Democratic Convention Watch: Open Thread

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

What is McCain's latest "senior moment", what does Obama need to do to win in November or whatever else is on your mind.

And please be excellent to one another. We do not accept name calling or any attacks on our commenters. Any objectionable comments will be deleted. Try to be civil.

Thanks!

New Open Thread here
This one is now closed for comments.

4188 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 3201 – 3400 of 4188 Newer› Newest»

Independent Voter said...: Mc is too much experienced

I see, some people still haven't mastered the English language. But I also see that there is a new way of saying that Mc"Needs A"Cain is way to effing OLD to be CiC.; July 18, 2008 6:40 PM
Beryl said...: McCain supporters fit in one or more of exactly 3 categories:

1. Ignorant
2. Insane
3. Evil

Picture a Venn diagram (3 overlapping circles). Most fit in the #1 circle. Obama and his supporters have a lot of work to do there. Those mainly in #2 and #3 need divine intervention.; July 18, 2008 6:45 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: CBS News/NY Times
07/07 - 07/14

McCAIN

Favorable 31
UNfavorable 32
Margin -1.0

MINUS 1 -- MINUS 1 -- MINUS 1; July 18, 2008 6:49 PM
Independent Voter said...: p'd ant......I hear ya. I really should be more careful of what I say :)

Would it be ok to say that US policy has made us the #1 terrorist run country? After all we have killed more innocent people over the past 70 years than any other countries.; July 18, 2008 7:16 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Senator Phil Gramm resigns as national co-chair of the MC"Need A"Cain capaign, and steps down as chief economic advisor.

Mc"Needs A"Cain camp says it's all ...

Drum roll please ...

The Obama campaign's fault!

Is the Mc"Need A"Cain campaign, and the supporters of that campaign separated from reality???????

Correction - we already know they're separated. The only question is how FAR separated from reality are they?

Mike; July 18, 2008 8:25 PM
Beryl said...: Keith O. interviewed Larry Hunter, Reagan's Policy Advisor tonight. He agreed with what I've been saying -- many Independents and Repubs are going to do the right thing this election -- reject McCain.

http://www.stoptheraidpledge.com/; July 18, 2008 8:45 PM
apissedant said...: Dave,
I don't know, we might be in tight competition with China and Russia on that one.; July 18, 2008 8:50 PM
Independent Voter said...: p'd ant, you may be right. But if we consider Nagasaki (80,000+), Hiroshima (140,000+), Vietnam (estimated 3-4 million Vietnamese dead), Iraq (which is estimated at 600K+)

I'm not so sure.; July 18, 2008 9:14 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Project Runway guru Tim Gunn was interviewed for Time's '10 Questions' feature this week, and he was asked "Michelle Obama or Cindy McCain?"

He has definite and differing opinions on each of them.

"Oh no contest, Michelle Obama. Absolutely. She looks so comfortable and relaxed in her style, in her fashion, and she exudes that. She has a presence that gives you confidence in her."

and

"Cindy McCain looks like someone has twisted her ponytail into a knot and tried to give her a facelift."

You Tube interview at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx5Nqod5wqM

The question and response are at about 4:20.

Mike; July 18, 2008 10:01 PM
apissedant said...: Dave,
That definitely puts us in the top three, I'm sure of that. Maybe that is good enough to advertise, after all, Ford, previously the premier personal auto source... is now advertising that they're equal in quality to Toyota, a company that began sales in the US 54 years after Ford.
Wow, this is now what our country brags about.; July 18, 2008 10:25 PM
Independent Voter said...: LOL p'd ant; July 18, 2008 11:14 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: DCW has posted an updated Presidential Forecast / General Election Tracker on the front page.

Obama '08; July 18, 2008 11:15 PM
Aunt Jean said...: Apissedant & Beryl

If you had read all the post you would know that I'm not the one that brought it up first. It was Kujo and I'm sorry but I can't let a lie past. Hillary lost because of the media and the SD,s. I'm not saying that is the only reason she lost but it played a major part in it. Just like if someone told a lie on Obama you'll would defend just like I defend Hillary.I'm sorry in my opinion Obama did not win it fair and square. Yes it's done and we need to move on I agree.Pick up the pieces and start fresh. Don't worry I really don't blame Obama. Jean; July 19, 2008 1:16 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: A quick update on the NY-13th Congressional race (from Larry Sabato's 'crystal ball'):

"July 15, 2008 Update:

"Just when you think the congressional race in New York's 13th district can't get any crazier, it does. This seat has certainly lived up to its unlucky number for GOPers this year, with Rep. Vito Fossella retiring following his DIU arrest and the revelation of a child as a result of an affair. Following Fossella's announcement that he wouldn't seek reelection, GOP hopes were pinned on Frank Powers, who then passed away unexpectedly in late June.

"Understandably this series of events left the local Republican Party in disarray. With the petition filing deadline rapidly approaching, Republicans filed Powers' signatures giving them a few extra days before they would have to name a replacement endorsee. The eventual winner of those sweepstakes was former assemblyman Robert Straniere, a divisive figure even within his own party. In 2004, Straniere lost his seat in the state assembly after the Staten Island GOP chose another candidate for their endorsement and Straniere lost the resulting primary. Local GOP leaders did choose him this time around, eschewing the other option, Jamshad Wyne, who is the Staten Island GOP finance chairman and a physician. Wyne will now meet Straniere in the September primary, but without the party support Straniere will receive.

"Still the insanity is not over, as some Republicans have hinted that they will cross over to vote for Independence Party candidate Carmine Morano instead of supporting Straniere. Morano and Conservative Party candidate Paul Atanasio both sought the GOP endorsement but were passed over and are now ineligible to run in the primary since they are not registered Republicans. Atanasio in particular faces a very tough race, since he is endorsed only by Brooklyn Conservatives and not by the Staten Island wing of the party, which has chosen to support Democrat Michael McMahon.

"Seem confusing? It is. With every added ounce of confusion, though, McMahon and Democrats pull further away. Republican fractures and fissures now seem much too deep to plaster over completely before November and Democrats are now the likely victors."

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2008/house/?state=NY (top article on that page).

Mike; July 19, 2008 3:04 AM
apissedant said...: Aunt Jean,
Actually, Stop brought up HRC, and you and Kujo are taking the bait. We disagree on this topic, and have both aired our personal opinions many times. The rules were agreed to by all parties prior to the competition. I am a Michigander, and I don't view my own home state's vote as counting. Most of my family and friends did not vote because they knew it didn't count, so some voted Republican, and some just chose against voting.

Many of my friends and family were/are angry with the DNC, and feel disenfranchised, but none are angry with Obama, and only one thinks Hillary got screwed, and she is still yet to join the Obama camp.

In any case, all of this is irrelevant. It is all done and over with, and you are allowing Stop to stir up crap. Ignore anything that Stop says, and anything that anyone says in response to Stop. I do this, which is why I had to actually go back and read the comment you were responding to in order to get a fair picture of what went on.

I don't think Kujo said anything offensive, but it is arguable. If you don't count Michigan, she is right, and I don't count Michigan. You do. It is debatable. Don't take the bait and continue allowing the idiot Republican to stir up crap.; July 19, 2008 7:03 AM
Beryl said...: Aunt Jean,
Again, I agree with apiss. I also don't read garbage from the troll (Stop) and ignore any responses to it. Kujo chooses to feed the troll (causing it to stick around for a while longer) and since you also took the bait, it was indirectly fed through you.

Trolls are nasty creatures with a single objective: to dump garbage on a blog and stir up the participants.

We won't all agree on every issue but constructive discourse is worthwhile. There will never be constructive discourse with a troll. I suggest you completely ignore them and responses to them like we do.; July 19, 2008 10:06 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; July 19, 2008 10:56 AM
apissedant said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; July 19, 2008 11:43 AM
apissedant said...: Obama is in fact spending his weekend in Iraq and Afghanistan, as said by John McCain. This means that McCain did in fact compromise the security of the mission. Looks like he is following the Rove/Bush model of compromising national security as long as it hurts those against him. Congratulations McShame, you have created your own Valerie Plame moment, and you didn't even have to be elected President to do it!; July 19, 2008 12:40 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: The White House had an 'OOOOOOPS' moment earlier today.

According to CNN, when an aide hit the wrong button and mistakenly sent to the news media a Reuters article saying Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki backs presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's troop withdrawal plan.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel says, "It was a mistake. Clips list for staff was supposed to be the addressee."

The Obama campaign quickly took advantage of the mistake, forwarding an ABC report detailing the incident to its press list.

Seems to me that the Shrub administration's "general time horizon" is very similar to Senator Obama's withdrawal plan, a plan that Senator Obama has had for several months now.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/19/white-house-sends-press-corps-al-maliki-praise-for-obama-plan/; July 19, 2008 5:29 PM
Beryl said...: This is terrific news, Mike.

I don't see it reported on CNN yet Hopefully the MSM will talk about it all next week.

Even if they don't want to give Obama credit for his strategy, they must give him credit for his judgment and leadership. He has proven to have had the right judgment from the beginning and he engages the right people to make decisions.

Go Obama!!!; July 19, 2008 6:16 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Beryl,

It's in the 'Political Ticker' section of the CNN new site. It will gradually fall down the page, that's why I put up the direct link to the article, not a link to the entire 'Political Ticker' blog.

Mike; July 19, 2008 6:22 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Here's the link to the political ticker:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

I keep it bookmarked on my toolbar and click on it probably 20 times a day ;)

The CNN Ticker
The CNN front page
Huffington Post

are the first three places I look every morning.; July 19, 2008 6:32 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Here's new video of Obama with the troops in Kuwait today ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bimTBZPYvWM

A couple minutes in it shows him shooting a couple of hoops for the troops.; July 19, 2008 6:45 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Hello There:

BHO is having a nice time in Kuwait.

He will get plenty of free air time for the next several days, because of his "fact finding mission".

What fact does he want to find? His policies are already in sloganeering! "Quit Iraq and Invade Pakistan" - that has been his Middle East policy for the last 6 months.

Al Maliki has endorsed him. That would be construed as a big thing for the Obamaphiles.

But the fact is, the American heartland does NOT care about Al Maliki.

Maybe, Mugtada Al-Sadr will also endorse BHO, followed by Ayotullah Al Sistani and even by Iranian fire brand Prime Minister Ahamedinajad!! Good for BHO, he is getting the endorsement of Big Fishes in the Middle East politics.

The MSM will have a field day; they will run the news clips all day every day!! There will be festive mood in Obamaville!!

Alas, all this will infuriate the American heartland!

You know the rest of the story.

Stay tuned.; July 20, 2008 1:03 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: What Al-Maliki would want from US Govt:

If the US troops are taken away from Iraq, then he can freely wine and dine with Iranian Theocracy!

A Greater Shia Iran-Iraq Theocracy!

America wants Democracy in Iraq, Not Iranian Theocracy.

Maliki Govt will soon fall from grace!! BHO can't do anything about it.

Stay tuned.; July 20, 2008 1:10 AM
tmess2 said...: A little story stolen from the Republican South -- with apologies to the long dead author and anyone who is offended --

In the summer of 2008, Brother McCain and Brother Fox News were tired of trying to chase Brother Obama down. They kept thinking -- how can we trap him, he is much faster thinking on his feet than we are. The more they thought, the more they looked around and heard the rumor that Brother Obama did not know his way around the briar patch of foreign policy.

So they put out the word that Brother Obama was scared to go near the briar patch hoping to goad him into going to the briar patch where they would set their trap. Much to their surprise, Brother Obama showed up the next day at the briar patch. They said here is our chance to trap him and they started to chase him into the briar patch.

They hadn't gone to far into the briar patch before they realized that Brother Obama knew his way around foreign policy and quickly emerged at the other end without a scratch while Brother McCain and Brother Fox News were once again cut to shreds and had to make excuses for why they were so badly injured.

The moral of the story -- Don't give a superior opponent the chance to disprove a perceived weakness.; July 20, 2008 1:12 AM
tmess2 said...: See George Orwell's favorite spokesman from the Ministry of Truth has stopped by again today. Good news is bad news. Our puppet is our enemy. Freedom is slavery. War is peace, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.; July 20, 2008 1:14 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: tmess2-

I think that someone forgot to tell McCain and his camp that Senator Obama majored in political science with a specialization in international relations.

I do so look forward to the debates between Obama and McCain.; July 20, 2008 1:52 AM
Karen Anne said...: NYtimes current list of VP candidates:
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/candidates/vp/index.html

Is it just me, or are all the Dems on this list incredibly boring?

And, is it just me or does Romney think he'll get to be Pres by hoping McCain keels over?; July 20, 2008 6:47 AM
apissedant said...: On this subject you guys are talking about... how did Republicans ever think that this was going to work out for them? Let us compare John McCain and Obama on foreign relations experience.

Obama- Had a Kenyan father, an Indonesian step-father, and lived and was educated in Indonesia for several years. He majored in Political Science with a specialization in international relations at Columbia University, and graduated with high enough grades to get into Harvard Law School.

McCain- Graduated fifth from the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy, where I cannot find any information on what he majored in. He crashed 5 fighter jets, and spent five and a half years living abroad as a prisoner of war.

The only way anyone could conclude John McCain could possibly be more qualified than Obama on foreign affairs, is if foreign affairs actually means conducting unsuccessful wars.; July 20, 2008 8:06 AM
apissedant said...: karen,
I don't think they're INCREDIBLY boring, but isn't boring what we want in a VP choice on the left? We are ahead, holding a comfortable lead or McDufus and his Republican brigade. At this point, the main goal in anything Obama does is not to make a mistake. He no longer has to win anything, just break even. Most people on the list for VP are very safe choices, which is important. A bad VP pick could easily screw up his lead, but a great one will leave him pretty much where he already stands. The obvious choice is to pick a safe one that won't hurt him.

McDufus on the other hand, is far behind, can't get press coverage, and is putting his own party to sleep. He has to take a risk and wake up the media and the voters. All his choices look like they will demand much more attention, which will give them more media attention, but it will also give them plenty of opportunities to screw up.

I hope he picks John Thune or Lindsey Graham, they're both retarded. My unborn child could school them on Meet the Press.; July 20, 2008 8:16 AM
apissedant said...: Al Gore did very well on Meet the Press this morning. Those of you on the West Coast should definitely catch it when it comes on. :); July 20, 2008 10:11 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; July 20, 2008 12:22 PM
Thanh Bui said...: I am a fan of Obama. My English is very poor, just baic read and write.

