

a Congress with a 10% approval rating And I thought approval ratings meant nothing to you Right wingers? What with a President with an approval rating in the teens, who you all still believe is a great leader, why would you concern yourselves with silly things like approval ratings?

By Bruno

November 3, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this

He flounders between balking when asked to cite references, claiming this is an opinion blog and he does not need to. Then, the times he does cite a url, we check it out and find he cannot even read his own references (ie. wiki; number of trimesters).

JokesOn—Hopefully I was able to provide enough backup to my statements on Friday to satisty your standards. Apparently you were unaware that Obama’s scheme to “redistribute the wealth” goes well beyond a readjustment of tax rates and includes writing checks directly to the lower-end wage earners. Perhaps you think this is A-OK in the name of compassion, but I see a very dark side to doing this insofar as it removes incentive to move up in the world.

Personally, I also view this as an opinion blog and rarely do any googling before posting, relying on memory instead, as I suspect most other posters do as well due to the time constraints of blogging while working. If you still need a reference to back up my claim that Obama is by far the most liberal Senator in the US, here’s a link:

nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 1:49 PM | Link to this

I have never heard a single response from you to any claims that Obama will be unleashing a Congress with a 10% approval rating.

I have read this from TOJ a few times now. What is funny is that it is pretty common knowledge that those polls mean nothing. It is always a reflection of the current admin, since people do not actually know what bills are in progress.

Not to mention has not been enough of a majority to even filibuster over the last two years!

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this

Hello Bruno!

Hope you had a good weekend! I am courious about this statement: Apparently you were unaware that Obama’s scheme to “redistribute the wealth” goes well beyond a readjustment of tax rates and includes writing checks directly to the lower-end wage earners If the Tax rate adjustments and possible checks go to 95% of all taxes payers this seems only slightly different than the Bush tax plan that sent us all those government checks for the last few years. I understand that 5% of the population would now not get a government check, and will freely admit, I have not done extensive research on this particular comparison but how is it so very different other than the top 5% of earners not getting additional money?

By Bruno

November 3, 2008 2:10 PM | Link to this

BTW, Sunshine, your Wikipedia reference regarding the 2000 election and subsequent litigation didn’t impress me in the least. Apparently, the fact that the FL Secretary of State was a Republican is all the info you need to know to conclude that “the Supreme Court gave the election to Bush”.

You’ve spent a lot of time today insulting TOJ, but I don’t see how you are much different from him with your unreasonable, one-sided political opinions. The bottom line is that Bush won the 2000 election according to the rules that were in place prior to the election. Subsequent recounts by the AP and other news agencies confirmed that he would have won even if the illegal recounts proposed by Gore had gone through. Since you are apparently unswayed by cold, hard facts, I am forced to downgrade my opinion of you.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

It’s not your political POV. It’s the same twisted logic. It’s the same way of answering a stance with a totally unrelated topic. It’s that hair trigger that releases a very small, hysterical person, demanding that others play like you demand that they play.

You have a lot more in common than your political stance.

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this

Dog,

You do not have to have the same opinion as I, but use factual numbers.

If you look at the NPR show comparing 5+ national healthcare systems you will find that your assertions are wrong. I am losing hope that you actually care more about facts than winning, like TOJ. I hope not.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

Joke

So you think that I was debating you?

I was dismissing you.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

And I thought approval ratings meant nothing to you Right wingers? What with a President with an approval rating in the teens, who you all still believe is a great leader, why would you concern yourselves with silly things like approval ratings?

Now I understand why you never responded before.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this

*BTW, Sunshine, your Wikipedia reference regarding the 2000 election and subsequent litigation didn’t impress me in the least. *

Bruno, you are right, I spent a lot of time this weekend reading over the facts about the 2000 election. Seems that I read too much info in the past that was skewed with a left perspective. I will admit that I was wrong. Although I still don’t believe EVERYthing about the election was on the up an up I believe the most compelling line from my research was this:

Bush would have won in all legally requested recount scenarios. If overvotes where the intent of the voter was clear were counted, using any consistent standard for ‘clear intent of the voter’, Gore would have won. This was not requested by either side at the time; the independent recount therefore led to a greater awareness of the issue of ‘overvotes’.

Under the recount rules initially requested by Gore, Bush would have won, and under the rules requested by Bush, Gore would have won.[37] (from the same Wiki page)

So I will admit my extreme dislike of the man and my partisan views did cloud my statements. And I am willing to admit that.

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

*Now I understand why you never responded before. *

Why?

By Bruno

November 3, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this

If the Tax rate adjustments and possible checks go to 95% of all taxes payers this seems only slightly different than the Bush tax plan that sent us all those government checks for the last few years. I understand that 5% of the population would now not get a government check, and will freely admit, I have not done extensive research on this particular comparison but how is it so very different other than the top 5% of earners not getting additional money?

I’m not 100% clear on what you are asking, Sunshine, but will take my best shot. I view taxation as a pretty simple matter: The government needs X number of dollars per year to fund its various programs, and collects the monies through taxation. In our “progressive tax system”, the tax rate is not uniform, such that the top wage earners pay a higher percentage of their incomes than the lower tier of wage earners. While I think that this is somewhat unfair for the top wage earners, I can live with it since we all are pitching something into the common pot for all of the common services we enjoy.

I do have a problem, however, when a large group of people pays nothing for the government services they receive, which is part of the Obama plan. Even worse, he is proposing offering the bottom wage earners an even sweeter deal by which they not only pay nothing for the services they receive, but will actually receive an additional check on top of it, all for the huge sacrifice they are apparently making by living in the US.

As for the Bush “rebate checks”, they were intended to be a partial refund of taxes that already had been paid. Honestly, I don’t know if non-taxpayers received checks as well, but I don’t think that was part of the plan. I do believe, however, that an “earned income credit” plan WAS enacted under Bush, whereby people are already receiving credit for taxes they never paid, which I think is a terrible idea.

In case you haven’t noticed, I have been very critical of Bush overall, but still can’t use that as justification to vote for Obama who is using class warfare and vote-buying in order to get elected.

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this

So you think that I was debating you?

You still cannot read. I said you cannot debate…..me or anyone else. Got it? Doubt it.

By Gale

November 3, 2008 2:36 PM | Link to this

Since the board seems to need a bit of lightness today, this from a CNN article about The Onion. ‘Obama warns he may cease to exist unless America believes in him.’

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

Honestly, I don’t know if non-taxpayers received checks as well, I thank you for your explanation but this is the heart of what I was asking, I will see what I can find, b/c I don’t know either. It seems if they do though, the plans would be similar, do you think differently (if non-tax payers where getting checks, again I will check!)?

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

ANNAPOLIS, Md. – Retired Marine Col. John Ripley, who was credited with stopping a column of North Vietnamese tanks by blowing up a pair of bridges during the 1972 Easter Offensive of the Vietnam War, died at home at age 69, friends and relatives said Sunday.

Ripley’s son, Stephen Ripley, said his father was found at his Annapolis home Saturday after missing a speaking engagement on Friday. The son said the cause of death had not been determined but it appeared his father died in his sleep.

In a videotaped interview with the U.S. Naval Institute for its Americans at War program, Ripley said he and about 600 South Vietnamese were ordered to “hold and die” against 20,000 North Vietnamese soldiers with about 200 tanks.

“I’ll never forget that order, ‘hold and die’,” Ripley said. The only way to stop the enormous force with their tiny force was to destroy the bridge, he said.

“The idea that I would be able to even finish the job before the enemy got me was ludicrous,” Ripley said. “When you know you’re not going to make it, a wonderful thing happens: You stop being cluttered by the feeling that you’re going to save your butt.”

Ripley crawled under the bridge under heavy gunfire, rigging 500 pounds of explosives that brought the twins spans down, said John Miller, a former Marine adviser in Vietnam and the author of “The Bridge at Dong Ha,” which details the battle.

Miller said the North Vietnamese advance was slowed considerably by Ripley.

“A lot of people think South Vietnam would have gone under in ‘72 had he not stopped them,” Miller said.

Ray Madonna, president of the U.S. Naval Academy’s 1962 graduating class, served in Vietnam as a Marine at the same time and said his classmate saved countless U.S. and South Vietnamese troops.

“They would have been wrecked” if the tanks had crossed, Madonna said. He said Ripley also coordinated naval gunfire that stopped the tanks from crossing at a shallower point downstream.

“He was a Marine’s Marine, respected, highly respected by enlisted men, by his peers and by his seniors,” Madonna said.

Miller said Ripley, who was born in Radford, Va., descended from a long line of veterans going back to the Revolutionary War. He graduated from the Naval Academy in 1962, after enlisting in the Marines out of high school and spending a year in naval school in Newport, R.I.

He earned the “Quad Body” distinction for making it through four of the toughest military training programs in the world: the Army Rangers, Marine reconnaissance, Army Airborne and Britain’s Royal Marines, Miller said. He was also the only Marine to be inducted in the U.S. Army Ranger Hall of Fame.

Ripley earned the Navy Cross and Silver Star for his service in Vietnam. He later served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and was regimental commander at Camp Lejeune, N.C., among other postings.

After retiring from the Marines, he was president and chancellor of Southern Virginia College in Lexington, Va.

Stephen Ripley said his father had a deep and tenacious love for his country, the Marine Corps and his family.

“My Dad never quit anything and never went halfway on anything in his life,” he said. “He just was a full-throttle kind of person and those people that he cared about, he really cared about.”

Ripley is survived by his wife, Moline B. Ripley, 67; three sons, Stephen Ripley, 43, Thomas Ripley, 38, and John Ripley, 35; a daughter, Mary Ripley, 39; and eight grandchildren.

Funeral arrangements were pending.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

ANNAPOLIS, Md. – Retired Marine Col. John Ripley, who was credited with stopping a column of North Vietnamese tanks by blowing up a pair of bridges during the 1972 Easter Offensive of the Vietnam War, died at home at age 69, friends and relatives said Sunday.

Ripley’s son, Stephen Ripley, said his father was found at his Annapolis home Saturday after missing a speaking engagement on Friday. The son said the cause of death had not been determined but it appeared his father died in his sleep.

In a videotaped interview with the U.S. Naval Institute for its Americans at War program, Ripley said he and about 600 South Vietnamese were ordered to “hold and die” against 20,000 North Vietnamese soldiers with about 200 tanks.

“I’ll never forget that order, ‘hold and die’,” Ripley said. The only way to stop the enormous force with their tiny force was to destroy the bridge, he said.

“The idea that I would be able to even finish the job before the enemy got me was ludicrous,” Ripley said. “When you know you’re not going to make it, a wonderful thing happens: You stop being cluttered by the feeling that you’re going to save your butt.”

Ripley crawled under the bridge under heavy gunfire, rigging 500 pounds of explosives that brought the twins spans down, said John Miller, a former Marine adviser in Vietnam and the author of “The Bridge at Dong Ha,” which details the battle.

Miller said the North Vietnamese advance was slowed considerably by Ripley.

“A lot of people think South Vietnam would have gone under in ‘72 had he not stopped them,” Miller said.

Ray Madonna, president of the U.S. Naval Academy’s 1962 graduating class, served in Vietnam as a Marine at the same time and said his classmate saved countless U.S. and South Vietnamese troops.

“They would have been wrecked” if the tanks had crossed, Madonna said. He said Ripley also coordinated naval gunfire that stopped the tanks from crossing at a shallower point downstream.

“He was a Marine’s Marine, respected, highly respected by enlisted men, by his peers and by his seniors,” Madonna said.

Miller said Ripley, who was born in Radford, Va., descended from a long line of veterans going back to the Revolutionary War. He graduated from the Naval Academy in 1962, after enlisting in the Marines out of high school and spending a year in naval school in Newport, R.I.

He earned the “Quad Body” distinction for making it through four of the toughest military training programs in the world: the Army Rangers, Marine reconnaissance, Army Airborne and Britain’s Royal Marines, Miller said. He was also the only Marine to be inducted in the U.S. Army Ranger Hall of Fame.

Ripley earned the Navy Cross and Silver Star for his service in Vietnam. He later served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and was regimental commander at Camp Lejeune, N.C., among other postings.

After retiring from the Marines, he was president and chancellor of Southern Virginia College in Lexington, Va.

Stephen Ripley said his father had a deep and tenacious love for his country, the Marine Corps and his family.

“My Dad never quit anything and never went halfway on anything in his life,” he said. “He just was a full-throttle kind of person and those people that he cared about, he really cared about.”

Ripley is survived by his wife, Moline B. Ripley, 67; three sons, Stephen Ripley, 43, Thomas Ripley, 38, and John Ripley, 35; a daughter, Mary Ripley, 39; and eight grandchildren.

Funeral arrangements were pending.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

ANNAPOLIS, Md. – Retired Marine Col. John Ripley, who was credited with stopping a column of North Vietnamese tanks by blowing up a pair of bridges during the 1972 Easter Offensive of the Vietnam War, died at home at age 69, friends and relatives said Sunday.

Ripley’s son, Stephen Ripley, said his father was found at his Annapolis home Saturday after missing a speaking engagement on Friday. The son said the cause of death had not been determined but it appeared his father died in his sleep.

In a videotaped interview with the U.S. Naval Institute for its Americans at War program, Ripley said he and about 600 South Vietnamese were ordered to “hold and die” against 20,000 North Vietnamese soldiers with about 200 tanks.

“I’ll never forget that order, ‘hold and die’,” Ripley said. The only way to stop the enormous force with their tiny force was to destroy the bridge, he said.

“The idea that I would be able to even finish the job before the enemy got me was ludicrous,” Ripley said. “When you know you’re not going to make it, a wonderful thing happens: You stop being cluttered by the feeling that you’re going to save your butt.”

Ripley crawled under the bridge under heavy gunfire, rigging 500 pounds of explosives that brought the twins spans down, said John Miller, a former Marine adviser in Vietnam and the author of “The Bridge at Dong Ha,” which details the battle.

Miller said the North Vietnamese advance was slowed considerably by Ripley.

“A lot of people think South Vietnam would have gone under in ‘72 had he not stopped them,” Miller said.

Ray Madonna, president of the U.S. Naval Academy’s 1962 graduating class, served in Vietnam as a Marine at the same time and said his classmate saved countless U.S. and South Vietnamese troops.

“They would have been wrecked” if the tanks had crossed, Madonna said. He said Ripley also coordinated naval gunfire that stopped the tanks from crossing at a shallower point downstream.

“He was a Marine’s Marine, respected, highly respected by enlisted men, by his peers and by his seniors,” Madonna said.

Miller said Ripley, who was born in Radford, Va., descended from a long line of veterans going back to the Revolutionary War. He graduated from the Naval Academy in 1962, after enlisting in the Marines out of high school and spending a year in naval school in Newport, R.I.

He earned the “Quad Body” distinction for making it through four of the toughest military training programs in the world: the Army Rangers, Marine reconnaissance, Army Airborne and Britain’s Royal Marines, Miller said. He was also the only Marine to be inducted in the U.S. Army Ranger Hall of Fame.

Ripley earned the Navy Cross and Silver Star for his service in Vietnam. He later served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and was regimental commander at Camp Lejeune, N.C., among other postings.

After retiring from the Marines, he was president and chancellor of Southern Virginia College in Lexington, Va.

Stephen Ripley said his father had a deep and tenacious love for his country, the Marine Corps and his family.

“My Dad never quit anything and never went halfway on anything in his life,” he said. “He just was a full-throttle kind of person and those people that he cared about, he really cared about.”

Ripley is survived by his wife, Moline B. Ripley, 67; three sons, Stephen Ripley, 43, Thomas Ripley, 38, and John Ripley, 35; a daughter, Mary Ripley, 39; and eight grandchildren.

Funeral arrangements were pending.

By Gale

November 3, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

It is not a definite answer to the latest question, but I remember that the tax “rebates” went to people who had filed a tax return. It is possible that someone filed, but had no taxes to pay because of other credits.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this

Jokeson! Suck on some Elephants balls!

By Bruno

November 3, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this

If you look at the NPR show comparing 5+ national healthcare systems you will find that your assertions are wrong. I am losing hope that you actually care more about facts than winning, like TOJ. I hope not.

JokesOn—If you are going to reference a particular study or comparison, you are going to have to provide a link if you expect me to follow up on it. On Friday, you demanded link after link from me, which I happily provided. Can you at least meet the same standard?

In terms of socialized medicine vs. private pay medicine, there are advantages and drawbacks to each system, so it will never be possible to sway anyone with “facts alone”. The most important “fact” to me is my own personal situation, however selfish that may sound to you. I’ve spent most of my working life involved in health care, and have seen first-hand the corruption which occurs with ANY third party payor scheme, whether government-based like Medicare, or insurance company-based like our current system. As such, I don’t want to be part of ANY system at all, but prefer to pay-as-I-go as I have done for my entire life. And while a large part of good health might be good genes, I have found that how we take care of ourselves is a huge part of good health as well. Because I’ve taken good care of myself for the most part, I haven’t needed to use medical care except for a small handful of times in my life. As such, I don’t feel obligated to fund other people’s health care, any more than I feel obligated to buy food for other people.

As for my own dedication to “seeking truth” vs. “being right”, you are welcome to form your own opinions, of course. Frankly, I don’t really care about that today, seeing that we are on the verge of electing the most liberal, pro-socialist candidate for President taht I’ve seen in my lifetime. Once again, I understand people’s frustration at Bush and Co., but dont think a hard swing to the left is the right direction for our economy.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 3, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this

Sunshine! Please join him!

By k

November 3, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Apparently, the fact that the FL Secretary of State was a Republican is all the info you need to know to conclude that “the Supreme Court gave the election to Bush”.

Way to oversimplify! I might be over-thinking this, but I seem to remember there being a few more key factoids in this seedy scenario than that. But I have a question, not a statement: If being BOTH the Sec. of State in charge of overseeing fair elections AND the statewide chairperson of the committee to elect one of the candidates on the ballot AT THE SAME TIME is not actually a conflict of interest, then what WOULD be a conflict of interest for the Sec. of State in charge of elections during an election year? Just curious.

By Bruno

November 3, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this

So I will admit my extreme dislike of the man and my partisan views did cloud my statements. And I am willing to admit that.

Fair enough, Sunshine. Your good name has been restored in my book.

WIsh I could blog all day, but have to return to work.

Congrats again to all the liberals on board on Obama’s victory tomorrow. Your wish has come true.

By The Other Jack

November 3, 2008 3:04 PM | Link to this

Joke

How would you know anything about my debating skills. I don’t debate clowns.

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this

Dog,

(http://www .pbs.org/wgbh/pages /frontline/sickaroundtheworld/?campaign=pbshomefeatures_ 2frontlinebrsickaroundtheworld 2008-04-16)

JokesOn—If you are going to reference a particular study or comparison, you are going to have to provide a link if you expect me to follow up on it. On Friday, you demanded link after link from me, which I happily provided. Can you at least meet the same standard?

My point is if YOU are going to state something as fact, like the waiting periods in national healthcare systems are bad, know that you are correct through study.

Do not randomly post purely what you feel in your gut, but do not know and state it as fact.

By Netbanker

November 3, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

Hey kids!

Bruno…come on now we both know that ALL liberals haven’t managed to sabotage Bush…if only because most liberals are mere citizens who have no power to actually sabotage a President’s policies.

those that are currently benefiting from the tax code (the selfishly rich). And these people benefit how, exactly? The top 10% of income earners pay 80% of all income taxes. If one is cutting taxes shouldn’t those who actually pay them receive the benefit of the tax cut? Let’s face it that our tax structure is whacked out. Isn’t it contrary to the American Ideal of the harder you work the more you ear to then increase the amount of tax on those earning?

terrified at the thought that Sarah Palin might become president in a complicated and dangerous world where her incompetence would put the nation at unprecedented risk. True that! She scares the bejeesus out of me as a possible president.

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

How would you know anything about my debating skills. I don’t debate clowns.

Personal insult day on a monday for The Truth. That means by friday he will be calling the waaaambulance.

