The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Time, money and sanity!

Oh, just go to disneyland already. Who would want to talk politics when Mr Toad's awaits? ;)

[Nephythys]

Oh, just go to disneyland already. Who would want to talk politics when Mr Toad's awaits? ;)


I get to go on DL's Space Mtn for the first time since 2001- squeee!

Yeah- who cares about politics......I'm going to DISNEYLAND!:D

[SacTown Chronic]

Kill the babies any way you can?!? I think you might have Tourette's Syndrome in your fingers, Neph.


As for govt spending, chew on this:

Link (http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/charts_C/c6.cfm)

[Nephythys]

Kill the babies any way you can?!? I think you might have Tourette's Syndrome in your fingers, Neph.


As for govt spending, chew on this:

Link (http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/charts_C/c6.cfm)


Um- no. That was polite given how I feel about it.

Yes- kill them anyway you can. Remove parental notification and ALL possible barriers to killing your unborn child. Suuurree. That's what America is demanding, just longing for. Not only that- but those of you who loathe the slaughter of abortion- guess what boys and girls- we are going to take your tax dollars and make it clear- stick it in your face even- that we are using YOUR money to pay for those abortions.

I can hear these blood soaked monsters laughing with glee.

I don't play nice about this issue- which is not based on faith, religion or anything else other than what I consider basic common sense.

And you gave me that link why? To prove to me that gov't spending has gotten worse.

DOH!

It's one of the reasons I have less respect for Bush daily- and for the so called conservatives in congress. Those asses are spending money on the most outragous BS- and it is not a party thing. I am as angry at my party for spending and bloating the gov't as I would be dems.

So what?

[SacTown Chronic]

So nothing. You posted some Dem ideas that offend you fiscally and I wanted to make sure you were aware of who is currently pissing away your tax dollars. Glad to know you already know.



Now, who's killing babies any way they can?

[Nephythys]

So nothing. You posted some Dem ideas that offend you fiscally and I wanted to make sure you were aware of who is currently pissing away your tax dollars. Glad to know you already know.



Now, who's killing babies any way they can?


Oh hell yes- I know. Sick of 'em- but the thing is, I don't trust the dems as far as I can throw them- on any issue.


Taxpayer Funded Abortions & Elimination of all Restrictions on Abortion, Including Parental Notice - H.R. 5151: Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and 66 Democratic cosponsors want to overturn even minimal restrictions on abortion such as parental notice requirements. The bill would also require taxpayer funding of abortions through the various federal health care programs. John Conyers, the would-be Chairman of Judiciary Committee which has jurisdiction over the bill, is an original cosponsor.


These brainiacs in congress seem to think that this is what we need-

The feds should not be paying for abortions. Or many other things they seem to think they need to do-

bah!

Ya know- I'm going to Disneyland tomorrow. I don't want to spend my afternoon and evening on abortion.

[JWBear]

...And you gave me that link why? To prove to me that gov't spending has gotten worse.

DOH!

It's one of the reasons I have less respect for Bush daily- and for the so called conservatives in congress. Those asses are spending money on the most outragous BS- and it is not a party thing. I am as angry at my party for spending and bloating the gov't as I would be dems.

So what?
You surprise me Nephy! I was expecting you to tell us all how the spending is Clinton's fault! ;) :evil:

[Nephythys]

You surprise me Nephy! I was expecting you to tell us all how the spending is Clinton's fault! ;) :evil:


naw- they are all guilty. Ticks me off regularly.

The vote themselves raises and then think they are being SO generous when they offer to raise minimum wage.
They babble on about how great public schools are and send their kids to private hoity toity schools- and most of the money going to schools is still being wasted.
They attach pork projects to everything to try to look good to their constiuents- while they try to put their names on things.

Adding totally odd amendments to things just to get their hands on OUR money.

Loathsome trogs- all of 'em- and NO ONE reigns them in. NO ONE- especially the one guy who should.

It's called veto power! Use it!:mad:

[SacTown Chronic]

Sign Neph up for anarchy!

[Nephythys]

heehee-;)

[Strangler Lewis]

The Liberal To Do List If They Win

Department of Peace and Nonviolence Act — H.R. 3760: Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and 74 Democratic cosponsors propose a new “Department of Peace and Nonviolence” as well as “National Peace Day.” Cosponsors include three would-be Democratic Chairmen: John Conyers (Judiciary), George Miller (Education and the Workforce), and Charlie Rangel (Ways and Means).

Gas Stamps — H.R. 3712: Jim McDermott (D-WA) and eight Democratic cosponsors want a “Gas Stamps” program similar to the Food Stamps program to subsidize the gasoline purchases of qualified individuals.

Less Jail Time for Selling Crack Cocaine - H.R. 2456: Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and 23 Democratic cosponsors want to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for possessing, importing, and distributing crack cocaine. John Conyers, the would-be Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over the bill, is a cosponsor.