I just read this. I would like to read your responses. Thanks!; July 20, 2008 12:44 PM
apissedant said...: NGU,
Remember, a news story is only as good as the person reporting it. Take a look at her work:
Rant rant rant, I hate everything and everyone.

A) The DNC chose the convention location, not Obama.
B) McCain continually assails him for not visiting foreign nations and war zones, and not knowing enough about foreign relations. This woman says going to foreign nations makes him elitist, John McCain says not going to foreign nations makes him elitist, what should he do, hover off their coasts to please both sides?
C) Yes we can is one of his political slogans, and all major politicians have political slogans, so I don't see the problem there.
D) Everyone gets angry when their spouses and family members are attacked personally, so this is also not new. Complaints about attacks on Hillary, Chelsea, the Bush twins, and the Kerry twins were all prominently seen by anyone. I man who didn't defend his family and get angry when they were attacked would not be a man I would trust.
E) McCain's wife says the only way to travel around Arizona is by private jet, where is the modesty?
F) McCain's chief economic strategist called us a nation of whiners, and called this a mental recession, where is the modesty?

In the end, this reporter concludes that because people like Obama, then he is an elitist with a huge ego. McCain is disliked by people, and therefore he must be modest. This woman needs a logic and philosophy class, because she has presented not only false evidence, but an obvious non sequitur and irrelevant ad hominem attack.; July 20, 2008 1:04 PM
Beryl said...: That is just another pro-McCain article with lots of flaws. Since I live about 10 miles from Denver, I must weigh in on this pointless comment:

"A convention hall isn't good enough for the presumptive Democratic nominee. He plans to deliver his acceptance speech in the 75,000 seat stadium where the Denver Broncos play"

The chosen venue was wise since there will be more speakers at the convention than just Obama. This is what happened in January when only Obama came out here...

"Obama drew more than 10,000 people to his speech at the University of Denver. They packed a hockey arena and crammed into two overflow rooms and still were lined up outside to get in."

http://cbs4denver.com/politics/obama.clinton.denver.2.641540.html; July 20, 2008 1:16 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Kinda-Sleazy Rice has decided for whom she will vote for, but won't tell the public.

THAT is interesting. And a couple of things come to mind:

If she has decided to vote for Mc"Needs A"Cain, then she is not real happy with the nominee, and won't be doing much, if any, campaigning for him.

If she has decided to vote for Senator Obama, then she has decided that her future in the GOP (if she has one going forward) must be kept safe, and she won't tell anyone. Or she doesn't want her skeletons brought out of the closet until after the election, if it becomes known that she's supporting Senator Obama.

CNN 'Political Ticker' article at:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/20/rice-mum-on-presidential-pick/

Mike; July 20, 2008 4:06 PM
jean said...: OK.
It is totally official.
A large portion of society sucks beyond belief.
I just was reading about Purity Balls.
We are back to the DARK AGES.
100 years ago women were married at 16 or much younger and had no rights, had kids and that was their job.
There were a few and only a few who did not.
Now women do what "men" do.
We work, support the family,
deal with hormones that have to be ignored.
I am not endorsing sex for younger women.
NO SPECIES can change in 100 yrs.
IT is physically impossible.
I have a daughter who is fantastic.
She knows that emotionally she could not handle it at 16.
This is logical.
The Purity Ball is grotesque.
When you talk about dealing with someone of color and breaking the barrier it is important but depending on the country it may not exist for that individual.
Women is pretty global in breaking the barrier.
Take the King and Queen thing away.
I know HRC is not liked on this Blog.
But I feel that a lot of why she was supported is not understood.
After reading the PURITY BALL on CNN I feel dirty and a second, third or fourth class citizen.
I am so angry right now I feel I will explode.
And NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not a FEMINIST.
I am a woman who needs to financially help support my family,
have kids, raise them, and I am treated largely as a second class person.
I am married to a wonderful man who does not think archaically.
HRC lost.
It is as simple as that.
The continuance of disrespect for her is a bunch of crap.
To hear Dems doing that is almost unbearable.
She is close to Obama in a lot of ways.
She made mistakes and so did he.
Unification of the party is talked about but needles and jibes are constant from the winning party.
I am not talking about Obama either.
He is gracious.
He knows the importance.
jean; July 20, 2008 4:47 PM
apissedant said...: Jean, I just read 1/3 of the New York Times article on it, and I couldn't finish. It sounded gross and weird. I agree with your sentiments, just maybe not so vehemently. Making sex such a huge public display between father and daughter is not appropriate.; July 20, 2008 5:20 PM
jean said...: Ap,
I had to restart my computer and I went to an article somehow about younger kids coming out and someone was hurt.
My daughter saw it and asked why the **** would they even put that in writing unless it was a hate crime.
I told her it was.
The answer was "Mom, that is sick."
THAT is called personal growth as a human being.
She has always felt that way.
Honestly,
You have not experienced this.
Ask your wife.
As strong as you are in your beliefs,
wait till you have a daughter.
If not the first maybay the second;)
Walking in someone's shoes is hard to do.
It really does suck.
And NO you cannot sue for discrimination like you think.
jean; July 20, 2008 5:32 PM
jean said...: Ap,
While this does have alot to do due with sex that is not all of it.
This is called "CONTROL".
Total control till a female is married.
SICK.
jean; July 20, 2008 5:43 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: ngu:

Welcome to this site.

To introduce, I was a Democrat - voted for Kerry in 2004 and the Democrats in 2006.

Pelosi/Reid Congress proved to me as incompetent as the ruling Republican in the White House.

Now I am an Independent trying to expose the Audacity of Humbug of Barack Hussein Obama Jr (BHO)

The article you referred to "Audacity of Ego" says it all.

BHO is just a fluff not of any substance. As many people called him, BHO is just an Empty Suit.

Here is my analysis of BHO:

1. He is a young very ambitious biracial man with good rhetorical eloquence. He was raised by White mother and grandparents from Kansas. BHO's forefathers never suffered the atrocities of slavery, discrimination and segregation and the attendant misery.

But he is very astute in using "Blackness" to his political advantage - he got the "Street Credibility as a Black" by becoming the disciple of pastor Wright, the firebrand anti-American and anti-White pastor of Afrocentric Rhetoric.

2. BHO raised tons of money. He lavishly spend it, and got the support of FAR LEFT Ideologues like Kennedy, Kerry etc. But he could NOT win the large Must-Win Primaries of MA, NH, CA, FL, MI, PA, OH, KY, WV, PR etc for ANY Democratic Nominee!!!

3. He has MONEY but NO Message:

He gets 55% of his money from Big Corporations as "bundles", but lies about it.

On Iraq War: He opposed it when outside the US Senate. But voted for ALL the bills supporting the WAR Financing in Iraq and Afghanistan. He is a double-talker.

On Afghanistan: He is the Chairman of the sub-committee but never convened a meeting to discuss the problems. He never visited the WAR torn region for many years. Now he does it just to play Dirty Politics.

On Economy: He is a "Tax and Spend Big Govt" politician, for some sort of "Fairness in Society" and NOT for creating good jobs or priming the economy to grow at a robust 3-5% rate like that we had in 1990s.

On Energy Crisis: He wants to support Ethanol from Corn and other food sources. This increased the price of the food. Poor people are suffering. He has NO plans to deal with the energy crisis short term and long term.

He is in the back pockets of Iowa farmers who grow corn, and the Telecommunication Co. He voted to pass FISA, against the will of most of the Democrats in the Congress.

Most Americans feel that BHO is terribly inexperienced, suffering from some disease of Grand Ego; he is naive and is a novice.

While McCain is too much experienced, BHO is too little experienced in National Politics.

Experience matters to be the President of the United States.

His Achilles' Heel is National Security, Naive Economics and Audacity of Humbug.

Americans will reject him very soundly. They rejected Kerry in 2004, although he had experience, charisma and good name cognition, besides money.

BHO has none, except lots of Money and Ego.

But, Message will win over Money any day.

ngu: Be an Independent, and ask tough questions before you cast your vote in Nov 2008.

Write about your views of the world. Don't worry about English. You may have the sufficient skill as you read and analyzed the Boston.com already. Good luck.

Stay tuned.; July 20, 2008 5:45 PM
Beryl said...: Jean
I don't know the specific reference for your discussion on the Purity Balls. They seem like an alternative to Debutante Balls (or Cotillions) which I not only appreciate having experienced but I also assist in organizing for my Sorority. I am uncomfortable with the "Purity Ball" -- as I understand them -- for 2 reasons.

1) The focus appears to be limited to sexual abstinence. "Purity" is much broader, IMO.
2) There should be the same concern for a young man's purity as there is for a young woman's.

I have no problem with a father and mother taking the kind of pledge to protect their children (not limited to gender) from impure influences.

I read that some young women have had operations to make them appear to be virgins. That is sick, IMO. However, many other ways women alter their bodies for the pleasure of men are equally sick.

Women need to learn to respect THEMSELVES first. We need to stop abusing ourselves and allowing others to abuse us physically, mentally, socially, and economically. We also need to take actions that do not pass on negative expectations to our sons and daughters.

(I think I told you that I **used to** support HRC.); July 20, 2008 6:42 PM
apissedant said...: beryl,
Now your post I can agree completely with. :); July 20, 2008 6:58 PM
apissedant said...: Hey, look what I found at Washington Post online!!! Stop seems to get around, and be one heck of a shape shifter. He seems to be a black man now.

rankcon wrote:
As a BLACK MALE and a Hillary Clinton supporter, I must advise other BLACK PEOPLE to get real. Barrack Obama has no relevant, executive, or management experience whatsoever. SURE, Hillary had baggage, 90% of that being attributle to her slim bag husband Bill, but she is tough, tested, educated, and well experienced, in law, government, etc. The lady can handle pressure, attacks, and humilation!!!.

Barrack gives some great speeches and talks about hope, change, etc. but all this stuff cost money.

As for Michelle Obama, she became a TARGET when she got actively involved in the campaign. Check Cindy McCain. Graceous, reserved, sexy (for an older lady) and very careful with her words. I'm a successful BLACK MALE and my advice to other Blacks is to watch people like Cindy McCain and learn from her. Don't run your d@mned mouth so much. ALSO, you know good and D@MNED WELL how BLACK WOMEN are. They try to dominate and wear the pants in every relationship they are in and you can tell that Michelle is the one who wears the pants in that relationship and she'd have serious influence over him in the White House.

I really wish CLINTON and ROMNEY were the ones who were running. Although very different, I could respect them both.

Tell me that doesn't sound exactly like Stop, spelling errors and all.; July 20, 2008 7:20 PM
Beryl said...: That poster is no more a black man than I'm an Asian man. That is the beauty of blogging anonymity.; July 20, 2008 7:45 PM
apissedant said...: beryl, I always pictured you as a 40 year old balding Asian man wearing a wife beater and spilling raman noodles over your ample belly. Are you trying to tell me that isn't the case? Tell me it isn't so!!; July 20, 2008 7:51 PM
Beryl said...: LOL! That image is priceless.; July 20, 2008 8:23 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: PISS:

Good, do your work diligently.

You will get the final truth, if you can handle it.

But Stop BHO Now. Because,

He is inexperienced, naive and therefore dangerous in a very dangerous world.

See "24" President Palmer!!

We need a tough person with experience, whether a Black, White or Brown, as POTUS.

BTW, my English is not as bad as yours! lol; July 20, 2008 8:53 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Here is a quote for thought from BHO:

Regarding different races:

On page 124, last two sentences -

It was first summer in NY. His mother and half sister visited him and all three go to see a movie "Black Orpheus" in downtown NY:

BHO writes,

"The emotions between the races could never be pure; even love was tarnished by the desire to find in the other some element that was missing in ourselves.

"Whether we sought out our demons or salvation, the other race would always remain just that: menacing, alien and apart".

My question to BHO:

This is a strange feeling and opinion you harbor in you.

How in the world Whites and Asians believe you in what you say and do?

They just can't understand you and believe you!

Stay tuned.; July 20, 2008 10:14 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Well, the quote is from

"The Dreams from my father"!!!!!!!!!; July 20, 2008 10:15 PM
apissedant said...: Dave is going to have to come back and explain himself. Going out and getting a life without my permission was not part of the thread rules as I knew them. Ed took off too... everyone has abandoned the poor little piss ant. *tear*; July 20, 2008 10:33 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Obama's plane has had a makeover and it is heading overseas...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/07/air-obama.html

Haven't been able to find a photo of it yet ;(

Obama/Sebelius '08; July 20, 2008 10:45 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Photos of Obama's plane!

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/07/obama-press-plane-poised-to-de.html; July 20, 2008 11:17 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: A short history of the Battle of Sedan (as depicted on the Siegessaeule), and a short history of the Siegessaeule from 1945 to 1987:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lSQ3u5CqF_k&feature=related

Mike; July 20, 2008 11:19 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: The weak link in dramatically higher voter turn-out this November:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/21/us/21voting.html?ref=us

It looks like we can expect 'voter' or some type of 'electoral problems', such as too few election judges, not enough ballots, 'low-education voters', etc., in several states, especially those that will be expected to be close on November 4.

Mike; July 21, 2008 12:55 AM
jean said...: Beryl,
Just got back.
I am trying to understand what you wrote.
I do respect myself and work very hard so that my children respect people as individuals.
The Purity Ball is just for females and propagates the negative.
I have never had physical altercations to my body, but if a woman wants to it is nobody's business.
It really doesn't have to be for their sex partner. It is for themselves.
In reference to sex as a devil oriented thing, it has been going on for a while. You don't see this as a way of oppression?
Chastity Belts?
Last I looked men don't wear them.

Women have had a harder time for equalization than anyone.
It still has not happened.
That this is ignored and brushed under the carpet with continuous
motion and only goes tiny step by tiny step to any type of growth
is disturbing.

Respect yourself and you will grow.

It sounds like you are saying that women need to clean up their act before things can happen for growth.
There are a lot of women that are nut jobs just like men.
We have BUSH for president, twice.
The King of Nut Jobs.

Equality is Equality.

I respect every person I meet no matter what color,sex or orientation.
The person will determine if I will continue to give it by their actions.

I would love to tell a any black person, heck any person, that they need to first respect themselves and stop allowing others to abuse them physically, emotionally, economically and socially. You can then grow.

I would then carefully pick myself off the ground and listen to them
"Do you think I have been sitting on my ass all my life doing nothing?"