Sad. His best friends are chuckles and GTG. What is the saying about the friends you keep?

By Sunshine

November 3, 2008 3:34 PM | Link to this

Really interesting, short, sweet comparison JokesOn, I found this the most compelling:

How does it work? The Swiss example shows that universal coverage is possible, even in a highly capitalist nation with powerful insurance and pharmaceutical industries. Insurance companies are not allowed to make a profit on basic care and are prohibited from cherry-picking only young and healthy applicants. They can make money on supplemental insurance, however. As in Germany, the insurers negotiate with providers to set standard prices for services, but drug prices are set by the government.

What are the concerns? The Swiss system is the second most expensive in the world — but it’s still far cheaper than U.S. health care. Drug prices are still slightly higher than in other European nations, and even then the discounts may be subsidized by the more expensive U.S. market, where some Swiss drug companies make one-third of their profits. In general, the Swiss do not have gatekeeper doctors, although some insurance plans require them or give a discount to consumers who use them.

By JokesOn

November 3, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this

NetB,

I agree that it is a very quasi-system.

We could get past it if everyone was honest about was it is. It is both a way to pay for standard government (populous agreed upon) services, and a money distributing system.

Social Security is just as screwed because of misinterpretation. It cannot work if everyone gets what they put in. It was created, not as your retirement fund, but as a way to keep the old from dying in the gutter. Even that is considered being too “nice’ to the despondent people of this nation and providing handouts.

I do not agree with that notion. I think that as each of us reaches financial stability and prosperity, it is our obligation to help others find the same. The fact that this humanity is demonized is what bothers me in the discussions.

If I make $250k/year, am I not in a better position to help others than someone who makes $35k? That should matter.

SS, I watch the whole documentary on nationalized healthcare systems that I posted, and they showed exactly what you posted in action. I used to think that it was a nice idea that we could not afford, but after that program, I was sold on the idea.

By k

November 3, 2008 4:22 PM | Link to this

“…..as a way to keep the old from dying in the gutter. Even that is considered being too “nice’ to the despondent people of this nation and providing handouts. I do not agree with that notion. I think that as each of us reaches financial stability and prosperity, it is our obligation to help others find the same.”

The fact that this humanity is DEMONIZED is what bothers me in the discussions.”

PLEASE GIVE JOKES ON THE TIARA!!! Thanks for saying that. According to published reports, Jesus had a similar philosophy. If Jesus were to post on this board, he’d be told he doesn’t understand economics, called all manner of nasty names, and of course, told to “STFU!” Ironic, IMO.

BTW, no response to my 3:00. I guess no one else knows either.

By Netbanker

November 3, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this

Here’s my take on ‘spreading the wealth’ “

The problem here is people trying to use taxation to fix real or perceived inequities in income. That isn’t the responsibility of the government nor is it fair to the income earner. We always assume that higher incomes mean wealthy. Not always the case nor is income a good indicator of poverty or wealth. If one has enough assets that they can live off of the interest from those assets or a combo of interest plus spending some of the principle then technically one has NO INCOME to tax. Said filthy, rich bas tard actually gets counted by the government as POOR! You just gotta love the way government counts things.

The problem with income inequity is that over the past 30 years or so executive pay as grown from 30-40% higher than the average worker to 344% higher than the average worker. During the same time period average worker wages have remained fairly stagnant while their productivity has skyrocketed. Can anyone really state that the role of a CEO is THAT much more valuable or different than it was 30 years ago? Of course it isn’t, but that didn’t stop those at the top of gaming the system so that the productivity gains translated into cash for the top while very little reaching those not in the executive classes.

To ‘level the playing field’ or ‘spread the wealth’ the solution is one of corporate governance rather than taxation. Stockholders (and for the little guy that means writing, calling, and being a PITA to the fund manager of your 401K) need to make moves in corporations to peg executive pay to the average worker’s pay so that they all succeed or fail together. I think this should be done on a company by company basis with the governmnet staying the heck out of it. Each company should be able to determine what that peg rate is for themselves or set industry standards.

By Gandalf, the almost human

November 3, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this

By Jonathan Curley Charlotte, N.C. – There has been a lot of speculation that Barack Obama might win the election due to his better “ground game” and superior campaign organization.

I had the chance to view that organization up close this month when I canvassed for him. I’m not sure I learned much about his chances, but I learned a lot about myself and about this election.

Let me make it clear: I’m pretty conservative. I grew up in the suburbs. I voted for George H.W. Bush twice, and his son once. I was disappointed when Bill Clinton won, and disappointed he couldn’t run again.

I encouraged my son to join the military. I was proud of him in Afghanistan, and happy when he came home, and angry when he was recalled because of the invasion of Iraq. I’m white, 55, I live in the South and I’m definitely going to get a bigger tax bill if Obama wins.

I am the dreaded swing voter.

So you can imagine my surprise when my wife suggested we spend a Saturday morning canvassing for Obama. I have never canvassed for any candidate. But I did, of course, what most middle-aged married men do: what I was told.

At the Obama headquarters, we stood in a group to receive our instructions. I wasn’t the oldest, but close, and the youngest was maybe in high school. I watched a campaign organizer match up a young black man who looked to be college age with a white guy about my age to canvas together. It should not have been a big thing, but the beauty of the image did not escape me.

Instead of walking the tree-lined streets near our home, my wife and I were instructed to canvass a housing project. A middle-aged white couple with clipboards could not look more out of place in this predominantly black neighborhood.

We knocked on doors and voices from behind carefully locked doors shouted, “Who is it?”

“We’re from the Obama campaign,” we’d answer. And just like that doors opened and folks with wide smiles came out on the porch to talk.

Grandmothers kept one hand on their grandchildren and made sure they had all the information they needed for their son or daughter to vote for the first time.

Young people came to the door rubbing sleep from their eyes to find out where they could vote early, to make sure their vote got counted.

We knocked on every door we could find and checked off every name on our list. We did our job, but Obama may not have been the one who got the most out of the day’s work.

I learned in just those three hours that this election is not about what we think of as the “big things.”

It’s not about taxes. I’m pretty sure mine are going to go up no matter who is elected.

It’s not about foreign policy. I think we’ll figure out a way to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan no matter which party controls the White House, mostly because the people who live there don’t want us there anymore.

I don’t see either of the candidates as having all the answers.

I’ve learned that this election is about the heart of America. It’s about the young people who are losing hope and the old people who have been forgotten. It’s about those who have worked all their lives and never fully realized the promise of America, but see that promise for their grandchildren in Barack Obama. The poor see a chance, when they often have few. I saw hope in the eyes and faces in those doorways.

My wife and I went out last weekend to knock on more doors. But this time, not because it was her idea. I don’t know what it’s going to do for the Obama campaign, but it’s doing a lot for me.

Jonathan Curley is a banker. He voted for George H.W. Bush twice and George W. Bush once.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

(Que Al Roker’s Voice)

TUESDAY, TUESDAY, TUESDAY!

IT’S ELECTION DAY—IN AMERICA!

By The Other Jack

November 4, 2008 8:37 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

Why?

Because you didn’t have an answer or comment. You did what you always do. When you are asked any question that requires that you look at what you are really saying, you change the subject. We weren’t talking about the president’s approval ratings and you were completely wrong about what you said about Bush’s approval ratings. we were talking about the most liberal Congress since 1932 having the full approval of the new ultra-liberal President.

Now if you have the ability to talk on THAT SUBJECT, please do so. if you are going to change to another subject, I will understand that you simply don’t know enough about who you are voting for. I will understand that i have been right in knowing that you aren’t really capable of serious debate, but just like your little brother, the joke, you come here to point your crooked little finger at others and scream and preach at them.

So, can you do it? Can you rationally discuss the issue at hand without the hysterics? Joke sure can’t. Let’s see if you can.

By JokesOn

November 4, 2008 8:56 AM | Link to this

Joke sure can’t. Let’s see if you can.

Lets see if you can post proof of that Mr. Troof….because I think this is simply part of your hysterics. Lets see a post by me where I am hysterical.

And then we will post your rants and frothing…heh.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 9:01 AM | Link to this

What Subject TOJ, you were the one who could not post one shred of fact about the supposed liberal take over of PBS, I am still waiting for facts or a single article about that. What about the congress would you like to discuss my dear? I believe control of the congress will shift because the American people are not happy with the way that the Republicans have been running this country. We are not going to see a shift today to a MORE Republican congress because (like you say) all the big bad Democrats have run us into a financial hole. No we will see a shift away from no regulation, only reward the wealthy, trickle down economics. You don’t even pose a question in your post, and then you say I can’t stick to the subject. What is it you want me to say?

By JokesOn

November 4, 2008 9:13 AM | Link to this

Yup.

Just as I thought. I read back over the postings and guess what? Everyone was playing nicely until you and chuckles started posting!

What a surprise. You and chuckles being personal and arrogant.

Between your outright lies about who/what gets posted, and your sympathy seeking lies on the blog regarding your personal life, you are a very sick individual.

By Mara

November 4, 2008 9:36 AM | Link to this

Awww. I missed Netbanker yesterday :^(

Not much to say right now. But…some things TOJ said yesterday deserve some comment.

TOJ @ 10:23 - Every speech Obama makes looks like Nurenberg.

Nurenberg? NURENberg?!

TOJ @ 11:02 - FOX pioneered cross interviews between opposing viewpoints

Er…wrong. Fox News didn’t even exist until 2005. By that time CNN’s iconic “Crossfire” had been on for over 20 years. However, even they weren’t the “pioneers” of the format. The concept of oppositional media debate programming began as a radio show, hosted by Pat Buchanan and Tom Braden way back in ’78.

TOJ @ 8:41 - The Republicans…restructured PBS to allow the stations a much wider FREE scope of work by allowing a minute at the head and tail of the shows, enabling any film maker the opportunity to have their work aired on our government owned PBS.

Though it’s contrary to the conservative dogma that all media (except for the fair-and-balanced conservative echo chamber, of course) is “liberal” in view and in programming, PBS has consistently presented fine, even-handed content. -

“PBS President Pat Mitchell maintained Tuesday that the taxpayer-supported network is independent and free of political bias, rejecting Republican arguments that there is a need for more conservative programming to balance the content of public television.”

“In her first public response to criticism that PBS suffers from a liberal reputation, Mitchell cited public polls that have repeatedly found that a majority of Americans view the network as objective and fair. She vowed to shrug off any attempts at political influence from either side of the spectrum.”

“Our responsibility is to tell the truth, no matter what the consequences,” she said in a lunchtime address to the National Press Club. “And from time to time, it does lead people to question our motives, even suggest an agenda.” But “PBS does not belong to any single constituency, no one political party, no activist group, no foundation, no funder, no agenda of any kind,” Mitchell added. “Our editorial standards ensure this, and public opinion polls verify it.”

[snip]

“Her address amounted to a rebuttal to recent remarks by Kenneth Tomlinson, the Republican chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a private nonprofit that is charged with distributing federal funds to public television and radio stations.”

“The CPB chairman has made no secret of the fact that he believes the Public Broadcasting Service has a liberal reputation. And his actions have sparked a flurry of protests from liberal advocacy and public interest groups, who are gathering petitions calling for his resignation and asking CPB to stay out of programming decisions.”

“Last year, he quietly hired an outside consultant to monitor the political leanings of guests on “Now With Bill Moyers” to bolster his case.”

(fyi – after complaints were filed by assorted persons, an investigation ensued and it was found that Tomlinson had violated statutory provisions and the PBS’s board’s code of ethics in regards to how he dealt with programmers creating new public affairs programs. The report on the investigation also states Tomlinson improperly reviewed shows and applied political tests when seeking a CEO and president for the CPB. He was eventually forced to resign.)

[snip]

“…in an interview with The (LA) Times earlier this month, Tomlinson…insisted that he does not want to undermine public broadcasting. He said he is seeking to broaden the reach of PBS because there is a “widespread perception among politically sophisticated people” that the network slants to the left.”

(not a “fact” mind you, but a mere perception of bias)

“However, polls have repeatedly found that the majority of Americans view public broadcasting as impartial and balanced. One poll commissioned by CPB in the summer of 2003 found that just 21% of viewers believe PBS has a liberal bias and 12% believe it has a conservative slant.”

That’s about it. I won’t be posting later because I’ll be off participating in the democratic process and fulfilling my civic duty. Ciao, buds.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this

All the voters in line in my precinct are voting McCain! YEAH! It looks really really good for an upset today! Go McCain/Palin! Stay home Dems! vote tomorrow! Watch for that upset!

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

And by the way what is your definition of the word completely TOJ? As I was completely wrong about GW job rating? First of all it is called sarcasm, its usually used to illustrate a point, that point being you want to reference a set of facts for congress and you want to IGNORE that SAME set of facts for the president. See how that works, it is hypocritical. Kind of like yesterday when you asked me to “Please give me a reference to the open firearms and black arm bands. Blathering proves nothing.” Then I did exactly that, then YOU changed the subject. You said it was too far in the past to reference even though I had given you facts about voter suppression all the way up to last month. THE ORIGINAL point I made yesterday was about your sweeping point that the GOP wants to include all POV and the DNC wants to exclude all POV’s. Which I disagree with, whether in broadcast OR voting. So PLEASE get off of your high horse and have a rational discussion. And please (see I said please I am not ordering you to do anything) site one source for your argument yesterday, if you can’t I will count it as your opinion and since I completely disagree with the opinion that the liberals are going to destroy PBS, I will disregard it.

Also, I was slightly off on GW’s approval rating: From Gallop (www. gallup.com/poll/111280/Bush-Approval-Rating-Doldrums-Continue.aspx) Remove One space

The most recent quarter included two Bush approval ratings of 25% — the worst of his presidency to date, and just three percentage points higher than the all-time low 22% approval rating Harry Truman received in February 1952.

I believe I was thinking of the Direction of the Country right/ wrong track polling when referencing the teen’s (from: www. pollingreport.com/right.htm)

“All in all, do you think things in the nation are generally headed in the right direction, or do you feel that things are off on the wrong track?”

11/1-2/08 Right Track= 11% Wrong Track= 76% Mixed= 10% Unsure=3%

See how that’s Done TOJ, you make a point then list the website you got it from, try it, its cool! It lends lots of creditability to your arguments!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this

PBS sucks, and I think it sucks donkey balls!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

Sunshine, is blabbing again! PLease STFU! We already know your a (DUM BASS!) Don’t need to prove it any more!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

Sunshine, the AJC doesn’t want you listing website (Dum bass!). That’s why the don’t allow post using urls. But certain d******* continue to use them. You’re as bad as the late spammers! You rule ignorer you! You mother smelled of elderberry and your father was a hamster! Now go away (and STFU!) before I taunt you a second time! I fart in your general direction!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

I am obsessed with animal testicles.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

I am obsessed with animal testicles.

By The Other Jack

November 4, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this

Mara

Nurenberg? NURENberg?!

Boy, you really got me there. I guess my point is moot. All those large cheering fans in those huge stadiums don’t really remind me of anything now. Great job.

Er…wrong. Fox News didn’t even exist until 2005.

Er. Wronger. The channel was launched on October 7, 1996. Girl, you have to read the whole paragraph when you go to Wikipedia.

By that time CNN’s iconic “Crossfire” had been on for over 20 years. However, even they weren’t the “pioneers” of the format. The concept of oppositional media debate programming began as a radio show, hosted by Pat Buchanan and Tom Braden way back in ’78.

I was really hoping that I wouldn’t need to explain the difference between political commentary and news. . . again. The use of opposing viewpoints during a newscast and that use being utilized to the extent that FOX pioneered would not have been possible in 1978. The use of Sat trucks were almost non-existent except in large markets and the availability of wide band, multiple channel satellites simply didn’t exist. I started in 1979 and they didn’t introduce “Golden Rods”, or portable microwave transmitters until 1983.

Political debate started in caves. Political debate is not what they pioneered. FOX pioneered the use of opposing viewpoints as being part of the news story. This is the concept that Roger Alles had when he started looking for financing.

Though it’s contrary to the conservative dogma that all media (except for the fair-and-balanced conservative echo chamber, of course) is “liberal” in view and in programming, PBS has consistently presented fine, even-handed content.

Mara. My best years in this business have been the years that I was either a director or a segment producer for 14 different television series. 5 of those were shows that were made available because of the change in the law, which allows local PBS stations to accept free programming from various programming suppliers

That programming is paid for by allowing the producers to use a minute at the head and a minute at the tail for eight 15 second commercial blocks.

This law was changed in the Republican revolution of 1994 and has not only saved an almost bankrupt PBS, but has allowed a much wider scope of programming and has allowed a much deeper and more diverse viewpoint on every issue, be it political or other programming trends.

The democrats fought this change in the way PBS operates tooth and nail. Are you old enough to remember the debate? Remember Gingrich saying that he gives to PBS, but unless the laws are changed, it won’t matter how much he gives?

Can you please address why the Democrats would want to restrict the scope of programming of our only state controlled television network while the Republicans wanted to hear all views, and have anyone with the spine to put an idea into a program, find sponsors and let the chips fall where they may, succeed. They have opened up a truly free market system that has scared the left to death.

Networks like HGTV is very restrictive as to the programming they buy. If i have an idea, they will pay me to produce that idea, but at the end of the production, my idea is theirs and my money stream ends.

With the new PBS system, after the distributor runs the initial year on PBS, I can then market it all over the world, in any language that I can find a translator. At that point, it becomes retirement. I have only one show where I did market it and ran a year on PBS and is still in syndication, mostly in Northern Europe. It is not much money, but it is nice to have a very old idea continue to feed me.

Your denials, mostly from liberals and PBS heads just aren’t going to convince a person that had fought the system before 1994 and has greatly benefited from it since then.

Don’t worry, Mara. Most local PBS local stations are ran by socialist leftist so Frontline, (The War Against America and Why We Stage It) is always shown. That is the kind of far left programming that you pay for when you give money to PBS, the programs I have done were free to you. You only pay for the propaganda.

So sorry. I don’t buy it. PBS was a very closed establishment and the Democrats are striving to make it that way again. I’ll survive, even though free speech won’t under the democrats.

By chuck

November 4, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this

For a serious discussion JOKESON, Can you please tell me what you meant by this comment?

The fact that this humanity is DEMONIZED is what bothers me in the discussions.”

Are you talking about OLD PEOPLE? Nobody on this board has demonized old people. If anything, old people have more to fear from the party that supports Euthanasia than they do from the Republicans. Nobody has demonized POOR PEOPLE either.

I can’t believe how naive poor people and liberals in general are. You are NOT HELPING poor people by giving them an endless source of government income. IT CREATES A PERMANENT UNDERCLASS. After all, if you go to work and make $13,000 a year, OR you can sit home and make $12,000 a year which are you going to do? They don’t see the advantage of learning on the job, doing the best they can and getting promotions and raises because they can’t get over the fact that it appears that they are working full time for $1000 a year.

I am not against a SAFETY NET. I’ll try to find the link, but I was reading some stats about welfare a few weeks ago and as I recall, less than 15% of those on welfare use the time that they have to participate in job training programs or in taking technical school or college courses. That to me is INSANE. WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE OUR COUNTRY STRONGER BY WRITING PEOPLE A CHECK.

By The Other Jack

November 4, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

I addressed your answer about the arm bands. I said it had nothing to do with the subject … again. I’m not saying that you can’t make a point, you just can’t address the subject of the conversation, like this conversation that is about your reaction to the Democratically controlled congress being unleashed by an Obama presidency.

I was right. You can’t address it. This is what you do. This is also what the joke does.

Here’s something you might want to try: ADDRESS WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED.

Now take care of that future human.

By The Other Jack

November 4, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

Chuck

Good luck. He’s been whining for two days. See if you can get him to stop crying, will you? I’m embarrassed for him.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

WHY WOULD KENYA CONSIDER BARRY A NATIVE SON? BECAUSE HE WAS BORN THERE? Look up Kenya Fever on the Googler!