I truly disagree Beryl.
jean

I really disagree Beryl.; July 21, 2008 12:58 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Senator Barack Obama has landed in Iraq, CNN confirms

.; July 21, 2008 1:14 AM
Beryl said...: Jean,

First, I wasn't referring to YOU when I spoke of women who aren't respecting themselves. If the shoe doesn't fit, take it off!

"The Purity Ball is just for females and propagates the negative."

Yes. I agreed with that. Re-read my post.

"I have never had physical altercations to my body, but if a woman wants to it is nobody's business."

Never said you did. You are taking posts far to personally!

"In reference to sex as a devil oriented thing, it has been going on for a while. You don't see this as a way of oppression?

Not if the rules are not gender-specific. Re-read my post.

"Respect yourself and you will grow."

Agreed.

"It sounds like you are saying that women need to clean up their act before things can happen for growth."

You misinterpreted. I didn't say that it was a prerequisite. We do need to clean up our act for our own sakes and to stop the cycle of abuse. Some women tolerate husbands who cheat on them and humiliate them. As a result, the wrong messages are sent to sons and daughters. I am not blaming the victim but don't minimize the power of "enabling."

"I would love to tell a any black person, heck any person, that they need to first respect themselves and stop allowing others to abuse them physically, emotionally, economically and socially. You can then grow."

How did BLACK people get into this discussion? Is race something on your mind?

"Do you think I have been sitting on my ass all my life doing nothing?"

Er, no. I never gave any thought about what you personally are doing. These are conceptual discussions not a personal ones.; July 21, 2008 1:18 AM
Beryl said...: Jean,
I just re-read my own post trying to see how you could have interpreted that I felt women should clean up our acts BEFORE we are respected.

I said this:

"Women need to learn to respect THEMSELVES first. "

I can see how you can interpret it that way but that is not how I intended it. Everyone deserves respect -- even those who do not respect themselves. I don't believe that "respect is earned" no more than I believe that "love is earned". I can love someone who doesn't love me and is considered "unloveable"

HOWEVER, women must put self-respect as our priority. One of the things I've learned is this: You can influence change in others but you can only change yourself.; July 21, 2008 1:31 AM
apissedant said...: Beryl and Jean,
I want to post a long diatribe on my feelings on this complex and sensitive issue, but I don't know if you want to hear it. It is not as cohesive as I would like, and it is much longer than I would like, but it basically explains my view on the sex issue, and what reasoning led me to my view. It may be taken as sexist, but it is not intended to be by any means. I do not promote either female nor male promiscuity for my future children. My wife and I very much disagree on this, but I plan to have a strict, "no" policy. I still believe in properly educating my children with their choices, but I will be very clear on what choice I expect them to make. I know that there is a good chance that will not be the choice that they make, which is why educating them is so important. Just because a parent has rules and principles does not mean that the child will follow them, I know I didn't follow all of my parents' rules.
In any case, if you have any desire to read it, let me know and I'll post it. I wrote it and then opened a new window because it was longer than I had planned, and the typical response from women is just calling me a sexist, which I don't much like. I truly do not believe myself to be a sexist, and I believe the sexist and racist cards are played too quickly in the current culture.

Again, if you have any desire to understand where my point of view comes from, I'd be happy to post it, otherwise I'll forget I wrote it. ;); July 21, 2008 1:50 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Berlin Germany is planning for ONE MILLION people at Obama's speech on Thursday!

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/7/20/10446/0072/95/554188; July 21, 2008 2:07 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: The Victory Column in Berlin...

"Today, the column serves as the focal point for mass events in Germany's capital, such as the annual Love Parade, a rave attended by hundreds of thousands of young people from all over the world. Berlin's annual gay pride parade also ends here, which is fitting, considering that Berlin's gay newspaper is also named, very tongue in cheek, Siegessäule. The golden Victoria atop the monument is no longer seen as pointing towards Paris to taunt, but as pointing to and leading towards Germany's Western allies, chief among them the United States."; July 21, 2008 2:09 AM
apissedant said...: Leah,
That is outstanding news, but now Republicans are going to call him elitist for having such large crowds! lol; July 21, 2008 2:19 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Nope nope nope... McCain is the elitist!!!

McCain’s Hamptons Fund-Raiser

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/20/mccains-hamptons-fund-raiser/

I think we won't be hearing McCain calling Obama an elitist anytime soon! LOL ;)

.; July 21, 2008 2:32 AM
apissedant said...: Leah,
Republicans don't mind being hypocrites, they assume Americans don't actually read the news or know what is going on, so they'll say it and we'll believe it. For many people, they're right, don't expect that just because he was ushered to a private fundraiser in the Hamptons by helicopter, and that those in attendance were among the wealthiest and most powerful men in New York means that they won't still call Obama an elitist. That is what they're known for doing. ;); July 21, 2008 2:50 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; July 21, 2008 2:59 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: apissedant-

You are probably correct.

But let's not forget that HRC tried to bash Obama for having 'big rallies' and for being an elitist and it did NOT work for her. So, in my opinion the things that did not work for HRC will still probably not work for McSame.; July 21, 2008 3:00 AM
apissedant said...: Leah,
Good point. I definitely think overall, this time around, the typical Republican attack will not work. I still find it rather troubling that it still works on as many people as it does though. I would like to think that 45% of my fellow citizens had some common sense and ability to do a google search.; July 21, 2008 3:14 AM
jean said...: ap,
Yes, I would like to read it.
From our conversations I would never think of you as a sexist.
I am curious.
I am sure Indy will show up soon.
Kathy Griffin performed last night and partys were everywhere all weekend.
I hope he drank his water and took his aleve last night;)
jean; July 21, 2008 9:51 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "But let's not forget that HRC tried to bash Obama for having 'big rallies' and for being an elitist and it did NOT work for her."

Wrong...Wrong. Read the History:

After his "Elitist" Comments in SF, BHO lost PA and most other major Primaries very pathetically.

Yes, he had big rallies as in Dallas, Houston and other major cities. People came to hear his rhetorical eloquence and the demagogy he breathed every second of every speech! But, after listening to his nonsense, they DID not vote for him in must-win large Primaries like TX, MA, CA, FL, KY, OH, WV, PR etc for any Democratic Nominee, in spite of outspending HRC 3:1.

Forgetting this historical fact is a travesty of conscience and a deep sinner of your own memory.

BHO will draw large crowds every where, no doubt. Believe me, most of the listeners WILL not vote for him because:

1. He is a Bleeding Liberal of the type of Carter. He is for "Tax, Tax and Spend and Spend Big Govt Bureaucracy".

2. He wants to wage a Class Warfare in America in the name of "Fair Society".

3. As per today's WSJ Editorial, in US bottom 50% of families earn only 12% of income, and they pay a paltry 3% of all income tax to the Federal Coffer. Instead of increasing their skill level and hard work to increase their total income, BHO wants to cut down the highly productive hardworking upper income people!

Bring the Rich Down is BHO's political philosophy!

He must go to the Socialist Europe to practice his Socialism or Collectivism of Communists.

America will remain a Capitalist Country, where hard work, hard thinking and innovation will always triumph.

Stay tuned.; July 21, 2008 11:55 AM
apissedant said...: Jean,
Women discriminate against other women, just as much, and sometimes more than men do. Women also too often excuse abuse and maltreatment by men as just something they have to put up with. The much hated practice of 40 year old and older men becoming successful, divorcing the mother of their children, and marrying 20 year old trophy wives involves a 20 year old woman in my opinion, selling her body to some old perverted dirt bag. If you go to any high school in the country, the rumors about which girl is a skank or a whore are typically perpetuated by other women.

Beryl, you, and I have all decided that the purity ball is not only sexist, but immoral and gross. This is not a question, but the larger question of what is and is not acceptable is much more complex and difficult to answer.

Here is some anecdotal evidence that explains where I am coming from:
As I have mentioned a million times, my wife is Dutch. The Netherlands is a much more liberal nation, where men and women are treated much more equally, and sex is not demonized. Due to this, both women and men can sleep around and have, "fun" at younger ages, with no commitment in mind, without being viewed so negatively. There are some serious negative consequences of this...
There are several studies conducted by feminists, as well as other groups interested in social sciences, that examine what men and women naturally look for in a mate. Every study I have read indicates that men are primarily focused on physical and reproductive items. Women mature and reach their prime in this region between the ages of 16 and 20. This explains why men naturally gravitate towards women in this age group, regardless of the age of the men.
Women naturally looked for more items that grew with age. They looked for maturity, power, intelligence, and many other components that grow with age. Reproductively, men don't have as much of a prime, and can father a child without incident well into old age.

In any case, back to the original story, my wife is the first person in her circle of friends to get married, and she is 26. Only one of her friends is even involved in a serious relationship. Several of her friends are with guys that are complete morons and pigs, and on top of that, they refuse to commit to any sort of a serious relationship. All of her friends are at the age where they definitely want to settle down now, but only she found someone, and she found me in America, not in her home country. (It isn't as if she was shopping, the relationship started innocent enough and blossomed)
Men in her country are settling well into their thirties, and the birthrate is 1.7, which is considered very bad for a nation, because it leads to decreasing populations, and more retired people than workers, which is very bad for the economy and the government. Men are able to do this, because the women all think they have to put up with this crap. The men all know they can get sex anywhere, so they don't have to settle down, and they can just continue having fun.
We call it going Dutch here, when women and men pay for each other on a date, and that is the actual practice there. It is actual equality, but it turns out men and women aren't really equal by nature. They have different goals, desires, needs, and abilities. Equality thus, cannot be defined in the same terms as racial equality, or other groups that are obviously equal physically and mentally.
Women by the age of 35, have 5 times more likely to have a child than they would at 25, and 50 times more likely at 45. At the same time, men have no adverse reproductive effects with age. Their seed continues to be just as viable and productive well into retirement.

At the same time, men are dirt balls. Women are naturally the ones that decide whether or not sex is going to happen with the exception of rape and arranged marriages, which in my opinion is pretty much rape. This is actually a great power, and nothing something terrible. Women should cherish this power, because in many ways, it puts them above men. It gives them the upper hand. At the same time, if you accept that men are dirty, and women are typically the ones that are deciding whether or not sex happens, then with this realization must come a difference in the way female and male promiscuity would be naturally looked at.

Again, I do not mean to sound sexist, and I will not condone promiscuity in either my male or my female children. There is a good chance it will happen anyways, but that does not mean I have to like it or say it is ok.

My wife and I have an equal relationship, where we both work, and we both make decisions and discuss our opinions and beliefs openly, and then come to a consensus. I do not advocate women being subordinate in any way, shape, or form in a relationship. I do not doubt the ability of women to do a "man's" job, or anything like that. I just believe there is a natural difference in the way men and women approach sex, and because of this, there is, and very well should be a difference in the way their acts are viewed.

Most women and men realize this and acknowledge this quite often, but lose it in the bigger picture. For example, Britney Spears is considered a ho, despite not having that many partners. Wilt Chamberlin is by contrast respected, as is Bill Clinton, and was John Kennedy, MLK, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and a whole host of other men who were a bit loose with the belt. No woman could have survived the long list of their transgressions, not with female or male voters. Monika Lewinski was called a slew of bad names by both women and men.
Many famous male actors are constantly bouncing around between women, and no one seems to care. An actress that is just seen drunk out at the club a few times is labeled as a trashy ho by all the checkout line rags that are both written and read primarily by women. Men that find out a woman has a large black book will be unlikely to date her. If he does, his ex-gf will undoubtedly remark about how she is a whore. Women, at least from what I've seen, are much less likely to disqualify a man due to his sexual history, and the ex will be upset, but not because his former gf is dating a male whore.

We literally look at sex differently between the sexes every single day, not just as a society, but as individuals. The two sexes think differently and act differently in regards to it. Women in every country and every culture are typically younger than their significant other. Even in a gay relationship, the man that is the "bottom", who we typically identify as the "female" of the relationship, is typically the younger of the two.
It definitely isn't equal, but maybe it is fair, and that seems more important to me than equality.; July 21, 2008 11:55 AM
apissedant said...: Sorry it is super long :); July 21, 2008 11:55 AM
Beryl said...: apiss,
I so agree with everything you posted but want to highlight your double-standard comment:

"For example, Britney Spears is considered a ho, despite not having that many partners. Wilt Chamberlin is by contrast respected, as is Bill Clinton, and was John Kennedy, MLK, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and a whole host of other men who were a bit loose with the belt. No woman could have survived the long list of their transgressions, not with female or male voters. Monika Lewinski was called a slew of bad names by both women and men."

Almost all of the "Founding Fathers" were "hoes". I do not respect that part of their legacies because they disrespected women (their wives and their female slaves) and sent the wrong messages to their sons and daughters.

(Since he was recently in the news, I'll call out Jesse Jackson who also whored around.)

Jesus Christ called out the double-standard while condemning judgment behavior He sent everyone stepping when they tried to stone a whore who was "caught in the very act". Where was the MAN who was with her? Why wasn't HE stoned too? Also, many of those trying to stone her "knew" her. So... he who is without sin should cast the first stone.

On a personal note - your wife is a very fortunate lady to have found you. Also, I think you'll make a terrific father.; July 21, 2008 12:32 PM
apissedant said...: beryl,
Thank you for your timely and kind response! I definitely agree that there is a most definite double standard. Although I don't agree with the double standard, I don't really agree with the double standard, I am not sure I agree with its removal either. Typically, when people attempt to remove the double standard, they are trying to have promiscuous women looked at less harshly instead of looking more harshly at promiscuous men, which I would be more inclined to agree with.

At the same time, because there has always been a longstanding double standard, and because men and women are emotionally different when it comes to sex, it is hard to really put their actions on an equal ground. It sounds bad, but basically, women essentially know better, because they know their actions will be judged negatively. Society in contrast actually encourages men to have "fun". I remember being teased in High School for choosing to wait. I was teased a lot, and most people just assumed I couldn't get any. I never witnessed a woman being teased for this, and I also recall people always assuming it was the woman's choice.; July 21, 2008 12:51 PM
jean said...: ap,
Thank you for your response.
I am going to respond but this work thing keeps coming up;)
Talk to you soon.
jean; July 21, 2008 1:06 PM
apissedant said...: jean,
I look forward to your opinion. :); July 21, 2008 1:09 PM
Karen Anne said...: "the birthrate is 1.7"

Great for the planet, though.; July 21, 2008 1:14 PM
apissedant said...: True enough Karen,
One major problem is the birth rate is very high in countries that don't have the resources or money to take care of the children, and it is very low in most of the industrialized nations with the ability to take care of their offspring.; July 21, 2008 1:34 PM
Beryl said...: "I am not sure I agree with its removal either. Typically, when people attempt to remove the double standard, they are trying to have promiscuous women looked at less harshly instead of looking more harshly at promiscuous men, which I would be more inclined to agree with."

So true! This is what I "fear" as well. There are so many health reasons (emotional, physical) that people should not "spread it around".; July 21, 2008 1:55 PM
apissedant said...: beryl, COMPLETELY AGREED.; July 21, 2008 2:04 PM
jean said...: Quick note.
I hate Mondays.
Busy.
I look at the cup half full.
Perhaps in taking away the double standard the male population has to come to the female standard;)
jean
Ap,
I have not forgotten you.; July 21, 2008 2:05 PM
apissedant said...: jean,
That seems to be a social change that beryl and I would be more apt to agree with.; July 21, 2008 3:20 PM
apissedant said...: They updated the campaign game that Jay posted forever ago.

Campaign Game; July 21, 2008 5:23 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Obamaphiles:

It seems BHO gets about 70% approval rating in Italy, Germany and Spain!

All the Socialists are coming out of the woodwork to support Comrade Barack!

Alas, American heartland does NOT TRUST BHO, because he is

Naive
Inexperienced and
a Mother of ALL Flip-Flopper.

In a very troubled world, America needs a very experienced knowledgeable leader. Not BHO. Very risky.

Yes, he is a Socialist.

Recently, Germans and Italians elected a Center-Right leader for their country; now the forgotten Socialists want Obama as their President in Europe!

He can pack his bags for Europe!!

Stay tuned.; July 21, 2008 5:28 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: From CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/21/mccain.nyt/index.html):

John Mc"Needs A"Cain wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times in response to Senator Obama's op-ed from last week.

The New York Times has decided to not print it!

In an e-mail to the Mc"Needs A"Cain campaign, Opinion Page Editor David Shipley said he could not accept the piece as written, but would be "pleased, though, to look at another draft."

The email went on to explain why the op-ed was being rejected, and what Mc"Needs A"Cain could change to allow it to be printed.

Mike; July 21, 2008 6:08 PM
suzihussein22 said...: m in md-Yes, I was enjoying the glaringly obvious differences between Obama's oped and McCain's lack thereof. It's all in the details. Obama's got plenty of details, but McCain was kinda whining about the rejection. Where's the beef, McCain? I wouldn't mind reading McCain's piece once it's not so fluffy.

beryl-Yes, it's definitely about RESPECT. That word is not just about a song. I have always talked to my kids about what it means. I've made sure my daughter knows what it means to be pretty. She is 10 but hasn't asked for make-up or earrings or brand name clothes yet. My son is 12 but still blushes when he finds out a girl thinks he's cute. They are learning first about how to treat themselves. They've still got lots of time to develop relationships. I also believe they should wait and agree about the physical and emotional side effects if they don't. We've already talked to them about most of these issues. This also got longy, eh?

leah-Yea!! Thanks for the info about Berlin. Danke shern(spelling phonically, only had one semester of German )! :D; July 21, 2008 8:44 PM
Beryl said...: sus -

At 10, my crew was still playing Barbie. Yeah, she also caused image problems but I'm glad we "accessorized" and play-dated with Ken rather than acting it out in RL.

Scouts kept us busy too. But then, it was different in the 70s. Back then, we were less anxious to grow up.

(Yeah, I'm old.); July 21, 2008 8:55 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Obamaphiles:

1. You are all gloating that the liberal icon NY Times refused to print the Op-Ed by McCain! Good for you, for you all don't believe in Free Press and different points of view, any way.

American Electorate (AE)is watching.

2. Even today, a full 72% of AE wants McCain to be the Commander-In-Chief; BHO gets only 44% on that(Gallup.com)

3. A full 65% of AE wants to drill off-shore for oil and gas. BHO and his liberal Congresspersons Pelosi and Reid oppose new drilling: this is will be the Game-Changer. Americans are hurting by high oil, gas and food costs. BHO's ethanol from corn hurts food prices.

Americans are sick and tired of inept politicians in the Congress who don't care about the everyday problems of hard working Americans.

They will send the liberal Democrats home very soon.

BHO will NOT get more than 251 EVs in the GE 2008.

Because he does NOT have solutions to the problems of the AE. He has money, photo ops, theater, fluff and fancy. That's all. And, European Socialists love him!!lol

McCain = Too much experienced, well tested, and AE knows him for over 30 years.

A well known personality with Message and Solutions.

Stay tuned.; July 21, 2008 9:09 PM
suzihussein22 said...: beryl-My daughter plays with Barbies if they're setting up a horse riding camp. Either that or they're fighting dinosaurs. She's been in a pageant(fundraiser). She stated her favorite tv show is Animal Cops. The other girls answered Bratz or Hannah Montana. The scouts around here aren't very organized. My den mother wouldn't even get certified to take us camping.; July 21, 2008 9:38 PM
apissedant said...: On the McCain piece,
My favorite part was McCain's response. His continued insistence that he was not going to change his Iraq and Afghanistan war plan just because the NYTs wants him to.

Umm... they didn't ask you to change your war plan, they just asked you to TELL US YOUR WAR PLAN. Unless of course your war plan is actually just to complain about Obama's war plan, which to me doesn't sound like much of a war plan.; July 21, 2008 10:00 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Many of you will remember that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had to admit that a LOT of the Gulf Coast hurricane relief supplies that were supposed to be given to the PEOPLE who suffered losses were in fact given to corporations, gambling casinos, etc., etc. The original estimate was that $85 million was given to entities not intended to receive the goods.

Well, it seems the DHS made a mistake, and today it corrected that mistake.

It wasn't $85 million incorrectly given, but 'only' $18.5 million.

See. Do a little re-estimating, then turn on the spin machine full speed, and problem solved!!

Or in other words, do I trust the DHS any more today than I believed it yesterday (or the day before, or the day before that, ...)? You are delusional if you think that! I STILL don't trust the idiots at DHS.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/21/katrina.supplies/index.html; July 21, 2008 10:52 PM
apissedant said...: Mike in Md,
Sounds about right. Hopefully Obama can fix that administration too, but how do you fix something that never worked in the first place?; July 21, 2008 11:10 PM
suzihussein22 said...: We can't handle the truth-

http://tinyurl.com/earnplace-withmccain

Can I ask him a question as long as it's not hostile and doesn't require him to know geography or sociopolitics?; July 21, 2008 11:57 PM
suzihussein22 said...: g'night folks...McCain can't compete with this straight talker-

http://www.dollyon-line.com/archives/albums/sts/cover.jpg; July 22, 2008 12:01 AM
apissedant said...: In my stumbling around the internet, I found something AMAZING. I ran into a NYTs article from 1998 on fuel economy, Ford, and GM. The European operations of Ford and GM supported a proposal raising average fuel economy to 39 miles per gallon! Yes, the same two companies that now, ten years later, are advertising their amazing 35 MPG vehicles here in the states as green machines. The same companies that claim that they would go bankrupt if we increased fuel economy, and that they just cannot afford to make these cars. AMAZING.

European Ford Fiesta gets 47 MPG

Average fuel economy in Europe is currently 45 miles per gallon.

Average fuel economy in the US is 24 MPG, with hopes of reaching 35 by 2020.

One article linked above points out that the number of cars sold in America getting more than 40 MPG has actually decreased in the last three years, from 5 to 2 cars. Of the 113 sold in Europe that achieve this standard, 2/3s are made by companies that produce and sell cars in the US as well as Europe.

In a sad piece of irony, fighting against higher fuel economy has severely damaged their companies, and many see bankruptcy as a distinct possibility for both of these giants.; July 22, 2008 1:49 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Over on ThePage (TIME) it says....

ABC News: McCain to hold undisclosed event in Louisiana Thursday designed to “capture some of the attention” from Obama.

---
In my opinion this makes McCain look desperate! McCain is not 'leading' - he is 'following'.; July 22, 2008 2:00 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: suzihussein22 said...
We can't handle the truth-

http://tinyurl.com/earnplace-withmccain

We already know who those seats will be reserved for:

- Faux News (so-called) reporters
- Washington Times (so-called) reporters
- Any Murdoch-owned newspaper
- Sundry other Reich-wing news organizations, such as the rag owned by Richard Mellon Scaife, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Mike; July 22, 2008 2:46 AM
apissedant said...: The Marshmallow Economy; July 22, 2008 11:01 AM
apissedant said...: Since 2000, there are 23 million more people living in the United States. At the same time, we have only added 5 million jobs.
Roughly 2/3s of the US population is employed, while only 22% of the population growth in the last 8 years was met with a job for them to fill. These numbers are growing worse as the population continues to rise, and the number of jobs has begun to shrink this year. This contraction in jobs is expected to continue for another 18 months.; July 22, 2008 11:11 AM
apissedant said...: The NYT published an article today explaining that the current low unemployment numbers are artificially low. Many fathers and mothers are "choosing" to stay home with their children due to a layoffs and a lack of good replacement job opportunities. They immediately disappear from the rolls, and do not count as unemployed, just non-workers.; July 22, 2008 11:13 AM
apissedant said...: Slight correction, I believe about 50% of people in the US are employed, not 2/3s, still, 22% new jobs for new people obviously does not maintain this by any means.; July 22, 2008 11:23 AM
tmess2 said...: Undisclosed event in Lousiana on Thursday would tend to suggest that Jindal is the VP pick. There would sort of go the experience argument for McCain.; July 22, 2008 11:26 AM
tmess2 said...: The key problem in McCain's op-ed piece that led to its rejection was its refusal to define "victory in Iraq." The New York Times basically refused to let him publish an argument for staying in Iraq until we have won without defining how we will know that we have won.

In other words, they weren't going to let McCain get away with the vague "moving the goal post" arguments that Bush has gotten away with for the last 5 years.; July 22, 2008 11:30 AM
Beryl said...: Andrea Mitchell misinterpreted Senator Obama's response to her lengthy set of questions in her report on MSNBC today. Senator Obama never stated that he would make decisions without listening General Petraeus as she stated. I listened to Sen Obama's response and he said that he would not solely RELY on the position of the General. He said that he would consider factors of which the General would not either be aware or would not be important to his goals.

This was a wise response, IMO. Effective leaders take in consideration the views of our subordinates but we also look at other factors when we make decisions.

What is up with Ms Mitchell?; July 22, 2008 11:32 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: Why NY Times is receding into oblivion a a National Daily:

1. Obvious partisanship. They published a potentially devastating totally unsubstantiated article about McCain very early during the Campaign.

2. Now very overt denial of McCain's publication of his view of what needs to be done in Iraq. When they published articles by Obama, they are OBLIGATED to publish one from McCain, however controversial it could be. The readers will make the judgment call, not the partisan Editors.

That's why I canceled the subscription several months ago.

Stay tuned.; July 22, 2008 2:28 PM
apissedant said...: You canceled the subscription before they refused to publish the oped that you claim they're obligated to publish? Wow, you're psychic, when will I die?; July 22, 2008 2:34 PM
Judy Bienvenu said...: Another possibility for the secret McCain Thursday press conference....leave speculation going all week about a possible VP pick, only to have a formal annoucement saying it's not Jindal on Thursday.
---------------------------
No doubt, that annoucement will also include more of this same sort of carefully planned attack on Obama that we've seen all week. Personally, I think all of Obama's advisors must be overseas with him. I don't think they're able to monitor how carefully McCain's camp has ramped up their attack this week.

While overseas, Obama needs to make a firm statement reminding the 24-hour news cycle that it was McCain who voted for the Iraq war in the first place....not Obama.

The Obama camp needs to respond to what's happening on this side of the planet while they're on the other. They need to show they're monitoring all activities around the globe no matter where the're at.

If Obama doesn't address this while he's there, he's going to be behind on this most recent McCain attack when he gets home. Instead of addressing the rediculous allegations himself, Obama is relying on his surrogates, that the 24-hour news cycles only give sound-bites to. It's a mistake.; July 22, 2008 2:38 PM
Judy Bienvenu said...: Stop/Yams - You were sooooo pro-Hillary back before the primary ended. Now you're soooooo pro-McCain. Yet you still insist on posting on this blog. You should think about blogging for Jeff Gannon and his group. Or even better, maybe you should join www.freedomswatch.org - you seem to be more closely aligned with them, then with the bloggers on DemConWatch. Just a suggestion.; July 22, 2008 2:43 PM
jean said...: ap,
YOU ANSWERED.
jean; July 22, 2008 2:50 PM
jean said...: You gotta see this;
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/22/vanity-fair-out-with-new-yorker-takeoff/
This is a response to the cover of the New Yorker but unfortunatly it will not be on the cover of Vanity Fair:(
jean; July 22, 2008 5:21 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Something's not right...

OHIO

Monday Obama +8 (PPP)
Tuesday McCain +10 (Rasmussen)

This goes to show that polls should be taken with a grain of salt!

Obama '08; July 22, 2008 5:50 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "This goes to show that polls should be taken with a grain of salt!"

Yes, as long as the n = small (1000-2000).

I like polls where n= < 200K, like the AOL Straw Poll with some correction for malpractice/mischief by Obamaniacs!!

____________________________

Obamaphiles:

BHO has acknowledged in so many ways that the Surge in Iraq has worked well. McCain won. BHO lost pathetically.

What Maliki said is politically motivated photo-op - nothing more, nothing less.

The Deputy Prime Minister, a Sunni, has warned BHO that a quick withdrawal of forces will bring back the violence against the minority Sunnis from people like Muqtada Al-Sadr.

Therefore, as McCain says for a long time, we need to stand down gradually depending upon the "Situation on the Ground", and not because the pro-Iranian Shia Maliki wants us to do so. He may be going down in the next election.

Hard earned victory in Iraq CANNOT be wasted by the naive thinking of BHO, the most inexperienced novice.

Remember, we will not have any "Peace Divided" soon even if we quickly withdraw from Iraq. Because, BHO wants to bomb Pakistan/Afghan Border! In his mind, the WAR will go on in Afghanistan/Pakistan for a long long time! Even hundred years, as long as the Islamic Fundamentalists are there to hurt America from outside.

He demagogues so much about 10 billion dollar a month spending in Iraq - he wants to spend that money in Pakistan. That's all the big difference, IMO.

No money for schools, roads and bridges here in America. Unless, he borrows nearly a $1 trillion dollar per year from foreigners like China or the petro dollars from the Middle East. Because our economy is very very weak and a Obama tax will take it to near Depression, Beware.