By chuck

November 4, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

Hey Sunshine, nice post:

“All in all, do you think things in the nation are generally headed in the right direction, or do you feel that things are off on the wrong track?”

11/1-2/08 Right Track= 11% Wrong Track= 76% Mixed= 10% Unsure=3%

Let me ask you a question? WHAT IF, when asked that question, people were thinking that Obama was about to be elected President? If you are a McCain supporter and you thought that, wouldn’t you answer that question as “WRONG TRACK”? On the other hand, if you are a Bush hater and you were thinking about the Bush Presidency, wouldn’t you ALSO answer it “WRONG TRACK”?

50% of statistics are 90% useless.

By JokesOn

November 4, 2008 11:20 AM | Link to this

For a serious discussion JOKESON, Can you please tell me what you meant by this comment?

You vetoed a serious discussion long ago (years now?) and again with your first posting on this subject. If you retract (like Sunshine recently and everyone else on the blog) your personal attacks, I and others would be inclined to believe you want an honest debate. But, until the, You and The Troof do not and cannot get it.

Someone could physically show you proof of your err (it has happened here on the blog) and you shrug and disregard it or change the subject. You two do not want to understand anything better.

You only want info that backs your beliefs. Plain and simple.

By Writer of Fake Names

November 4, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this

I am too stupid to breathe, please shoot me!

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this

Can you please address why the Democrats would want to restrict the scope of programming of our only state controlled television network while the Republicans wanted to hear all views—Can you please for the umpteenth time site a source for your information, or is all of this Right wing propaganda from your opinion only? (see if you get to call anything and everything left wing I can call anything you say with out any info to back it up right wing)

PBS was a very closed establishment and the Democrats are striving to make it that way again.—Again, ANY proof of this or are we just to take your completely unbiased opinion as fact?

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Eldest of 8th graders! GO away! You and sunshine both suck! STFU!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

Sunshine go pound sand! PBS SUCKS!

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

Chuck—Let me ask you a question? WHAT IF, when asked that question, people were thinking that Obama was about to be elected President? If you are a McCain supporter and you thought that, wouldn’t you answer that question as “WRONG TRACK”? On the other hand, if you are a Bush hater and you were thinking about the Bush Presidency, wouldn’t you ALSO answer it “WRONG TRACK”?

I would agree with you but the website I referenced goes all the way back to 1997, showing the answer to that question over and over. There has been a steady and constant decline in peoples’ opinion since before the presidential election, and since before the last congressional election. The last time it was at a high point was 4/2003 where 62% of America thought we were going in the right direction. Here is the website again, so you can check it out! (www. pollingreport.com/right.htm) Remove one space after www

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 11:44 AM | Link to this

you just can’t address the subject of the conversation, like this conversation that is about your reaction to the Democratically controlled congress being unleashed by an Obama presidency.—TOJ, it seems answering your questions, like the direct armband/sidearm question, is some how “off topic” to you. I have told you my opinion of the congress three times now, do you just not read my post, or do you just not like the answer so you ignore it? And BTW the congress will not be “UNLEASHED” by Mr. Obama it will be voted in by the American public, see we have this great system where if the people, you know, those pesky voters, don’t think you are doing a good job, they vote you out. Mr. Obama, like the rest of us, has one vote. And since I am not very good at predicting the future, I don’t know exactly what will happen when our newly elected officials arrive in congress. But I am sure with your infinite wisdom you do. And I am sure you will have no facts or data to back it up!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

McCain/Palin! Go Team! Obamanation, go suck a fat donkey ball!

By The Other Jack

November 4, 2008 12:03 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

I don’t think you get it. Mara is a smart woman. She follows the topic and often offers reasonable and sometimes even civil discussion. When I am trying to discuss issues with you or the joke, it’s like talking to my dog. I’ll think that he is getting what I am saying, and then he’ll pee on the plant again. There are so many things that you would want proved, including the election of 1994, I just don’t have the time and I really don’t care if you believe it or not. I understand my limitations.

I have been around a lot of pregnant women, including the pregnant woman that was carrying my own children. If someone, anyone would even suggest to them that it was not a human baby growing inside them, there would have been bloodshed.

So when you replied that your unborn child was nothing more than a future human to you, I realized that you would put your political mantra over the respect of your unborn child. That kind of indoctrination is much more than I can challenge. Again, i understand my limitations.

I’m not here to change anybody’s vote. I’m just here to challenge them to think a little differently, something that I have pleasantly and not so pleasantly encountered myself, several times.

But with you or the joke? It’s just frustrating to try and communicate. You just aren’t even close to getting what anyone is talking about. Your rambling conversations and your avoidance of any pertanant issues is impossible to deal with. I would just as soon you talk to other people. I seem to infuriate you, so please do us both a favor and just write to other people.

By The Other Jack

November 4, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this

Sunshine

So we are getting what we deserve.

Got it.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

Remember Republicans! VOTE EARLY! VOTE OFTEN! No to OBAMA, NO To SOCIALISM! NO TO RETREAT!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this

Oh Sunshine! POUND SAND TOO! AND DON’T POST ANYMORE!

YEAH!

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

The Truth of the matter TOJ is that you have been badly and deeply emotionally scarred by your former wife who decided to get an abortion without your consent. This taints all of your arguments and makes you unable to see another point of view. You have proven, on this board, by your own account, how little you know about pregnant women, and this is enforced even more by the fact that you do not understand why someone would have an abortion, especially your wife. You are so far off topic with bringing all of this up though it is funny, and kinda sad too. I am sorry for you loss, I hope one day you can get over it. Good luck!

By Gale

November 4, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

I listened to an interesting interview today. The person had written a book about the fall of Athenian democracy. He proposed that all democracies are doomed to fail. As soon as the people realize they can vote gifts to themselves from the public treasury, democracy is doomed to fail. It will always be followed by a dictatorship. I don’t know that I agree with his premise. But I thought it might make for an interesting, not too far off topic for discussion while we wait out the vote today. Any takers?

By chuck

November 4, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this

Jokes, I think the more likely response is that you cannot show from any post that I or anyone else has demonized the poor. My earlier analysis stands. You are an intellectual lightweight and your only purpose for being here is to try and boost your miniscule self-esteem.

By k

November 4, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this

HAPPY ELECTION DAY, everybody!

Actually, Chuck, I think JO was referring to (and I agreed with) the way some people demonize those who express the desire to look out for the poor, or more specifically, to build a safety net into the structure of our society for that purpose. While some make the argument that “helping” them is not really helping them, which IMO has SOME merit depending on the method used to “help” them, the idea that the government contain some tax-funded structural avenue for helping the poor is regularly met with enthusiastic disdain here, even from people who claim to follow Jesus, the ultimate, “help the poor” pioneer. Hope that helps.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 1:51 PM | Link to this

Obama’s mom loves that BBC, just like me! Big Black C0ck! I crave it! I am a slave to it…

By HeeHaw

November 4, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this

you do not understand why someone would have an abortion, especially your wife.

she actually did not want to reproduce any more ugly TOJ types. for the common good and all that.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this

heehaw! Go suck a donkey dongle! You (Dum BASS!) and all that! You ignorant, inbred POS!

By chuck

November 4, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

even from people who claim to follow Jesus, the ultimate, “help the poor” pioneer.

People who “follow Jesus are NEVER against “helping the poor”. I expressed in my earlier post when I said:

You are NOT HELPING poor people by giving them an endless source of government income. IT CREATES A PERMANENT UNDERCLASS. After all, if you go to work and make $13,000 a year, OR you can sit home and make $12,000 a year which are you going to do? They don’t see the advantage of learning on the job, doing the best they can and getting promotions and raises because they can’t get over the fact that it appears that they are working full time for $1000 a year.

The fact is, Kimberly, that some ideas are better than other ideas. I have no problem with people who debate honestly and openly about those ideas. All of us tend to be a bit hyperbolic in our assertions here, but I think most of us are honest about the way we see these issues and truly believe that our way is best for America.

For instance, I honestly believe that my taxes would go DOWN under Obama. That isn’t why I support candidates for President. To me it is an issue of FAIRNESS. Just because someone CAN pay more, it doesn’t necessarily follow that they SHOULD pay more. I have as much a stake in this country as they do. I should pay the SAME PERCENTAGE as them. THAT IS FAIR. I can carry my own water and they should carry theirs. No more, no less.

The point is that it is not helpful to poor people and it is an injustice to wealthy people. You used to post in a manner that was thoughtful and reasoned, but you have been almost “whiley-like” lately, going beyond hyperbole and into hysteria. I try not to respond to you like I do to Jokeson, because I do believe that you are sincere in what you post for the most part. It was much easier to repect your opinion when you were not so over-the-top in your discussions. I think you have a good heart…the opposite of what I think about jokeson.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

I should pay the SAME PERCENTAGE as them. THAT IS FAIR. I can carry my own water and they should carry theirs. No more, no less.— I completely agree Chuck, I often wonder why the flat tax idea has never taken hold, seems most people understand it and agree that it would be the most fair system.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

K, ARE YOU TOO STUPID TO SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE? Jesus wants you to give to Rome what is Rome’s. Help the poor, but not through tax dollars! STUPID STUPID STUPID!

By k

November 4, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

Chuck, I was about to have a reasonable discussion with you today, but you just couldn’t leave personalities out of it, could you? What does whiley, or your suppositions of my state of mind have to do with anything?

As I said before, there is some merit to the argument that helping people is not helping them when the method of helping them causes them to no longer help themselves. A meaningful discussion on the role of government to provide a safety net without an entrapment net, or a hand up instead of a hand out, or to generate opportunities instead of being a charity, might be useful to Americans as we attempt to go forward from here into what we’re told will be trying economic times. But you’d rather accuse me of something I didn’t do, at least not today, so What EV! Please continue to falsely pigeon hole everyone else while nobody listens.

Gandalf, go stick your head back in your scrotum, Dude. You’re just gross.

By chuck

November 4, 2008 2:49 PM | Link to this

I agree Sunshine. I can tell you what the problem is. Liberals see the Flat Tax as “Regressive”. I think that they would have a point if the AMOUNT PAID was the same for everybody, but if the PERCENTAGE is the same, rich people pay more.

What really burns me up is that democrats scream about tax cuts for the rich, but if you look at the LOOPHOLES that they helped to create for the wealthy when the top marginal rate was 70% and that continue today, the only people who win are the ACCOUNTANTS who help them pay the lowesst amount they can get away with. They win the game because they know the rules and use them to their advantage. To me, I prefer the Flat Tax to the FAIR Tax. It provides a very predictable revenue to the government and doesn’t punish innovation or success. It enables people to make solid financial plans for the long term without worrying about what congress might do with the tax code “next year”.

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this

My point is if YOU are going to state something as fact, like the waiting periods in national healthcare systems are bad, know that you are correct through study.

JokesOn—I read through the link you provided, and it isn’t nearly the slam-dunk that you seem to think it is in support of government-run healthcare. In fact, the specific point I raised that waiting times are longer under socialized medicine is only addressed at one point, in the Great Britain section:

What are the concerns? The stereotype of socialized medicine — long waits and limited choice — still has some truth.

Any other facts you need me to verify for you?

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Liberals see the Flat Tax as “Regressive”—Not all of us!

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this

The fact that this humanity is DEMONIZED is what bothers me in the discussions.

JokesOn, chuck, et.al.—If I’ve learned one thing in life, it’s this: All people believe that they are good and moral people, whatever their political stripe. As such, I think that it’s a complete waste of time to debate which political party is “more compassionate” when discussing specific policies and programs. Frankly, I don’t think that Jesus could be pigeonholed as being either a Democrat or a Republican, and I find it tiresome when people try to do so, on both sides of the political aisle.

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this

I’m swamped at work today, but wanted to throw a shout out to Sunshine and praise her once again for taking a deeper look into the 2000 election and subsequent litigation/recounts. Your willingness to take a second look and admit that you had previous bias is both refreshing and encouraging. WTG, Sunshine!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this

Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Judge me not by my color of my skin but my character”… That’s why I’m voting for John McCain! So would MLK! You know that poor soul is sad for what happened to his legacy. People like Jesse Jackson attempting to carry the cross…to bad for him.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this

Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Judge me not by my color of my skin but my character”… That’s why I’m voting for John McCain! So would MLK! You know that poor soul is sad for what happened to his legacy. People like Jesse Jackson attempting to carry the cross…to bad for him.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 3:18 PM | Link to this

Thanks Bruno! Its really nice to hear someone say something nice about/to me on here today! I appreciate the compliment!

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this

The problem here is people trying to use taxation to fix real or perceived inequities in income. That isn’t the responsibility of the government nor is it fair to the income earner.

NetB—I’m sorry that I missed you yesterday, but wanted to say that I agree 100% with your assessment of the proper role of the government in regards to business and taxation.

Once again for all of you who think raising the capital gains tax is such a great idea: The capital providers are the ones who keep our country running, who ultimately provide jobs for the rest of us. When you raise capital gains taxes, it discourages investment, which ultimately harms us all. Your man, Barack Obama, is dead set on raising capital gains taxes, though he won’t clearly say by how much. He is on record as saying that it’s a matter of “fairness” and brushed aside concerns that it will result in a weakened economy and overall lower tax collections. That’s a hard pill for me to swallow.

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 3:24 PM | Link to this

Thanks Bruno! Its really nice to hear someone say something nice about/to me on here today! I appreciate the compliment!

Anytime, beautiful.

Congrats again to you and your liberal brothers and sisters on board for Obama’s victory tonight.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this

K? Who told you your argument had merit? You just a Dum Bass! STFU with your rhetoric! K it’s hard to pigeon hole someone with as weak a though process as thee, now pleas STFU and go away!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 3:28 PM | Link to this

K is it “from each according to thier means, to each according to thier needs”? (DUM BASS!)

By k

November 4, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this

Sunshine, Bruno, or anyone who can answer, I still have a question about the 2000 (and 2004) election: IF BEING BOTH SEC OF STATE IN CHARGE OF ELECTIONS AND THE HEAD OF THE STATEWIDE COMMITTEE TO ELECT ONE CANDIDATE IN THAT ELECTION IS NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WHAT WOULD BE CONISDERED A CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR A PERSON IN THAT POSITION? I’m sorry to beat the dead horse over and over, but when you talk about perceptions of the 2000 election being “biased” then I have to say YES, unless what I think happened didn’t really happen, then the election was clearly biased in Florida/2000 BEFORE THE FIRST VOTE WAS EVEN CAST!

Should we pretend it didn’t happen?

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this

K, it’s OK, you will forget all about it when we steal this election! So be brave!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this

K, it’s OK, you will forget all about it when we steal this election! So be brave!

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

K, I will answer you question, yes it is ABSOLUTELY a conflict of interest and Katrine Harris was a terrible and undeniably biased Sec of State, not only did she call the election before all of the votes were counted, she also worked hard to purge thousands of voters from the rolls. From Wiki “Evidence is clear that Harris used criteria wider than that allowed by Florida law to keep some qualifying felons from voting. Felons who regain the right to vote tend to vote about 90% Democratic, and Harris later reinstated some of those disqualified in the 2000 election. Apparently she improperly removed about 4,000 qualified voters [5].” She is still a much despised figure in FL, and is used as an example of Bias in government. But after all the reading that I did, the 2000 election came down to the court making a decision. While I still don’t think they should have, they did, and I respect the Supreme Court’s decisions. It also seems that although the margin seems to be less than 500 votes, from all independent recounts I read about, Bush did win FL.

This is exactly why it is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo important everyone votes, 500 votes, from the 4th largest state in the country, good gravy that’s close! Also another reason this election is so important, we could have 3 Supreme Court Justices retiring in the next 4 years!

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

IF BEING BOTH SEC OF STATE IN CHARGE OF ELECTIONS AND THE HEAD OF THE STATEWIDE COMMITTEE TO ELECT ONE CANDIDATE IN THAT ELECTION IS NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WHAT WOULD BE CONISDERED A CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR A PERSON IN THAT POSITION?

On a personal level, I guess each person is free to decide if the situation you described is a “conflict of interest” or not and is free to spin out whatever conspiracy theories they like based upon it. From a legal standpoint, however, it is obviously permissible since it was never addressed in any of the subsequent legislation following the 2000 election.

Which brings me back to the main point of the 2000 Gore challenge in Fl: There are election rules and regulations in place which are necessarily established BEFORE the election, and cannot be changed AFTER the election is held simply because one candidate or the other is unhappy with the results. Gore tried to circumvent several election laws in his bid for a recount, and was rightly overruled by Judge N. Sanders Saul, a registered Democrat, in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in FL. The FL Supreme Court then tried to “legislate from the bench” in overturning Judge Saul’s decision, but were ultimately prevented from doing so by the US Supreme Court.

The essence of Gore’s argument was that more people “intended” to vote for him than the actual vote counts showed based on statistical analysis of pre-election polls. I’m not sure how you think elections should be decided, but I’m happy with simply counting the votes and declaring the winner based on the ACTUAL VOTES CAST, and not based on any projections based on pre-election polls.

Have I answered your question to your satisfaction?

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

Bruno, my friend, be careful here, I don’t think it was all about “Gore’s argument was that more people “intended” to vote for him than the actual vote counts showed based on statistical analysis of pre-election polls.” Read my post above, I still believe the court made the final decision, and in subsequent recounts it appears if by all account Bush would have won, but the way it was done and Katherine Harris’s participation in the events were dirty, the sad part is if she hadn’t stopped the vote counting Bush would have still won, BUT what she did is WHY the Supreme Court declared GW the winner. See this from the Katherine Harris Wiki Page:

“Harris certified that the Republican candidate, then-Texas Governor George W. Bush, had defeated the Democratic candidate, then-Vice President Al Gore, in the popular vote of Florida and thus certified the Republican slate of electors. Despite the fact that the margin separating Bush from Gore was only a few hundred votes, with thousands of votes remaining to be counted, Harris ordered a halt to the count, freezing Bush’s small margin in place. Her ruling was challenged and overturned on appeal by Florida’s Supreme Court; this decision, however, was itself reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore. That Court ruled (5-4) that Gore’s request to extend Florida’s statutory deadline for ballot re-counts had no merit because no Florida law at the time provided for that option. This decision had the effect of leaving thousands of Florida voters without having their votes counted, especially those who voted on the “butterfly ballot” - a ballot whose design violated Florida law - yet the Supreme Court chose not to give those voters a remedy. Both Florida state and federal law permit officials wide discretion in doing whatever it needed to permit voters to vote in such a way that their votes can easily be read and counted. This ruling nullified the state court’s decision, upholding Harris’ certification. The decision foreclosed any further court challenges by Gore and resulted in Bush’s margin of victory in Florida being officially tallied at 537 votes. Therefore, Florida’s electoral votes — and the Presidency - went to Bush.”

Sorry for the long post!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

I can feel the rising Of the McCain Power! Please don’t post any more and go Vote for the true patriot, John McCain. Forget about your silly whim, it doesn’t fit the plan! DOWN with obamanations! NoBama! Up with freedom and peace through superior firepower. Get up stand up! Stand up for you rights! Kill crimminals, not babies! Now STFU and go vote!

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

I can feel the rising Of the McCain Power! Please don’t post any more and go Vote for the true patriot, John McCain. Forget about your silly whim, it doesn’t fit the plan! DOWN with obamanations! NoBama! Up with freedom and peace through superior firepower. Get up stand up! Stand up for you rights! Kill crimminals, not babies! Now STFU and go vote!

By k

November 4, 2008 4:19 PM | Link to this

Thanks Sunshine and Bruno for answering. I agree that votes should be counted, and had a problem when I heard the news report that he SC said, “stop counting the votes, we’re going to make a decision now.” I was willing to have the votes counted, and frankly this electoral college business (and the primary nonsense) bothers me. Just count the votes.

I have not posted about consipracy theories (although I do believe Harris’ actions indicate premeditation to favor her candidate) only about what, TO ME, constitutes a clear conflict of interest and inherent violation of public trust. Of course any Sec of State has his or her own preference. But to hold both positions, to which responsibilities and duties are attached, in my opinion, demonstrates a lack of ethics. I could not personally respect someone who did not recuse herself from one of those positions in order to fulfill the responsibilities of the other with integrity.

ONE MORE TIME: Just because something is “legal” does not make it ethical or right. Many laws are written and tweaked by people looking to preserve their own interests at the expense of someone else’s. We need look no further than financial and insurance regulations to see evidence. One can say, “My actions did not break the law!” all day long, but that doesn’t automatically mean one’s actions were ethical, fair, right, or honest. Legality is not a basis for trust, and as an American, I would LIKE to have trust in my electoral process.

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this

Sunshine—I don’t have any more time to day to post, but will briefly answer you. The bottom line is that Katherine Harris followed Florida law as it existed before the election, plain and simple. Everyone’s votes were counted at least once, and in many cases twice.

If you care to dig deep enough into the actual Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, Gore’s team of lawyers unsuccessfully argued that “overvotes”, that is votes with more than one candidate selected, should all go to Gore since they believed that more voters “intended” to vote for him based on pre-election polls. As such, if you think that post-election “mind-reading” is a volid way to count votes, then more power to you.

Please find out more about the actual facts of the matter if you wish to discuss the matter any further with me. The source you quoted from only gave 1/3 of the facts, and presented it in a slanted way.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this

You are very right K—Just because something is “legal” does not make it ethical or right. Katerine Harris, WAS brought up on Ethics Violations, and was involved in MANY political scandals. She really was a peice of work, even Karl Rove didn’t want to support her election campaign for the US House because she “lacked state wide appeal”. Also her and Sarah Palin have a lot of the same religious views it seems.

By Gandalf, the Grey

November 4, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this

State don’t have to have elections for president. It’s the electoral college that matters! Once again K you are showing that you are a DUM BASS! Electoral College elects the President, not the people. Gosh, I guess you slept through Goverment in high school? Try reading the constitution just once before you blow off you silly steam! You can’t cure Stupid!

By Bruno

November 4, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this

stop counting the votes, we’re going to make a decision now

The FACT is that the votes in FL WERE counted, and were recounted in specific counties by machine. By the time the US Supreme Court stepped in, there was an additional, illegal, recount going on. Please be more accurate in your statements.

Just because something is “legal” does not make it ethical or right. Many laws are written and tweaked by people looking to preserve their own interests at the expense of someone else’s. We need look no further than financial and insurance regulations to see evidence. One can say, “My actions did not break the law!” all day long, but that doesn’t automatically mean one’s actions were ethical, fair, right, or honest. Legality is not a basis for trust, and as an American, I would LIKE to have trust in my electoral process.

The reason we have election laws in place BEFORE the elections are held is clear in my mind. “Ethics” can be argued either way, and as such, cannot form the basis for changing election laws AFTER the election has already finished. If you see it differently, you are certainly entitled to your opinions.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Bruno, I did read all about the Over vote/ Under vote thing, I agree with you in that you can not discern the intent of a voter especially when more than one candidate is marked. But Mrs. Harris did stop the vote count, and the source I referenced above was Wikipedia, are you really telling me that you believe that site is biased?

Everyone’s votes were counted at least once, and in many cases twice. this isn’t true. At least according to the articles I read, the vote count was stopped. “This decision had the effect of leaving thousands of Florida voters without having their votes counted, especially those who voted on the “butterfly ballot” - a ballot whose design violated Florida law - yet the Supreme Court chose not to give those voters a remedy.”

By k

November 4, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

Gandalf, you are a gross blob of scrotal tumor. I know what the electoral college is, doofus, I’m not one of those “we don’t need no educayyyyshun” Republicans who thinks book learnin’ is elitist and not knowing shoot from shinola makes you real. I said it bothers me. Being an American means I don’t have to pretend I’m okay with something if I’m not. I would like to see us adopt a system in which our votes actually count, even if that means we’d have to count your vote too. F—-tard.

By k

November 4, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

Gandalf, you are a gross blob of scrotal tumor. I know what the electoral college is, doofus, I’m not one of those “we don’t need no educayyyyshun” Republicans who thinks book learnin’ is elitist and not knowing shoot from shinola makes you real. I said it bothers me. Being an American means I don’t have to pretend I’m okay with something if I’m not. I would like to see us adopt a system in which our votes actually count, even if that means we’d have to count your vote too. F—-tard.

By Monica

November 4, 2008 4:52 PM | Link to this

Happy Election Day! Hubby and I went to the polls this am, fully expecting to wait in line - we even borrowed our boys’ Nintendos - but to our delight we didn’t have to wait to vote. Ahh, rural America. :)

By k

November 4, 2008 4:52 PM | Link to this

“Ethics” can be argued either way

Good point, Bruno! Besides, people demonstrate their ethics more through their actions than through their words anyway, don’t you think? You have your own standards, I’ll keep mine, thanks.

By Monica

November 4, 2008 4:57 PM | Link to this

Sunshine, I don’t know if you were being sarcastic or not, but just in case, Wikipedia is not a reliable source - anyone with a login and change information on it - so it can be biased. We don’t allow our students to use Wikipedia as reference source.

By Sunshine

November 4, 2008 5:17 PM | Link to this

I know that Wiki is not the MOST secure source BUT with everyone here screaming about the “liberal Media” I use wiki b/c you can’t call it partisan, I try to use other sources to, like Fox to prove a point, b/c then you are not accused of using a source that is “Leftwing” but since most GOP’ers here have claimed almost every single news outlet as left it is really hard to find any source they will agree with. There are footnotes and sources for the info on Wiki also and many times I check those before I use a wiki reference to see the possition, and if there is a wild “slant” in an article it is usually marked as such. (ie, this part of this posting is being disputed as….inaccurate, biased, ect) It is the more heads are better than one theory, if enough people look at it, the trash usually is cleaned out. And while I understand not wanting to use it in a school setting, this is just a blog as everyone keeps pointing out. Just my 2 cents!

See you all tomorrow! I am going home to get in my PJ’s and watch the results!

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 8:10 AM | Link to this

Congrats, Democrats. I hope i have been wrong and the country starts to work it’s way out of this mess.

But I have discovered an issue that I wanted to point out to the regular posters here. It’s about “Sunshine”. i have suspected that she/it wasn’t who they were claiming to be for a while now. Please read the following with an open mind:

Sunshine’s first Appearance on the blog was on Sept 3 at 4:47PM

Yesterday Sunshine wrote this

The Truth of the matter TOJ is that you have been badly and deeply emotionally scarred by your former wife who decided to get an abortion without your consent. This taints all of your arguments and makes you unable to see another point of view. You have proven, on this board, by your own account, how little you know about pregnant women, and this is enforced even more by the fact that you do not understand why someone would have an abortion, especially your wife. You are so far off topic with bringing all of this up though it is funny, and kinda sad too. I am sorry for you loss, I hope one day you can get over it. Good luck!

Here’s the truth of the matter. The truth of the matter is that since August 11, almost a month before “Sunshine” made it’s first appearance here, no one has repeated the story of my first wife and my aborted child. No one. Not a single person. Not a word has been said since Sunshine has appeared on this forum about that.

You can search it if you like, but it has not been discussed or even mentioned.
On August 11, Joke attacked me for losing my child, but few details were mentioned and that was a month before Sunshine ever appeared here.

This blog is set up to prohibit personal communications between posters so this issue couldn’t have been discussed without this person being here before.

So explain yourself, Sunshine, the Liar. How did you know about my first wife? I have made a point of not mentioning this, but you brought it up.

This is not something that you will be able to avoid or change the subject about.

I think you owe everyone on here an explanation of how you knew about a topic that hasn’t been discussed for weeks before you appeared here and the details that you mentioned hadn’t been outlined for months. .
So yes, it is kinda funny and kinda sad that you were caught. And you were caught because you are a sick little f^ck that couldn’t resist the temptation of jabbing me over the death of my child.

You screwed up, you sorry piece of crap.

And this is not going away. You might as well make up another character and try it again. You just exposed “Sunshine” for the lying poser that you are.

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 8:21 AM | Link to this

But with you or the joke? It’s just frustrating to try and communicate.

Once again, you cannot paste any post by you, to me, that is not frothing. You lie about things that all one has to do is scroll up to prove.

Chuckles, Seems everyone else can understand exactly what I meant, but your mensa certified mind. We all know the only reason you or TOJ would ask for clarification is to argue, not understand.

Dog, Never even alluded to it being a “slam dunk.” I said that they are evidence of another, and in nearly all cases, better, healthcare. Plus, you are reading a condensed article of what was an hour long documentary.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 8:26 AM | Link to this

TOJ—Paranoid much? Since you are so good at researching past posts you will also see the first week I posted I said I was a long time reader but new to posting. I have been reading this blog almost 2 years now, and formally I was blocked by a firewall at work from posting, now I am not, therefor when I was able to post I did. Mystery solved!

Remember this is a public place, what you put online is public. I am sorry that I related a story you told here, but after you have attacked my parenting skills and yesterday comparing me to a dog, I thought you could take it.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 8:31 AM | Link to this

Joke/Sunshine

Eat sh^t and die, you piece of crap.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 8:37 AM | Link to this

Sunshine

bullsh^t. You are caught, you friggin’ joke.

You can slime around all you want, but you will not slime out of this one. Joke, you are simply not smart enough to pull this off.

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

Here comes the waaaambulance!

TOJ is so predictable, as are most people that are totally controlled by their emotional reactions and not rational thought.

Maybe, just maybe, he will get tired of being completely reactionary and seek help one day in becoming a thinking human.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 8:59 AM | Link to this

Joke/Sunshine

Since you are so good at researching past posts you will also see the first week I posted I said I was a long time reader but new to posting.

Nope. Just looked over the posts. You never said that. You are lying again.

LOL!! You are caught. You are once again trying to be smarter than you are. I love the fact that Joke and Sunshine have both shown up to argue about this. LOL!!!

Hahaha. And you were caught because you couldn’t resist attacking me again because of my dead child.

Karma is a b^tch, b^tch.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this

Sunshine/Joke

Waaabulance? LOL

Not going to do it this time, Pal.

Eldest of the 8th graders indeed!!!!!

Hahaha. You are caught. And you are just dumb enough to try and argue about it.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 9:06 AM | Link to this

That’s right TOJ, I am not real just like I am not pregnant! You have ALL the answers! DUDE you have WAY to much time on your hands to care this much about other bloggers in cyberland!

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 9:13 AM | Link to this

Sunshine/Joke

Off to work. Sorry to ruin your day, b^tch.

You are caught. You can whine all you want, but most people here aren’t stupid. Even if you were lurking, they know that you don’t remember those kinds of details.

You have some serious problems, pal. I hope you can play pool better than you can pretend to be a pregnant woman. Although the femininity was very convincing. But knowing you as I do, being a man has never been your strong suit.

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this

Sunshine,

We are dealing with an unstable and irrational (understated to be kind) being here. There is no “talking” to him.

He always thinks that bloggers who dislike/challenge him are me as well - not to mention the snipers.

Hey kids, if you don’t like reality, just do what chuckles and The Troof does. Deny it exists. If you say the sky is green enough times, you actually will start to believe it.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this

Sunshine?Joke

*You have ALL the answers! DUDE you have WAY to much time on your hands to care this much about other bloggers in cyberland! *

Ah. But you can read about something I talked about in July and post every detail in Novemeber, but I care too much about other bloggers. I see.

So how stupid would the other bloggers need to be in order to believe you, Joke?

You are caught. Give it up, half-wit. You are just not smart enough to pull this off.

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this

Eldest of the 8th graders indeed!!!!!

Using Troofs logic, that is enough proof that he is Gandalf.

Idiot.

By GD the USA!

November 5, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this

LIBERALs I hope you all EAT Poop and DIE! You have destroyed our country. We are doomed!

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 9:44 AM | Link to this

Sunshine/Joke

LOL!!

Oh please keep going. My side is hurting. First you are just crazy enough to stalk me around the web, attacking people on other blogs who you suspect of being me, then you are just dumb enough to come here and brag about it.

Then you pretend to be a pregnant woman who doesn’t have the respect to call her unborn child a human baby until you want to “zing me” so you do what you always do, you bring up my dead child.

Well b^tch. You are just not smart enough to pull it off. Hahaha.

If a real pregnant woman would have known the details about my ex, she would have been discussing it all along, after all, I have discussed abortion more with Sunshine than with anyone. And only a sick, twisted, half-wit like yourself would consider using the fact that my child is dead as a jab when you are too frustrated to say anything else.

You are caught, half-wit. I just hate i compared you to my dog. My dog is really smart.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 9:47 AM | Link to this

Sunshine/Joke

LOL

You seem bitter and angry, Einstein. Hahaha.

Your little game backfired and now you look like a slimy, creepy idiot … again!!!

Hey, make your next character a man. let’s see if you can pull that off. Hahaha.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this

By Sunshine

September 17, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this

I can’t say that we share a common political outlook, Sunshine, but I like the blog name you picked for yourself!—Thank you for the compliment! I was given that nickname a long time ago, I try to live up to it! As a long time lurker and newer poster, I really enjoy the civil tone you bring with you Bruno! Good luck with your date! I hope its fun!

By USinUK

September 17, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this

Sunshine -

Best quote I heard recently about all the hub-bub that McCain was right about the ‘surge’: “You don’t get to brag about your delicious dessert, when everyone from your dinner party went home with food poisoning!”

OMG - that’s so good.

((and, Gale - I love the Meaning of Life reference!!!)

I don’t know how long you’ve been lurking around W2W, but one thing you’ll learn when you debate Truth - he will NEVER admit when he’s wrong especially when you show a link and provide him with proof - he’ll just move on to another subject

WOW was USinUK ever Right!

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

By Sunshine

September 17, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this

I don’t know how long you’ve been lurking around W2W, but one thing you’ll learn when you debate Truth - he will NEVER admit when he’s wrong especially when you show a link and provide him with proof—You are right USinUK, I am beginning to see that. I have lurked on and off for a long time, more than a year, depending on how interesting the topic is. I have just always been wrapped up in politics, and I get all worked up about it every two years! But I have to watch it this year, I am almost 5 months pregnant and the stress isn’t good for the little guy! I like to construct a good argument with facts and figures, and I love a good debate.*

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

TOJ-You really should put your big boy pants on! You put the details of your life on a blog. It is hard to forget someone cheating and then their wife having to make a choice about keeping a child. I am able to remember details like that, its a pretty horrible story. I think her position must have been incredibly hard. So you can rant and rave and swing your arms in the air!

Me? I am going to think happy thoughts and enjoy this historic day in our country! Yeah for Democracy, Yeah for Change, Yeah for the land of the free where anyone one no mater their background can grow up and be anything they want to be!

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 10:21 AM | Link to this

Sunshine/Joke

I saw that. But you said two years. Lying again.

Keep trying. Because there is one fact that you can’t avoid.

You posted this only this morning: I am sorry that I related a story you told here, but after you have attacked my parenting skills and yesterday comparing me to a dog, I thought you could take it.

I could take it? I could take you throwing up in my face that my child died? So who else is just slimy enough to bring that fact up and use it in an argument?

Please go back and find a single other poster that would use the death of a child as a reason to attack another poster. No one has. Everyone here, no matter how much we disagree has been understanding and even compassionate about it. Only one other poster used that fact as a reason to attack me. Only one other poster. And that other poster has been Joke.

You and Joke. You are such an idiot and such a common person that does not contain a speck of decency that would tell you that a death of a child is not something that decent people use to attack another person. it is that lack of decency that has bit your sorry a*.

Now explain that, b^tch.

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

TOJ-You really should put your big boy pants on! You put the details of your life on a blog. It is hard to forget someone cheating and then their wife having to make a choice about keeping a child.

Sunshine, You know what the real kicker is in this?

I really do not think either story about his ex’s abortion or recent girlfriend being killed in a car accident is true. They both happened when he made a complete a$$ of himself and alienated everyone, including those that tolerate him.

He manipulates and controls discussions through lying and personal attacks; and finally with emotional warfare.

One of the saddest bloggers to date. I do hope that the anonymity of the blog is just grossly exaggerating these facets and that he is not like this in reality. Makes me shudder to think he might really be like this.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this

I stand by what I said yesterday TOJ, and this is the last I will say about it. I wasn’t attacking you I was stating a fact that you have RE-demonstrated here:

The Truth of the matter TOJ is that you have been badly and deeply emotionally scarred by your former wife who decided to get an abortion without your consent. This taints all of your arguments and makes you unable to see another point of view.

I wish you luck, and hope you can get over this painful event in your life, talking to someone could help, I know this event has shaped your life, and I am sorry for that. I hope you can let some of your anger go someday.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this

Sunshine/Joke

I wasn’t attacking you I was stating a fact that you have RE-demonstrated here:

How dumb do you think the posters here are?

This is what you wrote this morning:

but after you have attacked my parenting skills and yesterday comparing me to a dog, I thought you could take it.

But now you are saying that you weren’t using it to attack me. Damn, twit. You are more stupid than even I knew.

You are caught. It is very rare to find anyone who is slimy enough to attack another person because that person has lost a child. And you just made another mistake. No one here has said that the reason was because i cheated on my wife but Joke and now, you.

LOL!! You are too friggin’ stupid to be allowed out in public.

There are a few on here that are so indoctrinated that they will support you no matter what. but the people with a triple digit IQ will see what you have been doing.

Now so far, just this morning I have caught you in three obvious lies.

Let’s see how long you keep digging Einstein. Hahaha.

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

What he is trying to explain to you Sunshine is that he loves to dish it out, but turns into a screaming child if he even thinks it is possible that he is being slighted.

Same old song and dance.

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

You are caught, Joke. For once, pretend to be a man and fess up.

You can whine and complain all you want, but you know you are caught. But the best thing is the fact that your lack of common decency is what caught you.

Karma is a b^tch, b^tch.

By k

November 5, 2008 12:14 PM | Link to this

Whoa…. way to hijack what could be a meaningful conversation on an historic (beautiful!) day to delve into the personal b—s**! That’s all most enough to kill my (beautiful, natural!) buzz, but not quite. It’s as if that’s what the tantrum thrower intended all along. GET HELP, Dude. A qualified psychotherapist somewhere awaits your bottomless pit of rage.

I’m still dancing, (in between bouts of weeping with joy), and you’re not ruining MY day! No how, no way.

YEEEESSSSS! WEEEEEEEEE! DIIIIIIIIID! (With only marginally sincere apologies to my neighbors who endured THAT in the wee hours. heee….)

By Gale

November 5, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

TOJ, stop already. You are behaving in an adolescent manner I expect only from Gandalf. I don’t care if anyone on the board misrepresents themselves. There are a number of people here who do not use a real name. If someone wants to use a name they feel says something about them, fine. I do care about all the personal attacks flying about. They do not contribute to any kind of discussion.

I would think, with a new president-elect, we would have something to talk about here. I am not happy with the election results. But I didn’t expect to be happy regardless of which side won. I’m sure someone has something positive to say today.

By Gandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

K you are such an (Dumbass)!!! You should weep, in dispair! You and you ilk have turned your back on what makes this country great and elected the antichrist! God help us! You neighbors should have slapped some sense into you…in 4 years, when you are told to either but on the BURKA or get stoned in the city square, remember who said it was a mistake!

TOJ, Maybe they are the same person! God know they both are dumber than a box of rocks, and post drivel every single day!.

By Gandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this

Gale! I am offended! (or is that offensive?)

By Mara

November 5, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

k - I’m still dancing

Me too! All over the world people are celebrating that America might once again embrace her ideals. People all over the world whooped and hollered and went out dancing in the streets, celebrating the hope that once again America might rise up and define itself as a beacon of tolerance, opportunity, and decency. Whether Obama manages to live up to his rhetoric or finds that political partisanship is too intractable to overcome becomes largely immaterial. Even failure, if that is the result, will not erase these hours of hope and euphoria.