Note: BHO is stammering and stuttering during interviews. This proves our point that unless there is a teleprompter, BHO loses his silver tongue so very easily!!!lol

__________________________

NY Times has become a mouth piece of Liberal anti-War moveOn.org or the Propaganda Vehicle of Obama Campaign!!!!

It is no longer a National Masterpiece of publishing opinions and news from ALL perspective.

Shame on NYT.

Unsubscribe NYT, as I did long time ago. I know where the demons and devils reside!

Stay tuned.; July 22, 2008 6:28 PM
apissedant said...: jean,
I know, I couldn't resist. The foresight of someone who has predicted everything incorrectly so far, with apparently this one ingenious exception... just was too much to let pass by. ;); July 22, 2008 6:31 PM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "In other words, they weren't going to let McCain get away with the vague "moving the goal post" arguments that Bush has gotten away with for the last 5 years."

NYT MUST publish ALL perspectives, not one narrow view of the Surge and War, if it wants to be a National Daily.

Otherwise, it soon will be the Mouth Piece of Obamaniacs!!! No one will respect NYT anymore!!!!!!

Stay tuned.; July 22, 2008 6:45 PM
jean said...: ap,
I cannot throw a stone for I am not guiltless;)
You have to check out the cartoon of McCain & Cindy on CNN.
It did make me smile.
It may be time to check the precincts for Indy.
jean; July 22, 2008 6:54 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: You can always tell when Obama is having a good day in the press because that is when stop0 shows up to post multiple comments.

The more stop0 posts the more I dislike McCain! LOL!

Obama Obama Obama Obama OBAMA '08; July 22, 2008 6:58 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Obama WILL BE the next President of the UNITED States of America!

McCain is OLD.
McCain can't remember anything.
McCain is OLD.
McCain is PRO-WAR.
McCain is OLD.
McCain deserted his first wife.
McCain is OLD.
McCain = Bush
McCain is not well versed on foreign affairs.
McCain doesn't know anything about economics.
McCain is anti-women.
McCain is OLD.
The WORLD doesn't like McCain!

The AMERICA and the WORLD LOVES OBAMA!

President Obama '09; July 22, 2008 7:02 PM
jean said...: leah,
My son asked me to check the polls and he was VERY confused.
He said that if he did this in his math class(TRIG at 14)he would get an F. The variances are WAY to large. He wants an explanation.;0
Do you have any suggestions?
He was for Obama way before me and I have been harassed for months;0
jean; July 22, 2008 7:11 PM
Beryl said...: I don't have a problem with McCain's age. Ronald Reagan was old too but inspired and gave hope to many Americans. I wasn't one of them but I respect that he was a change agent who made a difference on the world stage. (Obama was criticized for making a similar observation.)

The problem with McCain goes to his CHARACTER and his inability to demonstrate the level of domestic and world leadership we need at this time in history. So I agree with everything else, Leah, and your points are worthy of repeating:

McCain can't remember important issues.
McCain is PRO-WAR.
McCain deserted his first wife.
McCain = Bush
McCain is not well versed on foreign affairs.
McCain doesn't know anything about economics.
McCain is anti-women.
The WORLD doesn't like McCain!

That said, my mom is of McCain's generation and doesn't like him for many reasons -- including his age!; July 22, 2008 8:22 PM
Beryl said...: A crowd of McCain supporters look

Bored,
Disappointed,
Frustrated, and
Obligated to be there.

Because of their sour dispositions, they look UGLY as compared to Obama supporters who appear

Excited,
Hopeful (duh),
Inspired,
Engaged, and
Thrilled to be there.

Anyone else notice this?; July 22, 2008 9:18 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: From Huffington Post...

McCain's Got 99 Problems

99. Bush's willingness to talk directly with Iran.
98. Bush's new time "horizon" for troop withdrawals.
97. al-Maliki's endorsement of Obama's Iraq strategy.
96. Obama's headline-dominating foreign tour.
95. His disagreement with the majority of Americans on Iraq.
94. His lack of economic expertise and policy.
93. Obama's $52M June.
92. His $21M June.
91. 29% of the Latino vote.
90. 2% of the black vote.
89. Charles Keating (he'll be back).
88. Vicki Iseman (she'll be back).
87. Randy Scheunemann (he'll be leaving).
86. His band-aid approach to energy (more drilling, more nuclear, a $300M "prize").
85. His band-aid approach to healthcare (tax credits, more competition).
84. His band-aid.
83. Saying things like "I know how to win wars," despite his never having won a war.
82. His wife.
81. His ex-wife.
80. The Hagee/Parsley un-endorsement debacle.
79. An uninspired base.
78. Ape rape.
77. His bff, Joe Lieberman.
76. His claim that Czechoslovakia still exists (it doesn't).
75. His claim that Iran is training Al-Qaeda (they aren't).
74. His claim that Iraq and Pakistan share a border (they don't).
73. His claim that Somalia is the same place as Sudan (it isn't).
72. His claim that Vladimir Putin is the president of Germany (he isn't).
71. 71.
70. The images of 70,000+ screaming Democrats at Invesco Field.
69. Phil Gramm's "nation of whiners" implosion.
68. His unwillingness to call the situation in Afghanistan "urgent."
67. Steve Schmidt's failure to right the ship.
66. A new generation of Evangelicals who don't care what James Dobson thinks.
65. "C-nt."
64. "I hate the gooks."
63. His plan to resurrect Bush's plan to privatize Social Security.
62. The writer's rooms of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.
61. His tarmac birthday party with Bush -- as Katrina made landfall.
60. "General Petraeus goes out there almost every day in an unarmed Humvee."
59. His belief that Americans are better off than they were eight years ago.
58. His "Frankenstein on barbiturates" oratory skill.
57. His beyond-pathetic "Pump" ad, which blames Obama for $4.50 gas.
56. His "Obama Love" ad, which blames the MSM for his terribly-run campaign.
55. His computer illiteracy (c'mon...this is 2008).
54. A tax plan that doesn't even TRY to hide the fact that it's geared toward the wealthy.
53. Bob Barr.
52. Ron Paul.
51. Rupert Murdoch.
50. His gay adoption/marriage high wire acts.
49. His immigration high wire act.
48. His torture high wire act.
47. His drilling high wire act.
46. His tax cuts high wire act.
45. Not churchgoing enough for some evangelicals.
44. Too evangelical for some independents.
43. His temper.
42. "I know what [Iraqis] want."
41. The starlet gap: McCain = Heidi Montag; Obama = Scarlett Johansson.
40. The Facebook gap: McCain = 173K supporters; Obama = 1.17M supporters.
39. His 1983-94 opposition to the Rev. Martin Luther King holiday.
38. His 2008 opposition to the Ledbetter Fair Pay [for women] Act.
37. His 2008 opposition to the G.I. Bill.
36. "100 years."
35. Viagra-gate.
34. His 0% rating from Planned Parenthood.
33. His 0% attendance record for the last six Senate Afghanistan hearings.
32. "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno."
31. David Plouffe.
30. David Axelrod.
29. Republicans losing elections in traditional GOP strongholds.
28. His October 2002 insistence that victory in Iraq would be "easy."
27. His January 2007 insistence that he never said it would be "easy."
26. A resurgent Taliban.
25. Europe's Obamamania.
24. Kneeling at the feet of Jerry Falwell.
23. His penchant for gaffes.
22. 80% of Americans convinced we're on the wrong track.
21. The National Review calling his campaign strategy "likely to fail."
20. Another terrorist attack on U.S. soil "would be a big advantage to him."
19. Record turnout in the Democratic primaries.
18. A free Osama bin Laden.
17. "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran."
16. A campaign hierarchy dominated by lobbyists.
15. Suggesting Obama is a "Socialist."
14. The Dow Jones down 2,000 points for the year.
13. Foreclosures soaring, banks failing, and inflation at a 17-year high.
12. Still pushing his ridiculous, Big Oil-friendly gas tax holiday.
11. Being out-raised by Obama 2:1...in West Virginia.
10. His "no" vote on SCHIP (healthcare for poor children) reauthorization.
9. His support for overturning Roe v. Wade.
8. His consistent opposition to minimum wage increases.
7. Obama's 50-state strategy.
6. Al.
5. Bill.
4. Hillary.
3. Mitt.
2. John McCain.
1. George W. Bush.
.; July 22, 2008 9:20 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: Raygun as an agent of change.

Nothing wrong with saying that, since he did change the politics of the US.

But saying that causes a lot of people to think Senator Obama was complementing Ronnie Raygun for his policies.

Here's some analogies:
Hitler was a change agent for Germany and the rest of Europe.

Mussolini was a change agent for Italy.

Lenin was a change agent for Russia.

Sun Yat-sen, Chiang Kai-shek and Mao Zedong were change agents for China.

Porfirio Díaz, Pancho Villa, Emiliano Zapata, Álvaro Obregón and Plutarco Elías Calles were change agents in Mexico.

If I make the above statements, does that mean I agree with the philosophies and political platforms of all the above?

A big resounding NO!

It just means that I can recognize that some people can be, and have been, agents of change of a country's history. And the above people are just some of the most recent, going back only about 130 years or so.

Throughout history, many have been agents of change for their tribe, country, or the entire world. Does someone named Jesus, or Muhammad, or Gautama Buddha come to mind? For someone to NOT call them agents of change shows their lack of knowledge.

Mike; July 22, 2008 9:33 PM
apissedant said...: Ugh, I typed a response, but stupid blog was down... let's try again.

Jean,
I saw the piece, but it didn't look like satire, it looked like truth. I am also in the minority, because I was not offended by the Obama cartoon. I thought it was effective satire showing the lunacy of the right, but that's just me.

Leah,
John McCain and the Republicans, MSM, and even MSNBC have been calling Obama either an elitist, arrogant, or vain all day long. I told you truth would not stop them, it never does.
An MSNBC correspondent went so far as to say that if Obama chose a VP that he liked the idea of governing beside, and who fit in with his message, that it would show Obama's arrogance. In order to not be arrogant, he must choose someone who fills a perceived weakness in his campaign, regardless of whether or not they clash with him or the campaign.

WHAT!?!!??!?! ON MSNBC!!?!?!? He can't choose someone he wants to work with? Could you imagine running a business like that!?!? I wish more Presidents picked VPs that fit with their strategy and could work as a proper team. That's how they should all be picked, not on silly politics.; July 22, 2008 10:10 PM
apissedant said...: Mike,
I honestly could more easily defend Hitler as a positive agent of change than I could Reagan.
First, I'd like to mention that Reagan wasn't a terrible person, just an idiot.
Second, I would like to mention that Hitler was a terrible person, but also very smart.

Due to Hitler, Germany is at the forefront of the industrialized world. They are a peaceful and prosperous nation, and prior to Hitler, they were the poorest nation in all of Europe. The means by which he achieved this was terrible, but the outcome for his nation is difficult to argue with.
He also gave the western world a wonderful education, and changed international and war policies... well... until 2003. We rebuilt the countries we conquered to prevent them from falling back into the hands of crooks, and we established the UN to replace the ineffective League of Nations.

Reagan accelerated and inspired the borrow and spend lifestyle that all Americans are now dependent on. We are bigger polluters and wasters, we are less educated, more ignorant, and soon to be poorer.

I honestly believe Reagan was trying to do the right thing, but he was an idiot and screwed up. I honestly believe Hitler was trying to do, and actually do one of the most atrocious things in human history, but several positive changes were somehow born from it.; July 22, 2008 10:19 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: AP,

I disagree with your statement regarding "Hitler as a positive agent of change".

The change you allude to was actually the direct result of the defeat of the rulers who caused dramatic (previous) change in their countries. Both countries got the message very clearly AFTER the war that the world would not allow them to continue their previous policies, PERIOD! Both had been militaristic for centuries, and the world forced a dramatic change on the population's psyche to change away from that militaristic mentality.

In both nations, we basically destroyed their factories and infrastructure through bombing. When it was rebuilt (largely at the US expense), it was new, and thus more efficient than what we had in the US (and also Britain). Of benefit to most of Western Europe was the US taking over the defense obligation for them. Their economies didn't have to fund huge military budgets, and could focus more on the domestic budget.

Hitler caused the same type of effect on the Soviet Union - a lot of destroyed factories and infrastructure that when rebuilt was much more modern and efficient than what had been destroyed. The Soviets rebuilt their economy to a great extent by depriving the consumers in favor of the military, and the result of that policy started to dramatically show up in the late 1970s and into the 80s.

The Soviets also extended their rebuilding plans into Eastern Europe, including the economies being based on backing the military than domestic policies. Look at the economic differences between how East Germany and West Germany fared after the war, and before German reunification. Czechoslovakia was one of the most modern industrial powers before the war, with technology and worker expertise envied throughout Europe (it was their armaments expertise that was a main reason Hitler annexed the country). Poland, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria suffered from the Soviet policies, and those countries didn't make economic advances until after the Soviet yoke was thrown off.

Italy didn't 'suffer' the same fate as Germany and Japan. There was quite a bit of destruction of factories and infrastructure, but a lot was not destroyed. Therefore, Italy had a lot of old, inefficient factories and infrastructure still standing after the war. And the rebuilding of what WAS destroyed was not financed by the US at the same ratio as that of Germany and Japan.

IMO, about the only thing that Hitler did of direct benefit for Germany was the Autobahn system, incorporating new advances in road technology, and good design. The Autobahn, though, was not for the citizenry's benefit, but to make it a lot easier to move the German war machine from one place to another - not unlike the US's Interstate Highway System.

Ronnie Raygun was a doddering old fool, who surrounded himself with people who had no practical experience in running an economy, and/or believed in the old trickle-down economic model. His policy changes didn't really start to be felt until after he left office, thus most people won't accept his policies were, in the long run, a failure. In a lot of ways, he got idolized like Peron in Argentina - he left office (Peron was forced out in a military putsch) just before the result of their policies caused a crash or economic decline. People think/thought the economic problems were was because they (Raygun/Peron) no longer were in office and the policies were changed, rather than the policies they put in place causing the crash.

Mike; July 22, 2008 11:42 PM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Keith Olbermann did a great job tonight exposing the CBS cover-up of the big McCain ERROR regarding Iraq.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/22/mccain-makes-false-claims_n_114405.html

-----

I am sure that McCain will get alot of coverage tomorrow! They were complaining that the media wasn't giving him enough air-time, I guess they will get their wish now ;)

I think it is wonderful that everyone will now know that he doesn't know squat!!!

.; July 23, 2008 12:21 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "I honestly could more easily defend Hitler as a positive agent of change than I could Reagan."