Yay for America and Yay for the world.

By Gandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this

just goes to show you how a pile of cash can get anyone elected. Truly we don’t deserve to self govern, and just like Athens, we shall lose our greatest gift. How can someone who has no experience be elected to our highest office? Be a good speaker with tons of cash. For the first time in my adult life, I am embarassed to be an American. Hang your head in shame America, hang your head in shame.

By Mara

November 5, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this

Gale - I am not happy with the election results. But I didn’t expect to be happy regardless of which side won. I’m sure someone has something positive to say today.

your wish, my command :^) -

from Jim Manzi over at The Corner on National Review: “There are about 1,460 days until the next Presidential election, and I assume that I will spend approximately the next 1,459 of them opposing Barack Obama. But I’m spending today proud about what my country has overcome.”

By The Other Jack

November 5, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this

Gale, GTG

I apologize for using the board on this day of all days, but I wanted you to know who and what you were dealing with. Joke has bragged about stalking me around the internet, and has made up multiple nicks while swearing that he doesn’t.

Two days ago the only people here was joke and Sunshine and me. Their twisted logic was just too similar, and I am not talking about their politics. I am talking about their common and identical lack of grasping any subject that is offered. in only answering those two, i realized that I was addressing that same, very unique lack of basic intelligence and logic.

I had purposely not talked about my ex because i knew it was also very unique for a person to attack another poster because of a family death. i knew it would be joke under another name. No one does that.

Then yesterday, little cute innocent, pregnant Sunshine did it. I quickly went through the blogs with a word search since she has been here and that was never spoken about. We had talked about pregnancy and abortions every single day and she had said nothing until “she” got an opportunity to attack me with it.

So just understand that when you are talking to little Sunshine about being pregnant, you are talking to a very creepy dude.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

Great Quote Mara!

By Mara

November 5, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

Anybody want to comment on any of the other issues on the ballot yesterday?

Marijuana-friendly propositions did well across the country.

Abortion bans in Colorado and South Dakota went down in flames.

The Mormon Church backed Proposition 8 passed, stripping married gay couples of their legal status in California.

Physician assisted suicide passed in Washington State.

And last but not least, prostitution is still illegal in San Francisco.

Any comments?

By Mara

November 5, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this

Thanks, Sunshine. I’ve been looking over at some of the conservative sites, reading their comments and slowly becoming sadder and sadder at the bile and sheer contempt these people are unleashing on Obama before he’s even had the chance to try. Manzi was like a breath of fresh air in that cess-pool of hate.

Another interesting tid-bit that I happened across from Rod Dreher at Beliefnet -

1. The modern conservative movement began with the crushing defeat of Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential race. The modern conservative movement ends with the crushing defeat of Arizona Sen. John McCain — who took Goldwater’s Senate seat upon his retirement — in the 2008 presidential race.

2. Modern liberalism began its implosion with riots in Chicago’s Grant Park at the 1968 Democratic Convention. Tonight, modern liberalism is reborn at Chicago’s Grant Park, where a black Chicago Democrat will celebrate winning the presidency.

spoooooky!

By chuck

November 5, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this

Well, it’s finally over. No more presidential campaigning for what… 18-months, 2 years? You guys got what you wanted and we will all have to live with it. One positive thing that I can hold on to is that at least with this economic downturn, there won’t be enough money to implement any of the horrible plans that Barack HUSSEIN HAMAS Obama campaigned on. When he was measuring drapes, he should have taken a look in the cupboards…they are bare my friend. Hope you guys are not too disappointed when he is unable to follow trhough on those promises.

I figure that probably about the end of January the investigations into the origins of those “millions of small donations” begins. I’m guessing that about 20% of them came from overseas or from identity theft. We’ll see I guess.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this

Not to put a damper on ALL the wonderful things that passed yesterday!! YEAH for the South Dakota ban being defeated! But it seems so sad about Prop 8 and the FL Ban on gay/lesbian rights in FL. Why do so many people care to limit the rights of others? If you don’t want to marry someone of the same sex, then don’t, but why do you care if someone else does? It seems so intrusive into the private lives of others, when it has no effect on the general population. Why are we passing laws to restrict others right to happiness?

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 1:27 PM | Link to this

Trivial post:

One thing I did want to criticize obama about last night.

What the heck was his wife wearing?

That dress made it looked like she just walked out of a slaughterhouse.

By chuck

November 5, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

Hey, Mara, you don’t mean California finally got something right? Glad to hear that prop 8 passed. Hate to hear that Abortion RESTRICTIONS were voted down. It’s a bad time to be an unborn baby in America.

By Gandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this

She’s a stupid hater, who cares what she wears! She hates you!

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this

JokesOn, you didn’t like Mrs. Obama’s dress? Really, I quite liked it, I never noticed till last night how she almost always wears something that echos/coordinates with her girls’ dresses, and Mr. Obama’s tie usually matches too. I thought her outfit was great, very slimming in all the right places, and very festive, but I love red, so to each their own. I know one thing, I think she will be a style icon the likes of which we haven’t seen since Jackie-O!

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this

Marijuana-friendly propositions did well across the country. But, one can be fired for testing positive. Kind of crazy if you ask me.

Abortion bans in Colorado and South Dakota went down in flames. I wish there was a blog that could debate that without the freakouts. I would like to hear, out of curiosity, how those that want strict limits propose oversight of which cases are allowed and which ones are not. If rape qualifies, can an abortion be denied if the lady loses her case? (like I said, on a blog without the freakouts if someone does want to reply)

And last but not least, prostitution is still illegal in San Francisco.

Not sure what i think, but would lean towards it simply being regulated. The main reason people believe it should remain illegal is that it would proliferate; as if there are a bunch of women waiting to be one.

By Gale

November 5, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this

The Mormon Church backed Proposition 8 passed, stripping married gay couples of their legal status in California.

This one will be back in the courts. I must say I am very disappointed in the people of CA. I also wonder about the legality of the gay couples that married when it was legal. Do they make them unmarried? Suppose they were straight and had children during that period. Now their children would be illegitimate. I know that cannot happen and I am posing a hypothetical to point out the injustice. I am not a legal eagle, but if you do something when it is legal, how can that contract be revoked when it later becomes illegal. Should it not be grandfathered?

By Gandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this

JokesOn are you concerned about prostitution as it’s the only way you can get laid, or is it your mom and sisters business?

By Gandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this

JokesOn are you concerned about prostitution as it’s the only way you can get laid, or is it your mom and sisters business?

By Trunk Monkey

November 5, 2008 1:51 PM | Link to this

Jokes - that was a Narciso Rodriguez original, though it only vaguely resembled the frock that went down the runway at Fashion Week. But I can’t disagree with your characterization…the runway design was MUCH cooler than Michelle’s.

By Gale

November 5, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this

Oh, and the Obama dress. I agree. It looks like she was splashed with blood.

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this

PEEPS!!!!!

geez loueeeez … I leave the room for a few days and TOJ goes into full melt-down mode … criminey, I knew he’d miss me, but I didn’t think he’d go full-bore mental.

get help, honey. Sunshine is a woman. she’s pregnant. she was a lurker and is not a participant.

and you need some serious meds.

SUNSHINE!!! MARA!!! can I just say, I stayed up until 5 a.m. to watch the returns come in - and the minute VA was called, I started crying with the enormity of what we accomplished. Not so much the election of Obama - just the realization that, during the course of my lifetime, we have gone from not allowing blacks to drink from the same fountain to electing one for POTUS.

that it was Obama just made it a bonus.

and, while I know I should be a bigger person tham this, I can’t help myself: TOJ, Chuck, GtG … Dem pickup in the House, Dem pickup in the Senate, and 53% of the popular vote and an Electoral College blowout for the White House — :-P all your rantings and ravings about how much people hated the Dems - this was the American people’s chance and what did Americans do? they reelected Dem encumbents and ADDED TO THEIR NUMBERS.

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this

Gale -

Sadly, it wasn’t just CA - FL and AZ joined them in their bigotry, as well.

but, if there is one thing last night proved, it’s that small-mindedness and hatred always lose eventually. it may take time, Gale, but just as blacks weren’t fighting alone for their civil rights, you’re not fighting alone for yours. There are loads of us boring straight folk out here who support your right to marry legally.

HUGS!!!

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this

JokesOn, you didn’t like Mrs. Obama’s dress?

Not so much as didn’t like it as I really struck by how the red looked like blood splatter. Put a meat cleaver in her hand and she would be set for a horror movie.

Might just be me…I did watch Saw 4 a couple days ago. Still not sure why I watched it….too much pain and gore for me.

By Netbanker

November 5, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this

~waving~ Hey Mara! Sorry I missed you yesterday too. For whatever reason, when I work from home on Tuesdays I have less time to even think about looking at the blog. So I’ll just have to do it while I’m in the office.

To me it is an issue of FAIRNESS. Just because someone CAN pay more, it doesn’t necessarily follow that they SHOULD pay more. I have as much a stake in this country as they do. I should pay the SAME PERCENTAGE as them. THAT IS FAIR. I can carry my own water and they should carry theirs. No more, no less. Some very good points Chuck in your comments about taxation, but I don’t completely agree that the stakes are the same for everyone if only because you the more you have the more you have to lose. In that sense taxes are a bit like insurance in that the more you have the more you pay to protect what you have. If we’re going to be stuck with an Income Tax then those who earn more should probably pay more (like they do today) but when it comes time to cut taxes then those who do pay the bulk should receive the bulk of the tax relief. And if there needs to be an increase in tax revenue (to fund a war, for example) then EVERYONE should pay a bit more. In the end though I’m in favor of completely overhauling the whole tax system.

8I prefer the Flat Tax to the FAIR Tax. It provides a very predictable revenue to the government and doesn’t punish innovation or success. It enables people to make solid financial plans for the long term without worrying about what congress might do with the tax code “next year”.* I’m not in agreement with you on this one. I prefer the FAIR TAX because this system makes it completely impossible to avoid paying taxes. With a flat tax it will always be possible for some people to hide income in order to avoid paying taxes on it. The real beauty of the fair tax, for me, is that illegal immigrants will be paying into the system from which they benefit when they buy groceries, or go to the movies, or purchase anything that is taxable. Think of the hundreds of millions of tax dollars a year that are missed by this ‘invivisble’ segment of the population that simply can not be avoided in any way under the Fair Tax. The wealthy will still pay more in taxes than the average citizen simply by virtue of their spending more on luxury-type items. and no more tax loop holes to exploit…unless one purchases items over seas and then brings them in on their own private yacht…which all-in-all isn’t economically feasible.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 2:03 PM | Link to this

I REALLY don’t want to get into another discussion on abortion but this is always been my question. Ok lets say you now have to prove rape or incest (hypothetically) to be “approved” for an abortion. Think about how screwed up our court system is already! Do you go to the front of the line because of the natural time frame of your argument? It seems we could very well have someone who is 6+ months in and still has not had a court date, considering the system as it is now. I think very few people approve of 3rd term abortions but it almost seems unless special consideration was given to these “cases”, you would see the abortions done later in the pregnancy because of the time needed to “prove” the woman’s case. This seems counter intuitive to people who would want to limit it. I think.

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this

she was a lurker and is not a participant.

that should have read “and is NOW a participant” … see what happens when you only get a couple of hours of sleep???

By Trunk Monkey

November 5, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this

Dammit!! I hate it when I forget to change out of my “Trunk Monkey” costume.

Hey USinUK! Glad to have ya back.

By chuck

November 5, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

While I can’t help being a little bummed by the election results, I am not going to be like Alec Baldwin and declare that I’m moving to Canada. I’m still proud to be an American even if I don’t like what we are becoming as a nation. Though said at a most inopportune time for McCain, Phil Gramm actually got it right. We have become a nation of whiners. We have become so spoiled that we don’t remember what it is like to sacrifice for what we want.

Too many people are willing to take short cuts to “success” and self gratification. It’s clear by reading the posts on this board and many others that the current philosophy in America is fast becoming our national motto: “If it feels good, do it.” This is not restricted to just the democrats by any stretch. I guess the democrat party is into public expressions of illicit sex and greed and the republican party is into private expressions of illicit sex and greed.

I honestly don’t see a lot of difference between the 2. I vote Republican for the most part, because they at least give the APPEARANCE of supporting decency and morality. They have done a relatively lousy job of upholding that standard, though there are still some true believers out there. Hopefully, we can shake off the ill-will created by the disingenuous among us and get back to standing for what is right…both in speech AND practice. In the meantime I leave you with one of my favorites, from The Byrds(by way of the Book of Ecclesiastes):

To everything - turn, turn, turn

There is a season - turn, turn, turn

And a time for every purpose under heaven

A time to be born, a time to die

A time to plant, a time to reap

A time to kill, a time to heal

A time to laugh, a time to weep

To everything - turn, turn, turn

There is a season - turn, turn, turn

And a time for every purpose under heaven

A time to build up, a time to break down

A time to dance, a time to mourn

A time to cast away stones

A time to gather stones together

To everything - turn, turn, turn

There is a season - turn, turn, turn

And a time for every purpose under heaven

A time of war, a time of peace

A time of love, a time of hate A time you may embrace

A time to refrain from embracing

To everything - turn, turn, turn

There is a season - turn, turn, turn

And a time for every purpose under heaven

A time to gain, a time to lose

A time to rend, a time to sew

A time to love, a time to hate

A time of peace, I swear it’s not too late!

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

HI USINUK!!!!! WE HAVE MISSED YOU!!

I have been taking a beating on here! YES it was AMAZING LAST NIGHT! What a moment in history! I have been collecting lots of things today to make a scrap book page for the baby boy! What a time in history to be born! I teared up when they played MLK’s speech over and over, judged “not by the color of his skin, but the content of his character”!

By Netbanker

November 5, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

So does this mean that we can start calling many conservatives Obama-haters? If far-right conservative are the patriots they claim to be shouldn’t they be standing behind the new president-elect even if he isn’t the one they wanted because we’re still all in this together as AMERICANS first?

Welcome to the disenfranchised experience, Chuck. Maybe walking a mile or 10 in these shoes will drive home that one can be opposed to a leader’s policies without actually hating the person themselves. I sincerely hope that 44 will be a uniter of the country rather than simply a uniter of supporters in a new battle against dectractors.

IMO, much of the vote for Obama was a direct reaction to all the partisan rancor that occurred during the past 8 years. It hasn’t been productive or helped the country one whit.

I don’t suppose there’s any chance of starting out this new adventure together with repect for all Americans and a cease-fire in the name calling, perjorative fire-bombs, verbal brawling in favor of intelligent and respectful discourse?

By Bruno

November 5, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this

YEEEESSSSS! WEEEEEEEEE! DIIIIIIIIID! (With only marginally sincere apologies to my neighbors who endured THAT in the wee hours. heee….)

Me too! All over the world people are celebrating that America might once again embrace her ideals. People all over the world whooped and hollered and went out dancing in the streets, celebrating the hope that once again America might rise up and define itself as a beacon of tolerance, opportunity, and decency.

and, while I know I should be a bigger person tham this, I can’t help myself: TOJ, Chuck, GtG … Dem pickup in the House, Dem pickup in the Senate, and 53% of the popular vote and an Electoral College blowout for the White House — :-P all your rantings and ravings about how much people hated the Dems - this was the American people’s chance and what did Americans do? they reelected Dem encumbents and ADDED TO THEIR NUMBERS.

A hearty round of cheers and applause for kimberly, Mara, Sunshine, and USinUK today! Obama ran a great campaign, and won the election fair and square, and is deserving of all the praise he is getting today.

I was also impressed by the graciousness of McCain’s concession speech last night. While many of you on the liberal side of the aisle seem to believe that all conservatives are closet racists, that hasn’t been my experience at all through the years. If I am right about Bush, I believe he will do all that he can to help launch the Obama Presidency on a positive note.

It’s a new day in America, and I will do all that I can to accept whatever changes occur during the next four years.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this

Here is one of my favorite facts of last night!:

“If North Carolina goes to Obama, that would make it nine red states that flipped blue for Obama in the election.

Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Iowa, New Mexico, Indiana, Nevada and Colorado all turned for Obama in the electoral map. Florida and Ohio actually went for Obama before midnight, which seems like an historical first after all the drama from those states in 2000 and 2004.”

And looks like there will be a runoff for the GA senate seat!!

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

Hey USinUK! Glad to have ya back.

thanks - it’s good to be back … just a few days left of the vacay, then I’ll be back to posting all regularly and stuff …

in the meantime, I can throw my (ahem) considerable influence behind the Martin campaign (GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO JIM!!!) I knew him during my time working at the State House - he is one of the most intelligent, kindest, earnest and all-around NICEST men I worked with during my tenure. Seriously, in a building full of dogs, he was one of the most gentlemanly of the lot - he’d be a fantastic Senator. So, get back out there on Dec. 2.

By chuck

November 5, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this

USUK, Yes, the democrats added to their majority. So what? The filibuster is still very much in play in the Senate, and while the Clintons just took the DISHES with them, Bush and YOUR DEMOCRAT CONGRESS also cleaned out the bank account. Let’s let them deal with that for a couple of years and see how popular they are.

Hey NetB. I have to disagree with your disagreement. You said:

The real beauty of the fair tax, for me, is that illegal immigrants will be paying into the system from which they benefit when they buy groceries, or go to the movies, or purchase anything that is taxable. Think of the hundreds of millions of tax dollars a year that are missed by this ‘invivisble’ segment of the population that simply can not be avoided in any way under the Fair Tax.

Did you forget about the barter economy? “Hey NetB, if you’ll write some software for my carwash business, I’ll wash your Beemer for free.”

By Bruno

November 5, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this

but, if there is one thing last night proved, it’s that small-mindedness and hatred always lose eventually.

Please remember one thing for me, USinUK: Self-righteous moral posturing is just as wrong and unbecoming coming from a liberal as it is coming from a conservative. We’re all fragile sinners, and neither political party has cornered the market on goodness. It’s always easier to see the splinter in our neighbor’s eye than the telephone pole stuck in our own eye.

But, for today, have at it if it helps you relieve the frustrations you have undoubtedly felt the last eight years under Bush.

By Mara

November 5, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this

Hi ya, Net! I’m always busier when I work at home than at work. Nobody’s bothering me with questions so I end up getting more done, which means I have time to get started on other projects, too!

I’m with you on the Fair Tax. I don’t know how anyone who has read “Fair Tax” and “Fair Tax: Answering the Critics” could possibly argue against it…or at least not in good faith.

Gale, USinUK - popular opinion is that the increased turn out by blacks led to Prop 8 passing. Sadly, homophobia is even more prevalent in African American communities than on average. (head shaking) How a community that knows what it’s like to be told “You cannot marry the one you love” can support the same kind of discrimination against others just baffles me.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this

NetBanker—If far-right conservative are the patriots they claim to be shouldn’t they be standing behind the new president-elect even if he isn’t the one they wanted because we’re still all in this together as AMERICANS first?—AMEN, that is exactly what I thought when the crowd at Mr. McCain’s eloquent and very thoughtful concession speech boo’ed each time our new President’s name was mentioned! That didn’t happen when Mr. Obama mentioned Mr. McCain in Grant Park!

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 2:34 PM | Link to this

Sunshine -

I haven’t bothered reading the whole board - I just saw TOJ’s asininity about you and Jokes being the same person. what a twit. sorry if you’ve been getting a drubbing - chalk it up to the schmidiots who were cracking on you (and how schmidiotic are they??? just look at how “right” they were about the election, the mood of the country and how much everyone “hates” the dems in congrss)

I watched CNN last night and Gergin brought up MLK Jr’s last speech in which he said he probably wouldn’t be the one who would lead them into the promised land … and, yes, I started crying all over again.

the Evening Standard printed O’s speech in its entirety - I nearly started blubbing on the trainride home tonight ..

Later, Taters!!! it’s time for Coronation Street

By Bruno

November 5, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

Welcome to the disenfranchised experience, Chuck. Maybe walking a mile or 10 in these shoes will drive home that one can be opposed to a leader’s policies without actually hating the person themselves. I sincerely hope that 44 will be a uniter of the country rather than simply a uniter of supporters in a new battle against dectractors.

Welcome back, NetB. Your input has been sorely missed around the W2W corral. My work load has picked up significantly, so won’t be able to post as much. Hope all is well for you, your partner, and respective families.

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

I REALLY don’t want to get into another discussion on abortion but this is always been my question.

I know and agree. But, like you this never gets explained and I would like to hear it from a pro-lifer.

I do think that if pressed to do so, they would show that there would be a lot of strain on the system (a system that they generally distrust, they are going to trust in the holy grail of subjects?!?); or they will over simplify it and ignore the complexities.

But, since I may be wrong or missing something, I would like to give them a chance.

By chuck

November 5, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

Hey NETB, I’ve already been called a racist by another teacher JUST BECAUSE I SAID I WAS VOTING FOR MCCAIN. I don’t hate Obama or ANYBODY for that matter. To me it is more like what I would feel if someone was trying to hurt my family. I HONESTLY BELIEVE that if he is able to get any of his whacko policies enacted that it will hurt AMERICA, the land I love. It is not AND NEVER HAS BEEN about politics for me.

Hey, here’s another example of how illegals can escape paying taxes under the FAIR tax.

“Senor doctor, if you will treat my child, I will cut your grass.”

“Madomoseille Dentist, if you will fix my cavities, I will paint your chateau.”

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

Brunooooooooooooooooo

I was impressed by the McCain concession, as well - very gentlemanly. Especially when he stopped the booing and said he’d support the new president. Well done.

too bad he took the low road for the weeks leading up to the campaign - I think the mud will cling to him for some time because of his actions.

By chuck

November 5, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this

BTW, when you read those examples think “Speedy Gonzalez” and “Pepi LePew” to get the voices in your head.

By Mara

November 5, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this

chuck - read the books. your example has absolutely NOTHING to do with the Fair Tax. Your example illustrates how illegals avoid taxes now.

Since the Fair Tax does away with income tax completely, if Jose is working (even illegally, though that’s a whole ‘nother discussion) it won’t matter. He won’t be able to evade paying tax because he’ll pay up every time he hits the checkout counter of his local Wal-Mart.

Read the books. Get the facts.

(sorry Net, didn’t mean to answer for ya)

By chuck

November 5, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Sunshine:

Ok lets say you now have to prove rape or incest (hypothetically) to be “approved” for an abortion.

Incest is fairly obvious…DNA!?!?? It would not take more than a few hours to test that claim.

In the case of rape, again, the real proof that would be needed is a medical exam immediately after the rape has occurred, and a formal police report so they can investigate. The case would not have to be adjudicated before the abortion could occur. Of course, if the charge is PROVEN FALSE, then the woman would have to be prosecuted.

That said, while exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother would eliminate 99% of abortions, the only exception that I support is the life of the mother exception. The Bible allows one to defend him or herself in that instance. Rape and incest, while HORRIBLE, don’t rise to that level. It doesn’t matter how the baby got there…he or she is STILL A BABY.

By Fandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this

EXPAT welcome back! it’s FTW! now thank you very much. Congrats! You now have the first WORLD PRESIDENT! All his policies will be so good for us here in the USA! I have seen the light and it’s colored rose.

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this

Brunooooooooooo -

Self-righteous moral posturing is just as wrong and unbecoming coming from a liberal as it is coming from a conservative. We’re all fragile sinners, and neither political party has cornered the market on goodness. It’s always easier to see the splinter in our neighbor’s eye than the telephone pole stuck in our own eye.

hrm. funny. I don’t think that gay marriage is a dem/rep issue - I think it’s a civil rights issue. just like inter-racial marriage. I don’t think that Dems are any “gooder” than the GOP - but I do think that people who oppose gay marriage are no better than the people who opposed interracial marriage. I’d put money that some of the people who helped Prop 8 (and the similar measures in AZ and FL) were also Dems.

Gale and her partner (as well as my other gay friends) will get to the promised land … I just hope it takes less time

By Bruno

November 5, 2008 3:05 PM | Link to this

too bad he took the low road for the weeks leading up to the campaign - I think the mud will cling to him for some time because of his actions.

I attribute McCain’s shift to negative campaigning to the paucity of new ideas he had to offer rather than a lack of good character. To his credit, Obama kept a positive tone to his campaign right to the end.

Gotta get back to work, but congrats again.

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 3:07 PM | Link to this

shoot … hit “post” before I meant to …

I meant to add: the reason I don’t think it’s a Dem v GOP issue - I know people from both sides who support gay marriage … and I know people from both sides who are against gay marriage.

this is about civil rights … this is about human decency … this is something that transcends political boundaries - so, no, I’m not saying that the folks who were against Prop 8 were GOP bigots … I’m saying that the folks who were against Prop 8 were bigots. full stop.

By chuck

November 5, 2008 3:09 PM | Link to this

Mara, you’re wrong. They could not avoid paying SOME TAXES, but they could avoid paying MANY taxes they would otherwise owe. If you read the books, you would know that the fair tax applies to SERVICES as well as for tangible products. The examples could go on forever, for instance, trading for fruits, vegetables and meats with a farmer in exchange for labor. BOTH would avoid paying taxes that would otherwise be owed under THE FAIR tax.

The other problem with the FAIR tax is that by nature, it depends on consumption. This makes it unreliable as a sole source of revenue for the government. Consumption trends up and down. INCOME is much more stable.

By Bruno

November 5, 2008 3:13 PM | Link to this

I don’t think that gay marriage is a dem/rep issue - I think it’s a civil rights issue.

My comments, though directed at you, were meant for a larger audience today. Many of you liberals have spent the last eight years (rightfully) criticizing Bush for implying that one political party, or even one country holds a higher moral position than everyone else. I hope that you don’t fall into the same trap, that’s all.

By chuck

November 5, 2008 3:13 PM | Link to this

BTW, Mara, NetB, I would prefer the FAIR tax over the CURRENT SYSTEM, there is yet another reason I would still prefer a flat tax over the FAIR tax.

GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT!!!!!

I don’t want to be involved in a system that requires the government to send a check to every American EVERY FREAKIN’ MONTH.

By Sunshine

November 5, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this

USinUK, not to gloat, but I heard an interesting comment last night:

“The liberals will always win, eventually”

With this thought at some point what is liberal (ie civil rights, woman’s rights, ect) will become mainstream and new ideas will become “liberal” (in this case an easy example is Gay rights) and so on and so on, only rarely do we have a conservative backlash, kinda like 3 steps forward, 2 steps back. It gave me hope!

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this

chuck -

The other problem with the FAIR tax is that by nature, it depends on consumption. This makes it unreliable as a sole source of revenue for the government. Consumption trends up and down. INCOME is much more stable.

omg. it’s a sign of the Apocolypse. Chuck and I agree on something.

well-said, chuck. the “fair tax” is nothing more than a national sales tax gussied up and gone to town. it is regressive and is far more punitive to the poor than the rich. it makes it nearly impossible to forecast government revenues. and, for all you folks who hate Europe and its ways - it’s VAT tax.

now, if you’re talking flat taxes, no deductions, sign me the heck up!!! I’m so there!!

By JokesOn

November 5, 2008 3:17 PM | Link to this

Of course, if the charge is PROVEN FALSE, then the woman would have to be prosecuted.

Those are some pretty big dice to throw. And given the difficulty to prove many date rape scenarios, you would be charging a lot of women with murder.

Maybe one day, when we all have more resolve, we can kick that part of it around and truly flesh it out.

By k

November 5, 2008 3:24 PM | Link to this

Hmmm, the blog ate my post. Try again: Please let me express my sadness that Americans would vote to strip other Americans of the same rights they enjoy (or regret). I can think of few things more UN-American than singling out a subset of citizens and saying, “No, you can’t, because you’re different.” Discrimination based on sexual orientation is WRONG. IMO, there should be an injuction on marriage licenses in every state until any two consenting (of legal age) persons can obtain one. Also, the Akansas measure denying gays the right to adopt or foster children is appalling! Children who need love and care are being denied love and care of willing, nurturing people! It’s a freaking DISGRACE!

I’ve never had a problem with people practicing the religions they hold, as long as they don’t use it to infringe upon the rights of others. I’ve always admired the Mormons I know for their ethics and integrity. But if this were MY church today, I’d be deeply ashamed for Proposition 8.

The civil rights movement is SO NOT OVER! And until gay Americans have the same rights as straight Americans, I will not be silent.

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

Bruno -

I attribute McCain’s shift to negative campaigning to the paucity of new ideas he had to offer rather than a lack of good character

I’ll probably be excoriated for this, but I really don’t think that highly of McCain’s “character”. No one held a gun to his head and made him say the things he said on the campaign trail. No one. He had strategists and speech writers, but McCain still could have - and should have - said NO, I won’t call his patriotism into question. that’s a level to which I’ll not stoop.

I still go back to his speech ata GOP fund-raiser during the Clinton administration - that night he told a joke making fun of Chelsea Clinton’s appearance. He read the joke, he approved the speech. He thought it was a perfectly acceptable thing to do. I’m sorry, but people of character don’t do that. They don’t make fun of ANY child’s looks, regardless of the child’s parents.

so, the mud that he’s going to be carrying - it’s his own making and it’s due to his own weaknesses.

By Up-chuck

November 5, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this

It doesn’t matter how the baby got there…he or she is STILL A BABY.

It doesn’t matter that the impregnation was involuntary and an act of violence, pain, horror, terror, and unbearable shame. No, we will FORCE you to nurture the leavings of your assailant, regardless of what it does to YOUR body and mind. If these leaving aren’t actually killing you, you will be required, by LAW, to carry the fruits of this assault until your body forces you to expel it in a gushing of blood, tearing of flesh, an undescribably pain.

It ain’t YOUR body that matters, it’s the life that rapist forced into your virgin t**. Now, shuddup and git ta prayin for fergivness, ya hore.

By Fandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this

EXPAT WE need to do something about them dang Bigots in Cali! Maybe if we give ‘em back to Mexico they will straighten up! Then we get rid of Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxster! How sweet a deal would that be. How dare the people go against what the courts have decided! How Freaking Unamerican!

By Mara

November 5, 2008 3:33 PM | Link to this

Sunshine - With this thought at some point what is liberal (ie civil rights, woman’s rights, ect) will become mainstream and new ideas will become “liberal”

true. According to current exit polls, the 18-25 demographic regected Prop 8 by almost 3-to-1. National polls tell the same kind of story. Young people, by and large, see nothing offensive about gays and believe that they should be afforded the same rights and protections as straights. Eventually they will be the majority, and civil rights will march on.

out of time, y’all. See you tomorrow.

By USinUK

November 5, 2008 3:33 PM | Link to this

Beunooooooooo -

for implying that one political party, or even one country holds a higher moral position than everyone else

oh. that. well, of course I think Dems are morally superior in every way to the GOP … doesn’t everyone??

;-)

I keeeed!!! I keeeeed!!!

I tell ya what - when you go after the GOP participants on this board for telling me that I’m a traitor/treasonous for believing in questioning my government and believing that I have the right to protest, then your comment will carry a little more weight.

I love ya, sweetie, but, I mean, really. My problems with the GOP are because I am virulently opposed to most of their policies - not because I think their lesser specimens of human beings or are morally inferior.

By Neith

November 5, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

The Great Spirit blessed America yesterday! My faith, which I completely lost 4 years ago, has been restored in the American public. Yes, we can!

By Monica

November 5, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

well-said, chuck. the “fair tax” is nothing more than a national sales tax gussied up and gone to town.

Case in point: The state of Alabama does not fund education through property tax but by sales tax. Last month, they were only able to come up with 75% of the payroll.

now, if you’re talking flat taxes, no deductions, sign me the heck up!!! I’m so there!!

Great way to cut the federal budget - if we have a flat tax, with, say, 15% of everyone’s paycheck sent to the govt, we can eliminate most positions in the IRS!

He had strategists and speech writers, but McCain still could have - and should have - said NO…

Shouldn’t that be “strategerists?” (Blast from the SNL past)

BTW - hi to all :)

By Gale

November 5, 2008 3:58 PM | Link to this

Hm, well, electing a black president is a breakthrough. I think it will take electing a gay or atheist president to show we have abandoned all our bigotry. Merely electing a woman president will not be enough.

By Fandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 3:58 PM | Link to this

yes we can KMA!

By Bruno

November 5, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this

I tell ya what - when you go after the GOP participants on this board for telling me that I’m a traitor/treasonous for believing in questioning my government and believing that I have the right to protest, then your comment will carry a little more weight.

In case you haven’t noticed, the person that I’ve been most critical of here is chuck, primarily due to his arrogant view that somehow God is on his side, but not on the side of others. The person I’ve been second most critical of is TOJ due to his often non-sensical one-sided political attacks.

I love ya, sweetie, but, I mean, really. My problems with the GOP are because I am virulently opposed to most of their policies - not because I think their lesser specimens of human beings or are morally inferior.

I’ll grant you that benefit of the doubt based on your previous comments. However, many of your liberal cohorts on board HAVE questioned the humanity of those who simply don’t share their same political outlook. Maybe you haven’t noticed that or felt that it was ok as some sort of payback.

WIsh I could blog more, but am swamped with paperwork.

By Gale

November 5, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

Flat tax and No deductions? I think I would sell the house and rent.

By Monica

November 5, 2008 4:11 PM | Link to this

I should have typed 10% flat tax, not 15. It’s later in the day and I’m tired.

By Neith

November 5, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this

To live to see this day! My mom tells me when she was growing up in the south black people lived on one side of town and whites on the other. The schools were segregated and everyone she knew used the N word all the time. She remembers separate water fountains and bathrooms for blacks and whites. It is so amazing. She never met a black person until she was in her twenties (she’s in her sixties now) except for maids. She was terrified of black men because she never knew a black man! She worked for civil rights and for women’s rights when she grew up and got an education. She is so thrilled to see this historic event.

By Neith

November 5, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this

This is a great day in American history! Today a black man for president, tomorrow a woman for president of the USA!

By Fandalf, the White!

November 5, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

23% flat tax! And no MORE IRS! READ THE BOOK!

By Archie

November 5, 2008 5:09 PM | Link to this

Hello Sunshine,UsinUk,Mara. I am still in a fog and it’s just now setting in that a black man is president-elect. As a middle-aged black man I did not think this day would come in my lifetime especially since I have lived my life in the South but people like Mara,USinUk, and Sunshine made it happen. I give y’all credit because it took blacks and whites for Obama to reach his goal as well as other races. I hope that we get a healthcare plan that people can afford and that the troops come home and also we stop all the lying in business with so much greed going unchecked.

By The Other Jack

November 6, 2008 8:27 AM | Link to this

USinUk

You are an idiot. Sunshine is JokesOn, dumba^s.

Why do you think he is a woman? Because he says so? You are so friggin’ oartisan that you would support Hitler if he showed up supporting your pathetic stances. Bite me, fat bit^h. .

By The Other Jack

November 6, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

How do you like the stock market’s reaction so far, dumba^s. Looks like I am right again and the big financial expect is wrong … again.

What an idiot.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

jokeson, part of the problem with you is that you automatically READ STUFF INTO OTHER PEOPLE”S POSTS that just isn’t there.

When I said the women would have to be prosecuted, I did not say anything about prosecuting them for MURDER. People are prosecuted all the time for filing FALSE CHARGES. I’m sure that there would also have to be another charge such as “Obtaining an abortion under false pretenses” or something like that. I don’t foresee the country EVER charging women with MURDER for an abortion (even though that’s what it is).

By Copyleft

November 6, 2008 9:03 AM | Link to this

Hi, all. Just dropping by to gloat.

To all those rabid right-wing fools who kept screaming, “America will NEVER elect a radical Marxist, socialist, black-liberation, America-hating commie-Muslim-traitor to the presidency”…

You were right. We elected Barack HUSSEIN Obama instead!

Suck on it, losers! Just like WW2, America has defeated fascism once again. Yee-haaaa!

By chuck

November 6, 2008 9:21 AM | Link to this

The election of Barack HUSSEIN HAMAS Obama won’t help you too much Brian Curtis aka copyleft. You’ll still be an idiot no matter who the president is. You’ll still be stuck in that low-paying little lab rat job of yours, testing the urine samples of diabetics. So, crawl back into your hole you little worm.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 9:25 AM | Link to this

Hey Monica, I could go for 10% but you are right. the 15% would be way too high. God only expects 10%. The gov’t shouldn’t demand more than God.

How’s your year going? Mine’s great. I don’t have to teach for the next couple of weeks. I’ve got a ST this semester.

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

jokeson, part of the problem with you is that you automatically READ STUFF INTO OTHER PEOPLE”S POSTS that just isn’t there.

I did not say you stated that the charge would be murder. It seems like the obvious charge.

So, a woman could get raped, have to pay $1500 for the rape kit, if she loses the criminal case be faced with a criminal charge of some serious weight OR have the baby and have to submit to visitation and shared custody with the guy that raped her.

Lots of holes there. First, how could she get the abortion IF it is not legal and the case if not resolved yet. That is the whole purpose of the trial. Second, the shear number of agencies that would have to be involved (big government/brother + family services + court system + medical providers…). And third, the sequence of horrifying events she would have to go through through no fault of her own.

Like I said, a fleshed out response is what I am looking for, and not a over simplified half baked notion.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this

Good Morning all! Hi Archie, I agree it was an amazing time in our history, who would have thought? But the truth is the ugly bigotry is shrinking, I loved reading the breakdown of who voted for Mr. Obama!

“the near-unanimous backing of blacks and the overwhelming support of youth as well as significant inroads with white men and strong support among Hispanics and educated voters”

The Illinois senator won 43 percent of white voters… Fully 96 percent of black voters supported Obama… A stunning 54 percent of young white voters supported Obama… the strong 41 percent support from white men

From (www. politico.com/news/stories/1108/15297.html)

Not to make it such a racial issue, I just think it shows Mr. Obama’s mass appeal, regardless of his skin color he was a great candidate and MANY people from all social, economic and racial lines saw that!

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

Ladies what do you think? Should I formally submit my OB records to TOJ? At this point I don’t know what else to do, well you know, other than to ignore his crazy rantings! I mean how to you exactly go about “proving” your femininity on a basically anonymous blog? Sheesh! Oh well, the Baby Boy (as you predicted USinUK) is keeping me up at night enough, I don’t think I am going to let this add to that! Ha! Hope you all are still basking in the warm rays of a little more hope (at least for now, we will see about later) that comes with the end of the dark Bush days!

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

Oh well, the Baby Boy (as you predicted USinUK) is keeping me up at night enough

Don’t let The Troof keep you up. It is not worth it. (wink)

By Fandalf, the White!

November 6, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

We do what we call mercy killing when a woman is raped where I am from, all the maies in the family go find the SOB who raped our sister, cousin, daughter, neighbor, and kill him. Mercy killing is kind of an oxymoron, for we have no mercy on the rapist. Waterboarding, sticking needles under the fingernails, anything goes really! It’s kind of like a party for everyone except the rapist. FTW!

By Fandalf, the White!

November 6, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

We do what we call mercy killing when a woman is raped where I am from, all the maies in the family go find the SOB who raped our sister, cousin, daughter, neighbor, and kill him. Mercy killing is kind of an oxymoron, for we have no mercy on the rapist. Waterboarding, sticking needles under the fingernails, anything goes really! It’s kind of like a party for everyone except the rapist. FTW!

By Fandalf, the White!

November 6, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

We do what we call mercy killing when a woman is raped where I am from, all the maies in the family go find the SOB who raped our sister, cousin, daughter, neighbor, and kill him. Mercy killing is kind of an oxymoron, for we have no mercy on the rapist. Waterboarding, sticking needles under the fingernails, anything goes really! It’s kind of like a party for everyone except the rapist. FTW!