The most outrageous statement I have ever heard.

Utter nonsense....Unbelievable.

Reagan was BHO's hero!!!!

Stay tuned.; July 23, 2008 12:45 AM
apissedant said...: Mike,
Remember I said I would find it easier to pose an argument that Hitler was a positive agent of change, not that he actually was a positive agent of change. I stated many things that I believe historically show the positive outcomes for the Germans due to WWII, which was unarguably started by Hitler. Therefore, the argument can be posed that the positive outcomes resulted from the actions of Hitler.

As to rebuilding, I have to disagree with you. Italy has not been a powerhouse since the Romans. In contrast, Germany was a powerhouse prior to WWI, which is why they got the harshest treatment after WWI, despite the fact that they did not start the war, and were 1 of 3 of our enemies in the war. They had had compulsory education for over a century prior to the war. They had continued to grow in strength and knowledge for hundreds of years, while Italy had been in a constant state of stagnation for the centuries before. Italy was barely even given a seat at the table in Versailles, and had no part in negotiating the terms for Germany. It is hard to compare the end points when the starting points were so vastly different.

As to the Soviet Union.... I would remind you that the Soviet Union came to be because the Russian Empire was so dirt poor. Their nation was ravaged during WWII, and they were given no economic stimulus to to make up for this fact.
America on the other hand, emerged as the most powerful and economically prosperous nation in the world. It rebuilt its half of Germany with the vast sums of money it now commanded. The Soviet Union not only lacked funds to rebuild, but they were barred from trading with the other industrialized nations due to the red scare. This of course had the same effect it has on North Korea and Cuba, preventing them from ever rising out of the poverty they started with.

As to the cost of maintaining an Army... Germany and Japan both have a military. Japan's military spending is nearly equal to that of the UK and France, and greater than China's. It is number 3 in cost. We're expected to spend 696 billion dollars on the military this year, nearly equal to all other nations combined, and a staggering 23% of our national budget, and 5% of our GDP. World Military Spending estimates 43% of our tax dollars go to pay for current and past military operations combined.
According to the Atlantic Review (as of 2000), the UK spent 2.5% of GDP, France spent 2.6%, Germany spent 1.5%, and Japan spent 1.0%.

I don't think a 1-1.5% savings is the reason for Japan and Germany's prosperity. Italy was not rebuilt largely because they were never considered a serious threat, not just because they suffered less bombing. Japan suffered minimal bombing but still had extensive rebuilding.

The main goal of rebuilding was to prevent another war, like what happened after WWI, and no one seriously thought Italy had the balls or the ability to start a war, so they were largely ignored, just like the were before, during, and after WWI, and before and during WWII.; July 23, 2008 12:48 AM
apissedant said...: Leah,
Only those that tune in and pay attention. That will still leave quite a few ignorant to the truth.; July 23, 2008 12:50 AM
apissedant said...: Stop,
Luckily I'm not running for office, and don't really plan to ever do so. Due to this, I honestly don't care if you quote me out of context. You should put Obama's statements in context, because he spoke negatively of Reagan's policies, he only spoke positively about his ability to get people to believe, have faith, and follow.; July 23, 2008 12:54 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "You can always tell when Obama is having a good day in the press because that is when stop0 shows up to post multiple comments."

Very funny.

The liberal MSM is working for BHO's campaign, which already has the most paid people in the payroll in the entire history of Presidential campaigns in America!

I have a serious question:

BHO wants a full fledged WAR in Afghanistan/Pakistan.

As the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Afghanistan, why didn't he find time to convene even a single hearing so far?

To me his present concern on Afghanistan is just another political gimmick, and not a serious policy concern!

BHO can be a gentleman if he says in simple language that the Surge has indeed worked. Therefore, we can remove the combat troops and take them to Afghanistan/Pakistan!

He must stop being a demagogue. He is spinning his web of deceitful stories of "Sunni Uprising against Al-Qaeda" etc. The fact is Iraq is calmer now because of the Surge that McCain masterminded from day one.

Unlike BHO, who opposed the Surge from day one.

BTW, he opposed the Iraq War when he was outside the US Senate, but voted for ALL War financing in the last 3.5 years once got inside the Senate! What an achievement!!!!

Shame on BHO.

Stay tuned.; July 23, 2008 1:12 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "The more stop0 posts the more I dislike McCain! LOL!"

I know that for a fact. Even if he becomes a Democrat (like Reagan once was) you will NOT vote for him! BHO has such a strange hold on you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A Bleeding Liberal.

Barack Hussein Obama Jr WILL not get more than 251 Evs, believe me.

Because, he is NOT any better than John Kerry, who had very good name recognition all across America, had plenty of money and the anti-War sentiment all over the land. In spite of all this, he lost. Because he is a Far Left Bleeding Liberal, like BHO is.

Stay tuned.; July 23, 2008 1:23 AM
apissedant said...: McCain said we would be greeted as liberators, and that the war would be over very quickly with little loss of US lives or money. He supported diverting resources from Afghanistan in order to start a war on false evidence in Iraq. He asserted that there were WMDs. He continually supported the Bush administration's war policies. These policies were unarguably failed. The result was nearly 1 million Iraqi deaths, and over 4,000 American deaths. To add to this, an American outpouring of money that will likely reach 1 trillion dollars when all is said and done.

The surge began in mid-February, and was not in full effect until June. By mid-February, before the surge had even commenced, American military deaths were already down 27% from December 2006, the month Republicans love to compare everything to. Many Iraqi militant leaders had already signed treaties and had started fighting with the coalition forces instead of against them.
The great "success" of the surge, has resulted in bringing US casualties back to the levels of the 2003/2004 period. The great success Republicans are touting, is bringing us back to a period in time when we were told the war was over and all was one. Bringing us back to the point when we had committed to rebuilding Iraq, despite the fact we had still not spent a dollar rebuilding Iraq. If this is all we were waiting for, and if this is considered victory, then why didn't we pull out our forces in 2003 or 2004, when our casualties were consistently at the current levels?; July 23, 2008 1:30 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: AJ:

I blog for a fiscal conservative who espouses A Small Efficient Truthful Govt (not bigger than 18% of GDP).

I know the Clintons - with 18% of GDP collected as Federal Tax, they had a Balanced Budget. Because of that miracle, they became my cup of tea.

BHO is a FAR LEFT Bleeding Liberal who wants a Big Govt - a large wasteful bureaucracy with a massive tax increase and inefficiency.

BTW, Yamaka lives in Houston - he said he would vote for Barack!! He very infrequently visits this Site these days. He works hard and mints gold every minute of every day, perhaps!!!!lol

I live in Dallas - I will NOT vote for BHO, unless he junks and deserts all the Far Left Liberal Ideologies, and moves to the Center and yearns for a Small Efficient Truthful Govt!

And, I blog on multiple sites, don't worry. I am everywhere!! (Someone here researched and found out that I am a Black Male...... Wow..very interesting, but false!!)

Stay tuned.; July 23, 2008 1:40 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "he only spoke positively about his ability to get people to believe, have faith, and follow."

I guess you are talking about a different Reagan and Hitler than what most people know of.

Even if you water-board me I will never ever say good things about Furor, the Third Reich!!!!!!!

Reagan, being a professional Actor, he acted well. That's all.

In his tenure, America became the Largest Debtor Nation in the world.

He masterminded and executed the Iran Contra Scandal.

But he tried to convince America he was an innocent President!

Had his friend Bill Casey lived longer, Reagan would have been indicted by Judge Walsh for the Scandal.

Alas, he died very unexpectedly with a brain tumor.

Rest was history.; July 23, 2008 1:51 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: Our next President of the United States of America...

CBS interview - Obama and Couric

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DgLQn-K2Hjw

What a great interview!!!

Anyone that thinks that Obama can't talk without a teleprompter needs to watch this video.

Anyone that thinks that Obama is not up on foreign affairs needs to watch this video.

Anyone that thinks that Obama is inexperienced needs to watch this video!

Obama '08; July 23, 2008 3:09 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: Surprise, surprise, surprise.

The Shrub administration forced the EPA to back off a ruling, apparently in order to cover up the threat from global warming:

"White House nixed Calif. emissions rule, ex-EPA official says"

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/244/story/45181.html

Actually, this type of action doesn't surprise me, and it shouldn't surprise anyone else. The only question I have is how the Reich-wing apologizers will try to spin this.

Mike; July 23, 2008 5:27 AM
Mike in Maryland said...: At a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, one of Mc"Needs A"Cain's own volunteers in New Hampshire tells McLame to get a whole new campaign staff in New Hampshire because the staff is incompetent.

"You've got to make some changes," the woman told McCain. "I've had problems with a lot of your paid staff."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/23/volunteer-tells-mccain-to-get-new-staff

If he can't get competent people to run a campaign, how will he be able to hire competent people to run the government? Take lessons from Shrub, and use examples of (ahem) 'good hiring decisions' such as Brownie and Rumsfeld?

Mike; July 23, 2008 6:23 AM
stopOBAMAnow said...: "Our next President of the United States of America..."

He has NOT been even officially Nominated at the Convention!!!!!!

What would happen if the SDs moved away from him at Denver? Because

1. He voted for FISA
2. He violated a 30 year Public Financing Plan for the GE
3. He is for Faith Based Initiatives of Dubya
4. He is flip-flopping on very many issues after the Primaries.

Remember, ANY thing can happen.

Jesse Jackson wants to castrate him. There may a revolt against BHO at the Convention.

Stay tuned.; July 23, 2008 10:10 AM
Leah Texas4Obama said...: From CNN...

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Barack Obama is not the only presidential candidate who will be front-and-center in Berlin this Thursday. Well, sort of.

In the latest effort to counter-program Obama’s tour of Europe and the Middle East, the Republican National Committee will air radio ads promoting John McCain’s candidacy in three different Berlins: Berlin, New Hampshire; Berlin, Pennsylvania; and Berlin, Wisconsin.

Not the most expensive media markets for the RNC to buy time – but certainly a clever way to gain some national press and perhaps gain some buzz in these three battleground states, while Obama delivers what is expected to be one of the biggest speeches of this campaign cycle in the European capital.; July 23, 2008 12:35 PM
Beryl said...: Leah,
Thanks for the link to the video of our next POTUS! You are so right. The LIARS who say that he needs a teleprompter will continue to do what they do best -- LIE.

At this point in history, we need someone with his leadership style. I only wish my Daddy (Army Lt. Col) was alive to see and hear Barack Obama. Everything I hear from him is what Daddy taught me to help me lead and what I teach the management team reporting to me.

Two things impressed me after seeing that video.

BIG PICTURE: We all know that Obama is a visionary leader. I loved his comments about our need for strategic approach. People are so caught up with their "microcosmic" view of the surge, they can't see the big picture that Obama is attempting to illustrate. The lack of vision is why the US is struggling right now in many areas.

JUDGMENT: The last thing a leader wants anyone to do is to "question his/her judgment". All humans will make mistakes. I laugh about some of McCain's many gaffes but I don't hold them against him. However, McCain has proven to have poor judgment evidenced by his inappropriate jokes and behavior. The US deserves someone with better judgment leading and setting the tone for our nation.; July 23, 2008 12:40 PM
Thanh Bui said...: @apissedant, stop: Thanks you for your explanations. Of course, I am here to learn.

I have another lingering question. How come the Arabs and Iranians, in general extremist or not, hate Jews so much? What is the root problem?; July 23, 2008 2:58 PM
jean said...: Ap,
NGU asked a simplistic question which basically is the foundation to the disruption (a way of putting it) in the middle east.
Please make note I am looking forward to your answer and if you could put it in a form I could easily copy it I would appreciate it.
This is a major topic for my son.
This is good practice for you;)
jean; July 23, 2008 4:14 PM
jean said...: Ap,
By the way, could this help on a paper in Ap(HEH HEH)History the answer is yes.
jean; July 23, 2008 4:18 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: ngu said...
. . .I have another lingering question. How come the Arabs and Iranians, in general extremist or not, hate Jews so much? What is the root problem?

As many of us on another forum respond to this type of question, "We are not your research monkeys. Go look up the answer yourself." There is such a thing as 'the google" (as McLame calles the site).

BTW - to help you on your research, you might look up where the Jews of Europe were accepted when they were driven out of Spain in 1492.

Mike; July 23, 2008 4:55 PM
jean said...: mike in maryland,
I do not believe you were asked.
Blow up your chest with the other monkeys at the other forums.
I am sure Ap can answer for himself.
Stop, who cares.
jean
My word for verification is "turds".
I guess there is a higher power.; July 23, 2008 5:09 PM
Thanh Bui said...: Hi Mike,

Thanks for the tips. I did look around for answers (before coming here for help). My problem is there is no simple answer available. Not anything in a neighborhood of less than a page. For example, I know why pilgrims came to America at the first place and I can answer that in one sentence that would explain enough.

Any way, thanks!; July 23, 2008 5:20 PM
jean said...: Mike,
Being a kind soul will not hurt you.
Karma.
He did not know.
I hope you are not a teacher.
I am HOPING you are just having a bad day.
jean; July 23, 2008 6:11 PM
Thanh Bui said...: Hi jean,

No need to defend for me. I appreciate for your kind heart. I am sure Mike has his reason to say so. I had probably been asking wrong question at wrong place. I thought Open Thread means that alright for me to ask. My name, ngu, in Vietnamese literately means "stupid", btw.

Thanks jean!; July 23, 2008 6:40 PM
apissedant said...: NGU,
Mike isn't referring to the pilgrims, who were Christian Calvanists expelled from England that came over a few centuries after 1492 through Holland. 1492 was Columbus, who went to Central America and was only interested in money. On that note, there is a guy who does a stand-up routine debunking the myth that he was trying to prove the world was round, as 1492 was apparently the year the globe was invented.

What Mike is referring to is something I had never heard of, but looked up at his prompting... here is a link: An example of Jews and Muslims getting along.

Fear and hatred are emotions, and emotions are not rational. I wouldn't look too hard for some specific historical incident, or some particular difference in their religions. Shiites and Sunnis are both Muslims, and they are currently having serious problems getting along. Germans and Jews and the Spanish and Jews had very serious problems getting along in history, yet they seem to peacefully coexist now.

The simplest explanation is normally the correct one. People typically fear what is different, which is why minorities are almost always the target of hate groups. Members of hate groups tend to be the least educated, the poorest, and the least hopeful members of society. Starting to see a picture? When you mix people who are very different in a hopeless situation... history shows you almost always get a violent reaction. Jews are a very good target, and have historically been the target of hate crimes by all religions and all nationalities. They are always in a minority, and somehow they have always managed to be relatively economically prosperous compared to those around them.