By Fandalf, the White!

November 6, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this

How was Obama a great canidate? He has no plans to right the ship, he will strip of us our victory in Iraq, plunge us into a Carteresque near depression, but the world will love us? Democracy is near it’s end in this American experiment.

By GOB

November 6, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

When I said the women would have to be prosecuted, I did not say anything about prosecuting them for MURDER. People are prosecuted all the time for filing FALSE CHARGES. I’m sure that there would also have to be another charge such as “Obtaining an abortion under false pretenses” or something like that. I don’t foresee the country EVER charging women with MURDER for an abortion (even though that’s what it is).

Chuck - There is a big difference between being found not guilty and actually being innocent. If a prosecutor does a bad job and the woman’s rapist is found not guilty, the woman would be charged with a crime in your scenerio. There are simply too many factors involved for this to even begin to be a workable solution.

Also, what if a someone who strongly believes that any abortion is murder gets on the jury? There goes any fair trial. Like I said, way too many issues, not to mention the most basic that is the woman’s body and her decision in the first place.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this

Sounds to me your “mercy killing” which thank god we don’t allow in the this country, sounds a lot like what other cultures call an “honor killing” just goes to show how sensitive you are GTG, you can kill this human just not that human, really helps drive your point home about how important life is.

An honor killing, while the practice is condemned as barbaric by many present-day societies, some societies punish the victims of rape as well as the perpetrators. According to such cultures, being raped dishonors the victim and, in many cases, the victim’s family. In some cultures rape victims are sometimes killed to restore honor to the family’s name. However, it should be noted that the term honour killing applies to killing of both males and females in cultures that practice it.

By k

November 6, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this

So I don’t read anything into chuck’s post that he didn’t intend, is he saying that a woman who files rape charges that do not result in a conviction (see below) should then be prosecuted for filing a false police report, or even perjury? Hmm….. This is a great idea! It will completely remove the crime of rape from cluttering the schedules of police officers, attorneys, and judges, and push rape victims further underground in fear, trauma, and shame than they already are! Then we could just stop discussing that pesky little “rape exception” all together. I think CHUCK should run for PRESIDENT 2012! Then he can tell all of America how he really feels about women.

(According to rainn dot come, only 6% of rapists ever spend a day in jail.)

By Mara

November 6, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this

Hi Archie! Thanks for the pats on the back, but as Sunshine points out, it was a broad coalition that voted Obama in…including quite a few disaffected Republicans that I know. But “YAY!” anyway :^)

JokesOn - how could she get the abortion IF it is not legal and the case if not resolved yet

Currently the vast majority of abortions occur within the first trimester of pregnancy. Do you suppose these Anti-Choicers are willing to accept that as a consequence of having to wait for the slow wheels of justice to resolve their case, most (if not all) women will end up getting late trimester abortions instead? Will they quit harrassing women about so-called “partial birth abortion” when the only reason she waited so long is because chuck and his ilk demanded she do so?

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

Public Service Announcement:

Just so everyone knows the hypothetical scenario. We are discussing how the system would work IF the only legal routes to getting an abortion is when the woman is raped and incest.

Another facet that would have to be addressed: a woman claims she accidentally hit the gas pedal while in drive and not reverse when leaving for the office. She rear-ends her boyfriends car and cause herself to miscarry. Is there an investigation?

This is more evident to me as we kick it around as a major rats nest that would create a lot more government and government intrusion. These agencies and procedures that would have to be put in place also would be decided on beliefs, not fact, and would seem to be pretty arbitrary; therefore, varying from state to state.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 11:30 AM | Link to this

JokesOn, this is so multilayered it is scary, the ways in which it is possible to lose the baby seem terrifyingly endless (as I have recently learned!) My doctor has told me I can’t ride my bike past the middle of the second trimester because a hard fall could cause a miscarriage, catching a sever case of the flu could cause you to miscarriage. Because your joints and ligaments are loosened my the hormones pregnancy produces so that your middle can expand and and your back can adjust for balance and extra weight, you are much more likely to twist an ankle and fall. And there are thousands of stillborn babies that seem fine all the way up to delivery. Who prosecutes these women?

By Archie

November 6, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this

But the truth is the ugly bigotry is shrinking, I loved reading the breakdown of who voted for Mr. Obama! I don’t know because all the confederate states went to McCain ant that’s a shame not because people don’t have the right to vote their way but when is the South going to change. I read some stuff on other blogs that was just plain ridiculous and let me say that the conservatives here are pretty good even when they’re rude compared to other blogs. Also since republicans reached back and blamed Clinton for anything wrong during Bush’s eight,eight, eight years in office can we do the same thing if anything goes wrong during Obama’s tenure. If you’ve been the decision-maker for eight years you should take credit for something done right but you also should take the blame for things that went wrong. Bush is leaving the worst financial crisis in history, two wars, and an energy policy that needs fixing and yet you have people wondering if Obama can do the job??? Why would you want to hold his feet to the fire when you haven’t required anything of his predecessor? Bush straight out lied about Plame,straight out lied then he pardoned the guy that did his dirty work, a convicted liar.

Mara, I gave you guys a pat on the back because you voted the way you talked about all year. You didn’t let fear or bias stop you and McCain gets a pat on the back because he just couldn’t commit to lowdown tactics of the past. I hope that in 2013 we still don’t say there are 47 million americans without health insurance because there were 35 million back in the 90’s when Clinton first brought it up and absolutely nothing has been done the last 10 years to fix this problem.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

I didn’t say anything about a conviction kimberly. What I said was EXACTLY:

Of course, if the charge is PROVEN FALSE, then the woman would have to be prosecuted.

That has NOTHING TO DO WITH A GUILTY OR INNOCENT VERDICT IN THE TRIAL OF THE RAPIST.

For instance if MEDICAL EVIDENCE proved that no rape occurred OR if DNA testing proved the baby was the child of her husband or boyfriend rather than some unknown perp. THAT would be proof that the charges are FALSE. I don’t know if ya’ll are being deliberately obtuse or if you really just can’t see beyond your biases to READ the post. DID YOU NOT EVEN THINK OF THE FACT THAT MANY RAPISTS ARE NEVER CAUGHT?!?!? How could you hold the mother responsible for that? YOU COULDN’T.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this

Come on ARCHIE…Seriously?

Bush is leaving the worst financial crisis in history

No wonder Barack HUSSEIN HAMAS Obama won if you believe this kind of drivel. Could you please give me the statistics that prove that statement?

Unemployment?

NOPE, it was way higher under JIMMY and even one year under BILLY BOY

Interest rates?

NOPE, higher under JIMMY and even under BILLY BOY

Inflation?

NOT EVEN CLOSE.

So please tell me how this is worse than Carter, the mid 70’s, the early 50’s and the FREAKING GREAT DEPRESSION!!!!!!!

By chuck

November 6, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this

The BOTTOM LINE:

If something horrible such as rape or incest occurred, all the woman would have to do is tell the truth. She would need to file a police report and submit to a medical exam, which she would need to do anyway.

BTW, I think it is CRIMINAL for a state to CHARGE the victim a fee for ANY PART of an investigation. Especially a rape kit. THAT IS WHAT TAXES ARE FOR. Not to give a check to somebody else.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

Oh, and just a side note, about Mrs. Obama’s dress on the 4th, I guess I didn’t really look at it too closely that night, as I watched the replaying of the news I did see the “splashing” part at the top and bottom that I didn’t notice before, and you are right, maybe if it was in another color it would have worked better but in red it did remind me a bit of some sort of splatter!

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 12:03 PM | Link to this

Of course, if the charge is PROVEN FALSE, then the woman would have to be prosecuted.

What is the difference of outcome, regarding the woman, in an acquittal and proven false?

Abortion, if not due to rape, is illegal under the discussion’s setting. An illegal activity has to be probed by law agencies.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this

The difference, jokeson, is that a woman is not FREAKING RESPONSIBLE FOR WHETHER OR NOT THE PROSECUTION DID A GOOD JOB, THE WITNESSES LYING, THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY BEING FANTASTIC, ETC.

AS STATED ABOVE, THE CASE MAY NOT EVEN GO TO TRIAL. THEY MAY NEVER BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY A SUSPECT. THE PERP COULD FLEE THE COUNTRY ON AND ON AND ON. NONE OF THAT WOULD MATTER.

By Fandalf, the White!

November 6, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this

Sunshine! We don’t kill the victim! That would be stupid! We kill the rapist! That restores honor! Dum Basses kill the victim!

By Fandalf, the White!

November 6, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this

Sunshine! We don’t kill the victim! That would be stupid! We kill the rapist! That restores honor! Dum Basses kill the victim!

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this

all the woman would have to do is tell the truth—Chuck, I know you have said on here that you believe people are reading into your posts, but as with this line there are implied meanings in your texts, at least it seems to me. I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and know that what you believe is that the child is very important. The statement here seems to say that women usually don’t tell the truth, and that they are lining up to get abortions! Like it is some sort of game to them. I don’t think this is what you meant to say but the way it is stated comes across that way. I think it is a horrible, and incredibly hard choice for any one to make, no matter the circumstances. When you contemplate a lifetime of being a parent, and then compound that with a rape of any kind, and/or a medical condition that may cause you to die, I think that it is too personal a decision for anyone other than the woman, her doctor, and the father (if it wasn’t an attack) to be involved in. Personally I believe in the Plan-B pill, and I know you may not but, I think that most woman know if they have been raped, or had unprotected sex or if a condom broke or anything else, RIGHT AWAY. If you know this you can prevent a pregnancy even if it is two days later. In a perfect world this could replace the need for many abortions.

By Fandalf, the White!

November 6, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this

you have to see how my way is better than Chucks! Someone rapes your friend, relative, nieghbor, don’t call the police! Call your male friends and torture the culprit to death! That’s what we do!

By k

November 6, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

Archie, I too am saddened by the the red-state south’s turnout this week. Please take heart, though. They may have squeaked small margins, but millions of white Southerners (myself and 72-yr-old father incuded) DID vote for Obama, and WERE in downtown Atlanta cheering the historic moment, dancing in the streets, weeping openly, and hugging perfect strangers. It was a beautiful moment I’ll carry with me forever. So we’re not there yet, but we’re on our way. One more generation, and the old confederate bulls—- will truly be HISTORY!

Chuck, your ideas would seem to call for a whole lotta lawyerin’…. maybe even a whole ‘nother field of practice for the bottom feeders. Hmmm..

By Mara

November 6, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

chuck - OR if DNA testing proved the baby was the child of her husband or boyfriend rather than some unknown perp. THAT would be proof that the charges are FALSE.

so your contention is…what? That husbands and boyfriends don’t rape? That if a woman is in a relationship, she can’t be raped by her partner?! When a woman says NO and the man doesn’t stop…that’s rape. When a woman resists and the man doesn’t stop…that’s rape. When the woman believes she will be harmed if she resists…that is rape. And it doesn’t matter if the man is her husband, her boyfriend, her boss, her best friend or an “unknown perp”. Rape is rape and No means NO!

I suggest you pop into the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network site and look at the statistics -

60% of rapes are never reported.

of reported rapes, 73% of victims know their assailant.

there is only a 50.8% chance of an arrest.

when prosecuted, there is only a 58% chance of conviction.

when there’s a conviction, there is only a 69% chance the assailant will spend time in prison.

If one combines the unreported and reported rapes and tabulates the numbers, statistically only 6% of rapists end up in prison.

15 of 16 will walk free.

not that any of that matters to you…

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

TOJ -

the markets are slumping because of Obama??? omg, TOJ - why don’t you stick with something you know —- like, maybe, ghosts. cuz economics just isn’t your strong suit.

when companies like Cisco report slumping demand, that means that companies are cutting back on business investment and is a sign of economic weakness. add to that the fact that people claiming unemployment is at a 25-year high, and guess what? the markets take a nose-dive (from Yahoo news):

Comments from Cisco that it saw a steep drop in orders in October and reports from retailers that consumers are skipping trips to the mall provided fresh evidence of the economy’s struggles. While Wal-Mart Stores Inc. benefited from bargain-seekers, some specialty retailers posted big drops in monthly sales.

Adding to investors’ list of worries, the Labor Department said the number of people continuing to draw unemployment benefits jumped to a 25-year high, increasing by 122,000 to 3.84 million in late October. It marked the highest level since late February 1983, when the economy was being buffeted by a protracted recession.

and when central banks around the world are cutting their rates by 50-150 bps, its because the slowdown the US is experiencing is WORLDWIDE - not because they are terrified of an Obama administration. if your fevered little imagination thinks otherwise, then there really is little hope of a grown-up conversation with you.

but, then again, you also think that the Blitz was in retaliation for the Dresden bombing … which leads me to wonder, what the heck WERE you doing during school??? cuz you sure as heck weren’t learning anything …

as far as the rest of your drivel - the only person you damage is yourself, not me. and, I hazard to say, not Sunshine, either. (and, while we’re at it, you’re the LAST person who should be casting stones about changing their moniker TOJ / Corporate Dog / etcetcetc)

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this

sunshine -

ah, dudette, so sorry to hear about the sleeping situation (or, the NOT sleeping situation, to be more accurate). the little buggers seem to think that midnight-3 is party time, don’t they?

look at it as preparation for 3 am feeds. and teething. and all the other things they do that keep you from sleeping.

didn’t you just go for your mid-season scan?? how did that go??

btw - for the record, I am a 57-year old man who lives in Lilburn - fat, greasy, sitting around in my stained white tank-top and baggy sweatpants. I’ve never been to Lafayette GA, much less London England ;-) (rolling eyes)

By chuck

November 6, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this

Ofercryinoutloud Sunshine:

Chuck, I know you have said on here that you believe people are reading into your posts, but as with this line there are implied meanings in your texts, at least it seems to me. I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and know that what you believe is that the child is very important. The statement here seems to say that women usually don’t tell the truth, and that they are lining up to get abortions!

And you can’t see why I would make the claim that people are reading into the posts THINGS THAT AREN’T THERE!!?!?!?

The post that you referenced is a continuation from numerous EARLIER POSTS IN A DISCUSSION about a what if question. Since I know you read those posts, I cannot imagine how you could make that statement with a straight face.

UNBELIEVEABLE!!!

BTW, even WITHOUT the context of the earlier posts, there is NOTHING THERE to cause you to make the statement you made except for the fact that you read ever post through the filter of your own bias.

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

Brunoooooooooooooooo -

In case you haven’t noticed, the person that I’ve been most critical of here is chuck, primarily due to his arrogant view that somehow God is on his side, but not on the side of others. The person I’ve been second most critical of is TOJ due to his often non-sensical one-sided political attacks.

I apologize if that is the case - I have noticed you debate with chuck, but not that you have made the argument that only the GOP is godly/patriotic.

However, many of your liberal cohorts on board HAVE questioned the humanity of those who simply don’t share their same political outlook. Maybe you haven’t noticed that or felt that it was ok as some sort of payback.

Frankly, I really don’t read the one-hit-wonder/drive-by posters. if they’re not the W2W irregulars, I tend to skip over them. Of the W2W irregulars on the left (Jokes, Mara, Monica, Sunshine, Lyra, Gale, Archie), I honestly don’t recall any of them say anything even remotely like “all folks in the GOP are inhuman/immoral/not-as-saintly-as-us-on-the-left.” I’m open to being debated on this, but all I ever remember reading from my fellow lefty posters is policy-based disagreements. YMMV

and I’m with you … boooooooooooo paperwork.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this

Calm down Mara darlin’. If she accused her husband or boyfriend of the rape, the DNA and medical evidence would then prove that her claim was TRUE, not false and they would be prosecuted.

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Archie -

if you haven’t read Eugene Robinson’s column from today’s WaPo, RUN, do not walk to read it.

http://www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/2008/11/05/AR2008110503926.html

(copy, paste, delete extra spaces)

By chuck

November 6, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this

USUK, what you say may indeed be true, but the headlines are reading that it is the largest drop in history THE DAY AFTER A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. It MAY be a coincidence, but I doubt it.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

USinUK-LOL! PROVE IT! Ha! Yeah my mom called it Mommy Boot camp, just a taste of what’s to come! Between all the movement and the 3-4 late night bathroom breaks it seems I only get a few hours at a time, but that seems what it will be like in the months to come. It’s funny, I take a prenatal yoga class and we have (lovely) deep relaxation time at the end of each session, seems this is his FAVORITE time to try out his hardest and strongest karate kicks! I am like hold on here! Mommy is trying to relax! But its funny I was thinking the other day I will miss it when its gone. As for the scans yeah I had my second tri one the other day! He looks great, right on schedule in size and length, and healthy, healthy, healthy! It’s getting to the point where me and the proud Poppa can see when he kicks from the outside, and I found he doesn’t like when I use the belly for a shelf! I had a warm bowl on there the other night and he had great aim! Nearly kicked it off!

By chuck

November 6, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

See Monica, I told you you were too nice. Now they are accusing you of being “on the left”.

Actually USUK, Monica is a very NICE CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN. She isn’t nearly as blunt as me, but with some minor differences, she and I hold a lot of the same views on the issues. She’s just a lot more patient than I.

AND a lot nicer.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

Chuck, I really tried to be as nice as I possibly could in the post from above * I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and know that what you believe is that the child is very important.* I am sorry you could not see that.

By Gale

November 6, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this

Chuck, just because the father is the boyfriend or husband, does not mean it was not rape. It happens.

Wasn’t there a larger DOW drop just a week or two ago? I thought it lost about 700 points one day.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

Sunshine, I haven’t said this before, but congratulations on your soon to be born baby. It will be the coolest thing that you have ever done when you give birth.

I tell you what. I don’t understand how you could look at that ultrasound picture and even think that it would be okay to jab a sharp instrument into him to KILL HIM, if all of a sudden you decided you no longer wanted HIM. It seems to me that you are referring to HIM in a VERY HUMAN way. Almost like you consider HIM to be a real human being.

I guess when OTHER PEOPLE are pregnant they have a FETUS, but when it is YOU, “IT’S” all of a sudden a “HIM”. I hope you can see the irony.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

Sunshine, I don’t think that it’s particularly NICE to say that I believe women “USUALLY DON’T TELL THE TRUTH.” I would never THINK that much less SAY THAT, because it is asinine.

By chuck

November 6, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

GALE, read my 1:01 post:

By chuck

November 6, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this

Calm down Mara darlin’. If she accused her husband or boyfriend of the rape, the DNA and medical evidence would then prove that her claim was TRUE, not false and they would be prosecuted.

Gale, there have been MANY larger DOW drops than that, BUT NEVER A LARGER DROP ON THE DAY AFTER A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

By Frustrated

November 6, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this

Hello All! So, I tried reading through the posts, but there are wayyyy too many conversations going on to sort out. I would start out on what a downer Tuesday’s results were….but all in all….There is nothing we can do about it for 4 years, and in the meantime, I think the best thing for everyone to do is just hope for the best and pray for those in the White House. I didn’t agree with a lot that Bush did, but I felt like it was important to support him through prayer (at the least)… We are going to survive this people…even if McCain had gotten the position, the responsibilities at hand in today’s world are a huge burden to fix. It isn’t going to be fixed tomorrow….nor the next. So put your big girl panties on and get ready for a bumpy ride.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 1:40 PM | Link to this

Chuck, I know your side of the argument, I don’t think you really understand mine. I will try to kindly explain this to you but as demonstrated above, it seems that no matter what tone or way in which someone’s position is explained you think it is ridiculous if it doesn’t match exactly with your own. I am in a wonderful situation to have this baby, first of all it was planned, and we tried to get pregnant for several months, second I am married to the WONDERFUL (and handsome) father, third of all, for what is the first time in my life I am at a point where I have the ability to care for myself AND another person. These things are not always true for every woman who gets pregnant. Did I have sex before now, hell yeah! (I can say it for you GTG, yeah, I am just some huge slut…Blah, blah, blah) but I was near militant in my birth control because I didn’t want to have to make that decision if I did get pregnant. All of that doesn’t change the fact that I am more than a walking/talking incubator. You believe in a soul being created at conception. I don’t believe the same things you do, and in this great country that is allowed. As I CLEARLY said above I think the morning after pill is one of the most responsible ways to deal with a potential unwanted pregnancy. I don’t think many woman that are in the situation where they are trying to decide if they will terminate their pregnancy would ever get an ultrasound before they make a decision. Like I said before, all us ladies are not skipping down to the clinic to sign up for our abortions like you seem to think!