There have been countless publications showing how well Shiites and Sunnis got along prior to our invasion of Iraq, yet now they seem to hate each other. What changed? Economics. Here is a paper I wrote about my belief that nearly all civil unrest is precipitated by economic turmoil. You may need to have a myspace account to view it. If so, I can email it to you if you feel like reading it.

This is my personal opinion, and I believe there is plenty of historical evidence to support my argument. Many others, including those that have done countless hours of research and are true experts on the middle east would disagree with me, and give completely credible arguments for their opinions... but this is my belief, and can explain almost all violence, not just example. IMHO of course.; July 23, 2008 6:47 PM
jean said...: ngu,
When there is a place you cannot ask a question is a place you should not be.
jean; July 23, 2008 7:19 PM
jean said...: ap,
You have a star:)
jean; July 23, 2008 7:29 PM
suzihussein22 said...: McCain pledges to run a respectable campaign, correct? These videos are just in good, clean fun then-

http://www.wowowow.com/post/new-mccain-video-calls-out-media-obama-love-68863; July 23, 2008 8:13 PM
apissedant said...: OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA '08; July 23, 2008 8:35 PM
apissedant said...: I hope they spend millions of dollars airing those videos. I don't see it hurting Obama at all. It is mostly Chris Mathews, and then a slew of Republican journalists and those that were aligned with Clinton complaining about the rest of the media. So? We could just as easily compile a bunch of clips from the liberal media complaining that MSM is afraid of McCain's record and won't attack him, and a few FOX correspondents saying a bunch of McCain is so great crap. Has anyone noticed McCain started wearing a NAVY hat? I've been watching this guy for a decade now, and I've never seen him wear a NAVY ball cap. INTERESTING.

Anyways, it doesn't matter, because people naturally have a mob mentality. We act like sheep and we follow the leader, so a bunch of people saying how great Obama is plays into Obama's hands. All the Republicans will get up in arms, but the independents will wonder what is so great, pay more attention to Obama, and eventually fall in love themselves. BRING IT!; July 23, 2008 8:49 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: ngu said...
. . .My problem is there is no simple answer available. Not anything in a neighborhood of less than a page.

And that is exactly why I said do the research.

There IS no simple answer. People who have studied the situation for decades come up with all kinds of different answers to the problem.

With such a complicated situation, you will NEVER get a 'less than a page' answer to the question "Why?".

As an example that is much less complicated - What was the root cause of World War II?

Some would say Hitler's policies and ambitions.

Some would say the Versailles Treaty.

Some would say the ambitions of Kaiser Wilhelm to make Germany an empire during the late 19th/early 20th century.

Some would say the Franco-Prussian Wars.

Some would say the civil unrest in Germany in the 1830s to 1870s, when Communism was a powerful force (yes, decades before it was even known about in Russia).

Some would say Napoleon and his wars.

Some would say the Protestant split from the Catholic Church.

All were a factor, but the experts disagree on how much emphasis to give to each factor. So the question each person must answer is which expert to listen to.

Each reason cannot be answered in less than a page. And the farther you go back, the more information you have to include to respond to the question, thus the longer the answer.

Jean - Simplistic answers to complicated questions (even if the wording of the question is simplistic) does no one any good. In fact, simplistic answers to complicated questions is how Shrub, Cheney and the rest of the Neo-cons have caused so many more problems than they have answered.

History can rarely be answered by a simple, one line answer. Historical facts can sometimes be answered in one word (When were the Jews expelled from Spain? - 1492). But WHY were they expelled? That's a much more complicated answer that has many root causes that can't be explained in one or two sentences.

Another example, Saddam Hussein was Sunni Muslim. Al-qaida is comprised of radical Sunni Muslims. Ergo, get rid of Saddam Hussein and get rid of Al-qaida, right? That seems to have been the reasoning of the Shrub administration. But in reality, that was not the case, and look at what we got into in Iraq.

And to answer your other question - no, I'm not a history teacher in a school, but I have been a student of history for decades. And the more I learn about history, the more I appreciate how history is not as simplistic as what happened when, but what caused this to happen that influenced or caused something to happen, and what was the prior causal event, and what was prior to that, and what was prior to that, etc. What parallel events had influence or causal events in a historical era? What happened in previous eras to lead up to something happening in a later ear?

Another example - Why did Rome fall? Was it the lead in the water from the lining of the aqueducts? Was it too many non-Romans vastly outnumbering the Romans? Was it the treatment of the citizen non-Romans as 3rd-class citizens? Was it the rise of Christianity? Was it the Goths? Was it the removing of the capital to Constantinople?

And speaking of Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire - when did that empire begin? With the foundation of Rome? When the capital was moved from Rome to Constantinople? When the Western Empire fell? Scholars differ, but all can give reasoned reasons for their viewpoint.

That's why I don't try to give simplistic answers to seemingly simple questions about history, especially when the question, can be extremely complicated.

Mike; July 23, 2008 8:59 PM
Beryl said...: I agree, apiss.

Many Obama supporters will be offended by the ads and run even further away from McCain. It is like the comments that were made during the Primaries about people being duped or brainwashed. It is insulting and doesn't make the accuser look good.

What I don't understand is how McLame doesn't have as high unfavorable ratings as he should. He has aligned himself with Shrub and he also has his own baggage. I really can't stomach looking at him anymore.

Maybe that is why the MSM doesn't play much on him -- their ratings plummet.; July 23, 2008 9:00 PM
apissedant said...: Mike,
I agree for the most part, except for your definition of simple. I don't believe simple means short. I believe simple means easy to understand, and explains nearly everything. The basic fear of the unknown is understood and experienced by all. This makes it simple. The basic concept that poverty and a lack of hope push people to make illogical and terrible choices is understood and experienced by everyone who has ever had the chips stacked against them. This makes it simple.

The root causes of what changed and why is much more difficult. The discussion of how to go about fixing these problems is much more complex. An "answer" doesn't have to fix everything, or explain all the details of exactly how it came to be, but it can still be an answer.

You read the Washington Post, and they ran a front page story about Jimmy Carter and his latest trip to the middle east. He gave a VERY SIMPLE 1 SENTENCE ANSWER. It was correct, but it didn't answer EVERYTHING. It was very much in line with my statements and my paper. I was nearly done with the paper when he said the statement, and I ended the paper with his explanation.

Here is what Carter had to say:
"if you don't give people hope that their plight will be alleviated, then violence is almost inevitable"; July 23, 2008 9:19 PM
jean said...: Mike,
I agree. The question ngu asked is one of the most complex that has yet to be answered to an amiable end.
So the answer has not been given in any context that is acceptable to all.
It was just a question.
You did not sound very nice in your response and I do apologize if this interpretation is incorrect.

Ap,
Your definition of simple I admire.
Many ways to go.
I think your definition of simple means universally understood through your definition.
Complicating things could mean misinterpretation which no author wants.
Maybe I am wrong.
jean; July 23, 2008 9:35 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: AP,

Most people understand the concept of 'simple'. They also think that all, or at least most, questions can be answered with a simple response. Some questions can be answered in a simplistic manner, but that does not mean that the question has been answered in any shape or form.

A hallmark of trolls is to ask what seem to be simple questions. Then when someone tries to respond to the question, especially responding in a simplistic manner to a complex question, the troll takes them down blind alleys, diverting them onto tangential paths that divert onto even more tangential paths, and thus are completely taken off the subject of the original question.

Or, if they make a simple error, or interprets an event or situation differently than what the troll believes is 'the one and true answer', the respondent is ridiculed for making an error or interpreting differently.

If people haven't noticed, 'ngu' comes in and asks a question, then disappears for a while, then comes back in and asks another question. In other words, no interaction, just trying to stir up problems within the group. That is a classic definition and demonstration of a troll.

I will not respond to such a poster with a simple or simplistic response unless and until they show themselves to NOT be a troll. So far, 'ngu' has not shown anything but troll-like tendencies, and as a result, I will treat him/her/it as a troll unless 'ngu' demonstrates he/she/it is not a troll.

Mike; July 23, 2008 10:11 PM
apissedant said...: Mike,
Completely understand, and I have my reservations as well. I'm more apt to give the benefit of the doubt and give the answer I believe from what facts I know. It may not be a "simple" answer, but it will be the answer I believe is true. If they ask for a page or less, I may not comply if I don't feel a page will answer it. Just a difference in method to reach the same outcome I guess.; July 23, 2008 10:36 PM
apissedant said...: Mike,
How do you manage to still read the Washington Post? I've been reading them since I lived in Maryland, but I'm finding it more and more difficult. I'm seeing a dramatic and infuriating shift to the right, and a lack of real reporting and real news, instead shifting to a style of he said, she said. Their little section "RIGHT MATTERS" is the most disturbing section of all. What passes at news over there has dramatically changed.; July 23, 2008 10:57 PM
Thanh Bui said...: Hi Mike,

I am sorry that I have bothered you. The fact is that, as I've said , my English is very poor that composing a good sentence would take a lot of effort. All I want is learning and I believe people here are kind scholars. I made a mistake by posting a 'stupid' question. Even that I have contribute somewhat, don't you see? Besides the point that I've learn new thing, because of my stupid question Ap has discovered some fact that he said he's never known before; jean would have a simple answer for her kid; and maybe many more people who would like to know but afraid to ask (because they know that was a stupid question).

I'd better shut my mouth from now on and just read.

Thanks everyone,
--ngungo; July 23, 2008 11:06 PM
jean said...: Ap,
Thanks for the suggestion but watching Wife Swap is not on the agenda.
I am watching Ghost Hunters International. It is kinda fun.
I love old castles.
Have a good night.

ngu,
Sorry for the negative stuff.
jean; July 23, 2008 11:23 PM
apissedant said...: ngu,
Keep posting and don't let any one person discourage you. If you are for real, Mike will eventually see it and accept you more warmly. If not, you'll disappear and no harm no foul.; July 23, 2008 11:32 PM
apissedant said...: oh, and your question wasn't stupid... just too complex to give an appropriate answer in a short space, and not agreed upon by the "experts".; July 23, 2008 11:34 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: ngu,

If you want a 'one page or less' answer to a question, it should be a question that can be answered in one page or less. If you had done ANY research on the subject of the Arab-Israeli conflict, you would already have known that it's an extremely complex situation. Otherwise, the conflict wouldn't be dragging on after all these decades.

You state that you are Vietnamese. That means you should have some concept of SE Asian history. Would you be able to tell me, in one page or less, why the Vietnamese and Chinese don't get along? I wouldn't want a simplistic answer, but the reasons why they have had several wars over the centuries.

See what I mean about simple vs. simplistic answers? One is short, but it doesn't answer the question so that a person can understand the reason(s) for the situation. The other is most likely longer, but more fully explains the complexity of the issue.

Your question about the Arab-Israeli conflict is similar to a question about the causes of discrimination against African Americans (in particular), non-Western Europeans, Asians, etc., in the US, and the effects of that discrimination. It can, simplistically, be answered in one page or less, but even a simple answer that addresses the important points of that discrimination would take several pages. In fact, entire multi-volume series of studies have been written on the causes and effects of discrimination in the US, some on just a specific group of people - African Americans, Native Americans, Italians, Poles, Russians, SE Europeans, Asians, etc.

Mike; July 24, 2008 1:05 AM
Thanh Bui said...: Yes Mike,

I do have some concept, and opinion, about SE Asia conflicts. And yes Mike, I do have a one sentence answer, in my opinion, for the root cause whether or not my answer is correct or acceptable. It goes like this: "Han race through out history has always tried to concur and dominate the world whether or not they have the capacity. The world to them is 'everything under the heaven' and their emperor is 'the son of the heaven'".

I can see that you diverse your intention here. First, you accused me of a lazy ass who does not bother to google for my question. In a hidden sense, you accused me of posing question that takes side of the Jews by giving me hint on "The Spanish Expulsion, 1492" where the Jews had been embraced by Muslims. Then you made argument about "no simple answers to simplistic but complex question."

You make a good politician, Mike.; July 24, 2008 10:49 AM
Emit R Detsaw said...: Yup, Emit is still around, just hasn't been here for a few days. ;o)

Thought I would share some interesting items from a trip I took this week. Drove from San Antonio to Kansas to see my family. That meant driving through 3 RED States (Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas). During the 22 hours of driving, I only saw Obama bumper stickers and yard signs (and one Clinton bumper sticker), but nothing for McCain, the Republicans, or any of the 3rd party candidates. I know it is a ways to November yet, but found it interesting to see the Obama items out.

Then I get to my parents house, and I bring up the topic of politics. It is a subject that was never discussed, but my parents, sister, and all offshoots of relatives are Republicans. In fact, they have never voted for a Democrat except to vote for Sibelius for re-election. Anyway, all of them said that they were looking to vote for Obama except for my Sister. She stated that she couldn't vote for someone that was pro choice on abortion (she is highly religious). Well, after a few rounds of discussion, she also knows that she can't vote for McCain. I'll take that as a Win. ;o)

Anyway, from what I saw on the trip, don't be surprised if you don't see a whole lot of red turning blue this fall.; July 24, 2008 11:21 AM
Beryl said...: Interesting update, Emit. I'd love to take on your sister. I'm against abortions too (as is Obama) but think they should remain legal for medical reasons. She can support liars and killing based on lies? That is what she is supporting if she support McCain.; July 24, 2008 11:53 AM
apissedant said...: Beryl,
I agree again. You know, you are the most rational 40 year old balding Asian man wearing a wife beater while dripping Raman Noodles on your ample belly that I have ever met. ;); July 24, 2008 12:01 PM
Richard said...: Certainly a comprehensive answer to gnu's question is not possible on this forum, but I disagree that a discussion of the issue is not valuable. Nor do I think that ngu acted improperly in posing a question, just because it has no easy answer.

Because I think it is an important and valuable question, I will respond in brief. I believe the issues in the middle east are the result of long-standing struggles over the territory of Israel-Palestine, a territory which is holy to Jews, Muslims, and Christians. This area is the ancestral homeland of the Jews, who believe that the land was promised to them by God himself. During the Roman Empire, however, Jews became scattered throughout Europe and lost control of the area. For centuries this territory was controlled by Muslims, who held it against repeated invasions by European powers (the Crusades).

In the past century or so, western powers have gained increasing influence over the middle east. Both Britain and the U.S. have increasingly meddled in middle eastern affairs, motivated largely by a desire to create a stable source of oil for their industries. During this same period, with support from Britain and the U.S., hundreds of thousands of European and American Jews began to re-settle in Palestine, their ancient homeland. This migration accelerated in the wake of WWII and the holocaust, which prompted many to believe in the necessity of a Jewish state.

Not surprisingly, the Palestinian inhabitants of the area objected to the creation of a Jewish state in territory they had inhabited for centuries. The result was armed conflict, during which tens of thousands of Palestinians were forced from their homes into exile.

So this is the situation: Israel is a nation carved out of Muslim-controlled territory in a place which is very holy to Muslims with the support of European powers and America and at the expense of tens of thousands of fellow Muslims. Israel's very existence is therefore a source of embarrassment and great anger for middle-eastern Muslims, and the most prominent reminder of western influence in what they still consider their lands.

This is, of course, only a broad outline of thousands of years of history. It is not intended to be a comprehensive answer, and as Mike and others have said there are many other factors which deserve consideration, and people can justly argue over what the most important events or factors are. Perhaps my analysis places too much emphasis on geopolitics and historical factors. I'd be interested to hear anyone else's opinions.; July 24, 2008 12:23 PM
apissedant said...: vtslayer,
I agree for the most part, but I think the land issue has more to do with economics than religion. As you yourself said, that is the holy land of Christians too, yet we're not locked in a blood war for it.; July 24, 2008 1:13 PM
jean said...: Watched Obama on CNN Live.
Very nice speech.
He is well liked.
The hard copy should be out any minute.
jean; July 24, 2008 1:58 PM
jean said...: A light note for the day.
Envisioning McCain with the Dalai Lama.
Just can't see it.
jean; July 24, 2008 2:03 PM
Beryl said...: Jean,
I so agree. That speech was electrifying. The audience seemed to receive the message well and there were lots of US flags waving. It will be nice for the US to be respected and welcomed across the world again.; July 24, 2008 2:52 PM
jean said...: beryl,
They were waiving AMERICAN FLAGS.
Can't remember seeing that many outside of the US for quite a while.
You know.
I think McCain is trying to balance the publicity with his meeting with the Dalai Lama.
I just can't stop grinning and shaking my head when i envision it.
Do you think he will try to get one of the Beatles to join him LOL.
I know it is important but it just doesn't look right heh heh.
jean; July 24, 2008 3:00 PM
Mike in Maryland said...: vtslayer said...
Certainly a comprehensive answer to gnu's question is not possible on this forum, but I disagree that a discussion of the issue is not valuable.

vtslayer,

First, how about putting up a profile?

Second, exactly where did I state that "a discussion of the issue is not valuable"?

I took issue with gnu's comment, or more like 'demand' that he/she wanted a 'one page or less' summary.

As I've stated many times, I've studied history for decades. But even if a person does a cursory review of the Arab-Israeli conflict, they will be able to determine that this conflict has many causes, and therefore cannot be explained in 'one page or less'.

As a student of history, I particularly dislike people who don't do at least a quick review of a subject before asking questions. And since anyone who uses a computer has access to Google or other search engines, the lack of at least a minimal amount of research is especially galling to me.

Now if you would be so kind as to research where I stated that "a discussion of the issue is not valuable". Hint - you won't find it. I told ngu to go do some basic research on the subject. I also commented that it couldn't be boiled down to a 'one page or less' answer. I did NOT state "a discussion of the issue is not valuable". I would NEVER tell that to anyone when discussing some aspect of history.

Or maybe you should bone up on your reading comprehension, and not put words in other people's mouths.

Mike; July 24, 2008 4:37 PM
Beryl said...: After a few years working with others in the Americas: Brazil, Argentina, and Canada, I'm getting out of the habit of saying "American" when I'm referring to the United States of America. The other "Americans" look at us as being arrogant and that just slows down work efforts.

I guess I could have said "USA Flags" instead of "US Flags".; July 24, 2008 4:47 PM
apissedant said...: USA flags sound stupid.... I say stick with US flags.; July 24, 2008 5:13 PM
jean said...: ap,
I just sent something.
Check it out.
Nothing to lose.
jean; July 24, 2008 5:28 PM
Thanh Bui said...: I like your one page version, stop. But that does not explain why you hate Obama so much. :) You know I am kidding, right? Anyway I was crying listening to Obama's speech today.; July 24, 2008 8:46 PM
apissedant said...: Why were you crying?; July 24, 2008 8:48 PM
Thanh Bui said...: I don't know!
You have seen the movie Scent of a Woman, haven't you. I remember that I had the same feelings as watching Colonel Slate (Al Pacino) gives speech. I was crying then too.; July 24, 2008 9:00 PM
jean said...: ngu.
Perhaps a person who actually has feeling, hope and belief in what they are doing is not seen that often.
To actually put that combination into a purpose with knowledge that is beneficial is a rarity.
To take this combination and act on it with success can scare a lot of people.
It gives you goosebumps.
That weird feeling you get before you think you are going to cry.
The scared and sad part is you don't know what people will do.
Levity;)
Scent of a Woman is a great movie.
jean; July 24, 2008 9:20 PM
Beryl said...: I cried too and know why. I felt "proud" (in a good way) that a US citizen represented our country so well on foreign soil. The US flag waving gave me hope that we will be welcomed around the globe again.

I also cried because frankly, I don't know if I'll want to remain here under McCain. Life is short and I simply don't want to face another 4 years of mendacity in the Executive Branch of our government.; July 24, 2008 9:25 PM
jean said...: beryl,
I refer to that as the scared part.
I don't like that feeling.
Levity.
Move forward and grow.
Scared is always part of that.
Gonna finish dinner.
It has a beginning,middle and end.
A lot of things don't have that.
jean; July 24, 2008 9:32 PM
jean said...: beryl,
I forgot to add satisfaction.
That is hard to find also;)
jean; July 24, 2008 9:34 PM
suzihussein22 said...: I feel a lot of hope reading how positively Obama was received today.; July 24, 2008 9:34 PM
Thanh Bui said...: stop: efforts of individuals with the Enlightened Self Interest to soar to higher level of achievement and prosperity;

I think he himself is perfect example of what you said. Don't you think?

off topic: my poor English prevents me to respond you every point. It is too long to write. But I will try harder as time comes.; July 24, 2008 11:08 PM
Beryl said...: Aunt Jean,
I so disagree with you. AAs are still discriminated against in this country. Hate crimes in Los Angeles are at a five year high and they are disproportionately against AAs:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jiCYFjVwQeFwkeHYaoBqXN7Z76sAD924HENG0

Those of African descent are discriminated against on every continent including in many African countries. Heck, the Chinese recently issued a decree to ban black people in preparation for Games:
http://shanghaiist.com/2008/07/18/the_racist_games.php

This is not to say that other groups do not also suffer discrimination. In particular, the Jewish people are still discriminated against everywhere.

Muslims suffer discrimination in most European nations.
http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2008/06/oic-muslims-in-europe-face-greater.html

Comparing the suffering of ethnic groups is pointless, futile, and beneath rational people. Time is better spent seeking ways to ensure fairness for everyone.; July 25, 2008 1:10 AM
apissedant said...: Stop,
I normally make it a point to ignore your insane rants, but you just said something ridiculously offensive.

Why would you assume Barack Obama made it to Columbia on affirmative action? He EXCELLED at his previous school, and transfers between schools is quite easy. He was the President of the Law Review, not a small accomplishment at Harvard. Do not show yourself to be a racist as well as a homophobic. It really doesn't look too attractive. Both he and his wife have more than proven themselves to be worthy of every institution they have attended, and every job they have held. Do not try to diminish his accomplishments because he is black. He received scholarships everywhere he attended, and worked to pay living expenses. He is an admirable man, whether you agree with his positions or opinions is a whole different topic.

Do you realize that you get as many points for being the family member of an alumni as you do for being a minority? Actually, you quite often get more, because if there are enough qualified minorities, then you get nothing, but alumnis always get an advantage. Not only this, but they have the best private school educations and tutors that money can buy. It is no secret that George W. Bush's SAT scores and High School grades were not even close to Ivy League caliber, yet he still got accepted, did he not? His grandfather had been a Congressman, his father was a Congressman, and his father was an alumni. So, despite not meeting the academic criteria, he still magically made it in... can you say wealthy affirmative action?

I am in the process of applying to graduate school, and applied to undergraduate school just two and a half short years ago. Every application asks if I have a family member that attended, why do you think that is? What do you think they use that for? If you want to complain about unqualified people gaining acceptance and stealing spots from those of us that deserve them, then complain about the wealthy kids with alumni parents. These kids had every advantage and still did not meet the standards. These kids most definitely don't deserve a break.

On the other hand, inner city kids with single mothers that didn't graduate high school, attending the worst schools in the country, with entire communities making them feel as college isn't even an option... What chance do those kids have? If those kids are still able to succeed in school and do well on the SAT, doesn't that say a lot? Shouldn't they be spotted a few points, because it is obvious that given the opportunity, they could have easily competed with us suburban kids?

In any case, this is irrelevant, as Barack Obama was not an affirmative action case, and G.W. Bush most definitely was.

One thing I can say is that affirmative action based solely on race is unfortunate, but it is the best we have come up with at this point, and it is most definitely better than nothing. I hope some day we'll be able to switch affirmative action to a socio-ecomoic/community based program instead of one that focuses on race. This will help rural and suburban kids of all races that are suffering from a lack of opportunities.; July 25, 2008 1:25 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Beryl

I'm not talking about what happens in other countries only the USA. I have not seen it myself. How do you explain why a school system has to keep their quota of AA's even if they can't pass the subject that they teach. Please don't tell me that it isn't true I know better I worked for the school system for 6 years. I drove a school bus in Tenn. for alittle extra cash so to make a long story short I wasn't rehired because they discriminated against me. I even had police and 3 dozen parents wanting me back to no avail. I try to go thru this gov. office to file discrimation. Do you know what they told me. Sorry because you are not AA we can't help you. There is several things that I can tell you about so please don't tell me about how hard they have it. They have it in most states a lot better than white woman.Do I believe that everyone should be treated equal regardless of their race, gender, or what ever YES. But that is the whole problem everyone is trying to make up for what happened years and years ago.That is what people get so angry about.You can't change what happened but you should learn from it. Well I don't think anyone has learnt a darn thing because they go overboard and discrimate against whites now. So years from now are they going to say poor whites they have been discrimated against for years. It a cycle that needs to be broken and everyone treated as americans not BLACK, WHITE, ASIAN, INDIAN,are anything else just american's if you work hard you will have something but if you choose to sit on your butt and have nothing that is your choise. Jean; July 25, 2008 1:43 AM
apissedant said...: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010326/conley

Terrific article at The Nation talking about race and economics. It found that white kids and black kids born into the same socioeconomic status have the same odds of success.

Basically, this is a simple and obvious translation. If you're born poor, you're likely to die poor. If you're born rich, you're likely to die rich. A good education is an expensive item, and those with wealth can better afford this as well. Poverty is a nasty cycle that will likely continue generation to generation, and black people all started with no education and no money. This means that their children are likely to start with no education and no money... the trend continues until someone gets lucky and breaks the cycle. From this point on, their descendants are given more opportunities and are able to prosper. This explains my earlier explanation that I believe socioeconomic and community based affirmative action would be the most fair, and the most helpful for our society as a whole. The largest benefactors would still be minorities, but some whites with few chances would be given a few more, and a few minorities with many opportunities would lose the extra boost that is not necessary. I believe this should be accompanied with removing the practice of promoting legacies.; July 25, 2008 1:47 AM
apissedant said...: Aunt Jean,
I believe affirmative action should stop at the workforce, but it is most definitely needed and helpful in schools. Refer to my above explanations.

As far as the workforce is concerned, I believe the purpose of a business is to make money, and they should be able to hire the employees that benefit the business the most. However, under this same principle, women who plan to raise a family would get a back seat. The fact is that they will take pregnancy leave, and they are more likely than their male counterparts to take time off or refuse overtime in order to take care of their children. For this reason, this same company, in an effort to increase their profit, would hire either a career oriented woman or a man before they hired a woman who wanted or had a family. They would also do the same thing with their promotions. How would you feel about that? This practice isn't currently allowed, and I think you would be hard pressed to find women who would accept this change. Isn't that a form of affirmative action? Hiring someone who will most likely make your company less money because you're not able to discriminate based on sex (even though you're actually discriminating based on motherhood and not sex)?

Also, I know black people that were refused a job because they were black. There is a locally owned technician company nearby me, and I was a tech for another company that kept running into the owner. He offered me a job interview, so I went by the shop. It was all white boys, with the exception of one white woman who worked the phones. He repeatedly talked about how he would never hire a black and how terrible black people were. This is anecdotal, just like your story, so it in no way proves widespread racism. This is most definitely not the only time I confronted it though, as I had problems while working in northern Virginia and Maryland with black coworkers and redneck white owners. I spent a lot of time defending my coworkers because I knew their work and I knew the racist site owners. I also remember racism when my 99.9% white high school played Pontiac Central, and plenty of racism while I was in the Navy.

There is most definitely still a good old boy network in this nation, and the good old boy network is all white, all male, and all heterosexual. If you do not fit into this mold, you will likely experience discrimination at one point or another, whether you realize it or not.; July 25, 2008 1:59 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Apissedant

all they had to do was call that office I was talking about in an earlier post and they would have been more than willing to help them.I'm sorry I have been in this world just alittle longer than you [no pun intended]I believe what you said but I also have seen a heck of lot of discrimination against whites. Jean; July 25, 2008 2:14 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Apissedant

All I'm saying is : If you have 2 students [1 aa and 1 white] their grades are about the same and their house income was about the same. It should be based then on first come first served but it's not that AA will get the help from the gov. first because he is AA and I'm sorry you can sit their and say I'm wrong but THAT IS WRONG!!! I don't care how you look at it what happened many years ago I really don't give a crap it's not right!!!.When People realize that and quit doing this country will become united. Jean; July 25, 2008 2:26 AM
Aunt Jean said...: Apissedant

Do they not cry, bleed and hurt like white people so why are they treated better? Or at least in a lot of states. Are we not all Americans here [or at least we should be]. Jean; July 25, 2008 2:30 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 3201 – 3400 of 4188 Newer› Newest»

Welcome to Democratic Convention Watch

Blog Archive

Democratic Convention 2008

Democratic National Convention History

Denver & Colorado Democrats

DCW in the News

Friends of DCW

2008 Republican National Convention

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Open Thread

4188 comments:

Tags