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this

chuck -

USUK, what you say may indeed be true, but the headlines are reading that it is the largest drop in history THE DAY AFTER A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. It MAY be a coincidence, but I doubt it.

there is a phrase you and TOJ need to learn: MARKET FUNDAMENTALS.

first of all, the market didn’t take a nose-dive yesterday - it’s been swooning for the last 3 months. and not just US markets - the FTSE, EAFE and Nikkei (goodgravy, the Nikkey has been plummeting) why? because the market fundamentals SUCK right now. orders are down (such as Cisco’s headline today), unemployment is up - including the first mass layoffs in 6 years, consumer spending is down - look at today’s retail numbers. manufacturing and service industry indices have been in contraction for the last 3 months. the housing market is rock bottom. Toyota today reported a 69% fall in profits.

and you and TOJ want to blame the market swoon on the election??? honey, I hate to be the one who breaks it to you, but the markets have historically performed better under a DEM administration than under a GOP administration:

*According to their paper, entitled, “The Presidential Puzzle: Political Cycles and the Stock Market” and published in the October issue of the Journal of Finance, stock market returns are on average about 5 percent higher when the White House is run by a Democrat than during Republican rule. *

Looking at the 72-year period between 1927 and 1999, the study shows that a broad stock index, similar to the S&P 500, returned approximately 11 percent more a year on average under a Democratic president versus safer, three-month Treasurys. By comparison, the index only returned 2 percent more a year versus the T-bills when Republicans were in office.

http:// money. cnn.com/ 2004/01/21/markets/election_demsvreps/

(copy/paste/delete spaces)

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this

If she accused her husband or boyfriend of the rape, the DNA and medical evidence would then prove that her claim was TRUE, not false and they would be prosecuted.

The problem with your posts Chuck is they are no where detailed enough, and we consider those possible details in our replies. It is not reading into….it is filling in the blanks.

Like the above statement. You declare. matter-of-factly, that if a woman accuses her bf or husband, and DNA proves the child is his, that it is therefore rape. There may be no factual evidence that it was rape vs a jilted woman who no longer wants his POS’s husbands child.

By Mara

November 6, 2008 1:47 PM | Link to this

chuck - For instance if MEDICAL EVIDENCE proved that no rape occurred OR if DNA testing proved the baby was the child of her husband or boyfriend rather than some unknown perp. THAT would be proof that the charges are FALSE.

perhaps I’m misunderstanding, but by using the OR conjunction, you indicate that paternity would be as valid a “proof” of false accusations as a lack of medical evidence. In what relevance does the DNA of the fetus have to whether she was raped?

If she accused her husband or boyfriend of the rape, the DNA and medical evidence would then prove that her claim was TRUE

why would you need the DNA from the fetus if a regular rape kit shows that she HAD been raped?

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this

And BTW Chuck as much as you may not like the term, what is inside of me right now, (kicking and squirming and demanding a 2nd lunch!) is a fetus.

A fetus (or foetus or fœtus) is a developing mammal or other viviparous vertebrate, after the embryonic stage and before birth. The fetal stage of prenatal development starts when the major structures have formed, and lasts until birth.

By Frustrated

November 6, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this

Sunshine, just a question…and I am not trying to be spiteful here… Let’s say the economy bottoms out and you get pregnant with child #2 (by accident)…. If you saw that you couldn’t afford for #2 like you can for the one you are pregnant with now, would you get rid of it? After all of the joys you have experienced with this one?

By Gale

November 6, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this

Chuck re: 1:01. Sorry, I am guilty of leaping to a conclusion. Check 11:37 1:01 was phrased differently and that was still in my mind. I agree with Mara on this.

And your point is taken on the DOW drop on the day after an election. But I have to agree with USinUK on that. We have not had an election in this financial climate since at least the Great Depression. I cannot blame it entirely on the election results.

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this

sunshine -

And BTW Chuck as much as you may not like the term, what is inside of me right now, (kicking and squirming and demanding a 2nd lunch!) is a fetus.

you’ll find the pain stops when you stop banging your head against the wall.

chuck and TOJ have their opinions about when life begins/what a fetus should be called, etc … you can argue with them, you can give them the medical facts … you can argue logic regarding DNA tests vis a vis proving rape - but you’ll never win. they believe what they believe. roll your eyes. shake your head. walk away with your sanity intact while you still can.

as for baby boot camp … god love ya. my youngest niece just turned 1 and only now is starting to sleep through the night (and even then, only kinda) … how my sister-in-law does it is beyond me.

By Archie

November 6, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

I just went back and reread some of the posts and I would like to thank USinUk for tip about the Eugene Robinson article, it was a good read. As for my saying the “worst financial crisis” that was a phrase I picked up from someone else. I did find it interesting that the current president has one of the lowest approval ratings in history and the fact is he didn’t make many appearances on behalf of his party after being a two-term president. The other two-term president in recent history was seen several times campaigning on behalf of his party but one of the amazing things is that some of same problems that existed years ago are still in the same bad shape as they were years ago,i.e. numbers of uninsured americans. It’s incredible that some people think that problem is just ok.

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 2:25 PM | Link to this

Archie -

I would like to thank USinUk for tip about the Eugene Robinson article, it was a good read.

buck up, little buckaroo … NC was declared for Obama today - the entire south wasn’t red … and, don’t forget, the margin of victory for McCain in those states was a LOT lower than Bush’s in 2004.

:-)

By Archie

November 6, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

Also USinUk is right that I have never attacked a republican person as just plain evil because I have frat brothers(yes,they’re black) who are republicans and a number of associates who are republican. I know of at least two republican guys that are boycotting a local barbecue business because of the owners racist ways so let’s keep things into perspective. Also I voted for Lindsey Graham here in South Carolina because the democrat didn’t support Obama. I mean if ‘old boy’ is going play that way then yeah, I am going to vote for a republican who did take the time to advertise on black radio. I don’t agree with Lindsey Graham’s politics but the man took the time to speak to black folks and put his money where his mouth is. The democratic guy didn’t support my guy/my issues on a national level so I am glad he’s at the house today and I get to disagree with Mr. Lindsey Graham one more time. I am not a blind supporter of democrats and I imagine, except in the South, you have a lot of folk that are not blind republicans.

By Monica

November 6, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this

Yup, Chuck is actually correct in that I am not a “leftie.” My first candidate of choice was Mike Huckabee. :) I don’t dicuss abortion on here anymore because it’s moot, but I am indeed a pro-lifer. Based on recent events in Washington DC, I don’t like to affiliate myself with either pary, but I am a conservative Christian. Hope ya’ll have a great day!

By Lyrazel

November 6, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this

Stock markets always fall with democrat elected president and then rally around inauguration. On republican president elected its reverse. Why it is like this no one knows but in study of the market it is a remarkably consistent fact.

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Sunshine, just a question…and I am not trying to be spiteful here… Let’s say the economy bottoms out and you get pregnant with child #2 (by accident)…. If you saw that you couldn’t afford for #2 like you can for the one you are pregnant with now, would you get rid of it? After all of the joys you have experienced with this one?

Mute point.

The point that many do not get is that many of us (whether it can apply to us or not) would never have an abortion (for various reasons, including faith based) - we simply do not think we have the right to make someone else chose as we would.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 3:10 PM | Link to this

The point that many do not get is that many of us (whether it can apply to us or not) would never have an abortion (for various reasons, including faith based) - we simply do not think we have the right to make someone else chose as we would.

Thank you JokesOn! I whole heartedly agree, that is also why I don’t see the point in banning gay rights.

By USinUK

November 6, 2008 3:13 PM | Link to this

from today’s NYTimes:

Before the markets opened, retailers reported that their October sales slowed as Americans pulled back on spending. The holiday shopping season could be the worst in years, analysts said, as consumers buckle down to ride out a looming recession.

The job situation may be worsening, as well. The Labor Department is expected to report on Friday that employers cut hundreds of thousands more jobs last month, data that could prompt a sell-off in stocks. The agency said on Thursday that new claims for unemployment benefits declined by 4,000 last week, to 481,000; readings above 400,000 are considered recessionary. The agency also said that worker productivity grew at an annual pace of 1.1 percent in the third quarter, down from a 3.6 percent growth rate in the second quarter.

chuck et al … we’re in the middle of a sh!tstorm right now - we’re in a recession that is going to last well into next year … banks still aren’t lending to each other and they sure as heck aren’t passing along the interest rate cuts they’re getting.

and you want to blame this on the election of Barack Obama??? jeebus christmas on a pogo stick. turn off Rush. put down your copy of Black Helicopters weekly. turn on CNBC and actually LISTEN to the business reports. Warren Buffet could have just been elected POTUS and the market would still be circling the drain.

By Netbanker

November 6, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

I vote Republican for the most part, because they at least give the APPEARANCE of supporting decency and morality. They have done a relatively lousy job of upholding that standard, though there are still some true believers out there. Chuck…that is why I left the Republican party for the Libertarians. It just felt too hypocritical to me for them to claim to be the party of ‘family values’ and keeper of ‘morals’ when too many in positions of leadership were NOT living the values they believed that everyone should follow.

Did you forget about the barter economy? You got me! Completely forgot about that, but I doubt that there would be enough of an impact from bartering to affect tax collections. Most citizens aren’t in a position to barter for services because they don’t have a skill worth offering. For those that do, the trade must be fairly equitable which isn’t often enough going to be the case. Senior doctor may treat the kid, but how many times will said illegal immigrant need to do it which takes away time from his earning money? The illegal immigrant won’t be able to barter at the pharmacy for medicines even if they are non-prescription. Good luck bartering for gasoline or electricity or groceries or an iPod or admission to the movie theatre. Bartering as a system of commerce only works well when the economy is dominated by tradesmen.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

Sorry, I really don’t mean to beat a dead horse, or caribou, (but maybe we can change the subject from abortion!). This is just funny:

There is one comment in particular from a McCain aide that guaranteed to heighten friction between the two camps. The angry aide described the Palin family shopping spree to Newsweek as “Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast.”

Perhaps the most dangerous allegation for Palin are reports in The New York Times and Newsweek that when she was urged by McCain adviser Nicole Wallace to buy three suits for the Republican convention and three suits for the campaign trail, she went on the now-infamous shopping spree at swank stores like Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus.

A Republican donor who agreed to foot a majority of the expenses was stunned when he received the bill, Newsweek reported. Both the Times and Newsweek report that the budget for the clothing was expected to be between $20,000 and $25,000. Instead, the amount reported by the Republican National Committee was $150,000.

That wasn’t the whole tab, however, according to Newsweek. The magazine claims that Palin leaned on some low-level staffers to put thousands of dollars of additional purchases on their credit cards. The national committee and McCain became aware of the extra expenditures, including clothes for husband Todd Palin, when the staffers sought reimbursement, Newsweek reported.

Classy!!….But wait there is more:

However, press accounts today suggest that Palin rubbed many of the McCain aides the wrong way. On election night when it was clear that McCain would be giving a concession speech instead of an acceptance speech, Palin approached McCain with a speech in hand hoping to make her own concession speech, according to published reports.

And when McCain and Palin split up in Arizona Wednesday, the personal differences were stark

McCain drove himself home in a Toyota sport utility vehicle. Palin’s departure was a grander event. She left with an entourage of 18 family members and friends and a Secret Service detail, heading to the airport in a motorcade stretching more than a dozen vehicles, flanked by a dozen more cops on motorcycles.

And lastly, don’t you want this woman’s finger on the button in 2012?

McCain aides had numerous complaints about Palin. She was unwilling or unable to find the time and energy to prep for her disastrous interview with Couric. And when she did study, she astonished her handlers by her unsophisticated views.

She didn’t know Africa was a continent, according to Newsweek. Fox News revealed that during her cramming, she couldn’t name the three countries that belong to the North American Free Trade Agreement: the United States, Canada and Mexico.

(from: www. abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/Story?id=6196407&page=2)

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

Thank you JokesOn! I whole heartedly agree, that is also why I don’t see the point in banning gay rights.

np;)

Hope the little bugger does not keep you up too much and best of luck throughout the process.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 3:28 PM | Link to this

Mrs. Palin is doing just what GW told her to do to help the economy, shop, shop, shop, even if it isn’t with your money!

By Mara

November 6, 2008 3:33 PM | Link to this

Lyrazel - Hey Ya!

Jokes, moot point, dear, not ‘mute’.

USinUK - Black Helicopters Weekly!? LOL!!

Quittin’ time so…later, taters.

By Bruno

November 6, 2008 3:35 PM | Link to this

Oh well, the Baby Boy (as you predicted USinUK) is keeping me up at night enough

Sunshine—I am very honored that you have chosen to name your baby after me—Bruno. ; > }

btw - for the record, I am a 57-year old man who lives in Lilburn - fat, greasy, sitting around in my stained white tank-top and baggy sweatpants.

Have you been peeking in my windows again, USinUK??

Of the W2W irregulars on the left (Jokes, Mara, Monica, Sunshine, Lyra, Gale, Archie), I honestly don’t recall any of them say anything even remotely like “all folks in the GOP are inhuman/immoral/not-as-saintly-as-us-on-the-left.”

You might have to read a little more closely, then. E.g. the insults directed toward Southern residents above simply because they had the audacity to vote for McCain. Despite all his faults, McCain was a viable candidate and would likey have made a good President. I hardly see how voting for him proves that someone is a back-woods racist.

By Frustrated

November 6, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

Jokes, Sunshine…. I think it would be interesting to see the statistics on how many women have abortions after they have already become a mother… Meaning they have a child/children already which they are taking care of, and for whatever reason, decide the others aren’t in the cards for them and get rid of them. I think abortion is the easy solution for a mistake that one doesn’t want to live with…whether it be violent or not. But it isn’t that I am trying to make a decision for the mother, I am trying to give a chance to the child….which then results in “telling” the mother what she “should” do…. it’s a vicious cycle.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

Hope the little bugger does not keep you up too much and best of luck throughout the process.—Thanks, I really appreciate that. :-)

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

No offense to the enlightened guys here but Frustrated, you must be a man! Based on this statement: I think abortion is the easy solution for a mistake that one doesn’t want to live with you have NO CLUE about how women think or feel! Again you and TOJ can believe that we are all waiting to skip-to-my-lou down to the abortion clinic and all line up to kill our babies but YOU ARE CRAZY.

By Archie

November 6, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

She didn’t know Africa was a continent, according to Newsweek. Fox News revealed that during her cramming, she couldn’t name the three countries that belong to the North American Free Trade Agreement: the United States, Canada and Mexico. Sunshine I heard that on a radio show yesterday but that info on the shopping shows Ms Palin to be a phony but she would have fit right in with the Bush administration. This lady,Sarah Palin, appointed a committee to investigate her for abuse of power and that committee found she did nothing wrong but the bipartisan committee not appointed by her found her guilty of abuse of power and this woman basically called the guy she fired a liar and Palin refused to testify under oath in the investigation of herself. Twenty grand for clothes, I mean c’mon,and you say you can relate to soccer moms? There was an anticipation of a loss long before the election and some reports had the McCain camp making Palin a scapegoat. Just based on what you posted and what I read elsewhere it does not sound like Palin was expecting to win anything.

By k

November 6, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this

I hardly see how voting for him proves that someone is a back-woods racist.

You’re right. One does not prove the other. However, I have lived in the deep South all my life. People who come here from other places do not know what we know about “backwoods racists.” (If you are an open-minded person, or a clueless yankee, then I guess I’m not talking about you.) That’s why I made the point to say that, though the old racial prejudices may still exist here, they ARE on their way out! Hallelujah!

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this

Bruno, ok please don’t take this bad I really appreciate the laugh, I hope you will get a chuckle too! When you said “Sunshine—I am very honored that you have chosen to name your baby after me—Bruno” I thought maybe I was missing something and that maybe Bruno meant “baby boy” or something like that, so I googled “Bruno”. I got the wiki page, and although I have never seen it, there is a charter named Bruno played by Sacha Baron Cohen on the Wikipedia page. It is sooooooooooooooooo the opposite of the picture I have of you in my mind it made me laugh! You should check it out!

(http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C3%BCno)

By JokesOn

November 6, 2008 4:01 PM | Link to this

I think abortion is the easy solution for a mistake that one doesn’t want to live with…whether it be violent or not.

Omitting the obvious situations of rape/incest/etc, I personally agree with you. But those are our personal feelings.

But it isn’t that I am trying to make a decision for the mother, I am trying to give a chance to the child….which then results in “telling” the mother what she “should” do…. it’s a vicious cycle.

Hence why it is best left up to the mother to decide. It is her fate, right/wrong or benign.

Jokes, moot point, dear, not ‘mute’. Yup. My apologies;)

By Gale

November 6, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

If McCain had picked a reasonable VP, he might still have pulled it out. The Palin choice was crazy.

By Gale

November 6, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

clueless yankee Makes me laugh. I’ve been in GA for 16 years, but I often get reminded that I am not really a southerner. My dad was a Kentucky boy, moved to Ohio for work at 17. He was a bigot until he actually worked with some black guys. I remember his journey into tolerance and respect. It is easy to hate and fear the unknown. Especially when you are poor, it is sometimes needful to look down on someone to assure yourself that you are worthy. It takes maturity to realize you do not have to be better than someone to be worthy. I am proud of my dad that he did gain that maturity and stopped being a bigot.

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this

clueless yankee Makes me laugh—I was in a bar in FL (a while ago, obviously!) and there was this HUGE sign across the whole wall behind the bar. It said “WE DON’T GIVE A DAMN HOW YOU USED TO DO IT UP NORTH!” It was funny! Someone said the regular waitresses just point to it if some one starts a sentence that way.

By Archie

November 6, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

It is easy to hate and fear the unknown. Especially when you are poor, it is sometimes needful to look down on someone to assure yourself that you are worthy. It takes maturity to realize you do not have to be better than someone to be worthy. I am proud of my dad that he did gain that maturity and stopped being a bigot. That’s the best thing you have ever written Gale. I so much subtle bigotry at college football games here in that many patrons look down on the event staff but many of the event staff have college degrees and post-graduate degrees but since student loans are high thus the need for a second income. I really think the need to look down on someone is why we don’t have universal healthcare. Also K, I don’t think you or I insulted anyone but just made an observation. I also made the observation based on another study that the fattest states are pretty much the same Southern states. I mean as a southern born man I would like to be progressive sometime. Commentary about the South and this election has not been unique to me or K. Bruno I don’t think you need to feel insulted but you can’t ignore what some numbers tell you. Remember I do have republican people that I associate with all the time and just a side note but Cheryl Underwood is a republican and she is a very popular black female comedian and she leads a black sorority group,my point is that there’s no automatic dislike of republicans. However, “I have lived in the deep South all my life. People who come here from other places do not know what we know about “backwoods racists.” I second that statement.

By Bruno

November 6, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this

FYI, Sunshine, Bruno is a Norse God, the God of Strength and Fertility!!

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 5:03 PM | Link to this

Thanks for the education Bruno! I would much rather that picture than the one I found! Have a nice night!

By Frustrated

November 6, 2008 5:03 PM | Link to this

Sunshine….I am not saying that coming to the decision to abort is easy…I am saying that compared to living with the “unwanted” mistake and being responsible for all of his/her needs for the first 18 years (or more), aborting is the easy way out. You don’t agree?

By Sunshine

November 6, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this

Frustrated—aborting is the easy way out. You don’t agree? No, I absolutely do not.