Voting Rights for Criminals - H.R. 1300: John Conyers (D-MI) and 32 Democratic cosponsors, and H.R. 663: Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and 28 Democratic cosponsors would let convicted felons vote. Rep. John Conyers is the would-be Democratic Chairman of the Judiciary Committee which would consider this legislation.

Expand Medicare to Include Diapers — H.R. 1052: Barney Frank (D-MA) supports Medicare coverage of adult diapers. Barney Frank is the would-be Chairman of the Financial Services Committee.

Nationalized Health Care - H.R. 4683: John Dingell (D-MI) and 18 Democratic cosponsors want to expand Medicare to cover all Americans. John Dingell is the would-be Democratic Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee who along with cosponsors Charlie Rangel, would-be Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, and Henry Waxman, would-be Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, would have jurisdiction over the proposal.

Federal Regulation of Restaurant Menus — H.R. 5563: Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and 25 Democratic cosponsors authorize federal regulation of the contents of restaurant menus.

Taxpayer Funded Abortions & Elimination of all Restrictions on Abortion, Including Parental Notice - H.R. 5151: Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and 66 Democratic cosponsors want to overturn even minimal restrictions on abortion such as parental notice requirements. The bill would also require taxpayer funding of abortions through the various federal health care programs. John Conyers, the would-be Chairman of Judiciary Committee which has jurisdiction over the bill, is an original cosponsor.

(kill the babies- any way you can- but don't put drug dealers in jail)

Bill of Welfare Rights — H.J. Res. 29-35: Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL) proposes a Soviet-style “Bill of Welfare Rights,” enshrining the rights of full employment, public education, national healthcare, public housing, abortion, progressive taxation, and union membership. On some these measures, Rep. Jackson is joined by up to 35 Democratic cosponsors, including would-be Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers.

Link (http://timchapmanblog.com/2006/10/19/the-liberals-are-coming-to-town-oh-my/)

Bleaugh-bloat, more absconding of our money to the gov't....whoopee.:rolleyes:

I agree with Bear that most of these are empty partisan silliness and, yes, Republicans do it, too. Since you seem to agree, you should not have titled your post as you did. There are, however, some serious issues here.

Right now, the statutory mandatory minimum for 50 grams of not particularly pure cocaine base is ten years. You have to be working 5 kilos of powder to get ten years. The crack/powder disparity and its obvious racial implications have come under substantial criticism. The United States Sentencing Commission recommended that it be eliminated, but Congress did not respond. Now that the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines are merely advisory, there is basically a return to discretionary sentencing. Many federal criminal laws have maximums but do not have mandatory minimums. The federal drug laws, which imprison people for far longer than most state laws do, have long been criticized. In short, there is nothing remarkable or out of the blue about this proposal.

National health care is a serious issue. Other countries do it well, but probably nothing will come of this.

As I recall, diapers are expensive. Diapers for big people probably even more so.

[Alex]

Less Jail Time for Selling Crack Cocaine - H.R. 2456: Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and 23 Democratic cosponsors want to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for possessing, importing, and distributing crack cocaine. John Conyers, the would-be Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over the bill, is a cosponsor.

I fully support this. Of course, I don't think crack cocaine should be illegal in the first place. But this is a move in the right direction.

Independent of the "drug war" mandatory sentenzing is almost always a horrible idea and should be resisted wherever possible.

Voting Rights for Criminals - H.R. 1300: John Conyers (D-MI) and 32 Democratic cosponsors, and H.R. 663: Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and 28 Democratic cosponsors would let convicted felons vote. Rep. John Conyers is the would-be Democratic Chairman of the Judiciary Committee which would consider this legislation.

I support this as well.

Expand Medicare to Include Diapers — H.R. 1052: Barney Frank (D-MA) supports Medicare coverage of adult diapers. Barney Frank is the would-be Chairman of the Financial Services Committee.

If Medicaire is going to exist, this seems a reasonable thing for it to cover but I can't say that I'm familiar with what Medicaire covers in the way of ameliorative devices.

Nationalized Health Care - H.R. 4683: John Dingell (D-MI) and 18 Democratic cosponsors want to expand Medicare to cover all Americans. John Dingell is the would-be Democratic Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee who along with cosponsors Charlie Rangel, would-be Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, and Henry Waxman, would-be Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, would have jurisdiction over the proposal.

I oppose this if participation is mandatory and really don't support Dingell's plan. But mandating insurance through employment is an even stupider system so if universal coverage is going to be a societal goal then this is a move in the right direction as a method for achieving it. I just disagree with the goal.

Taxpayer Funded Abortions & Elimination of all Restrictions on Abortion, Including Parental Notice - H.R. 5151: Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and 66 Democratic cosponsors want to overturn even minimal restrictions on abortion such as parental notice requirements. The bill would also require taxpayer funding of abortions through the various federal health care programs. John Conyers, the would-be Chairman of Judiciary Committee which has jurisdiction over the bill, is an original cosponsor.

As long as abortion is legal I see no reason it shouldn't be covered by some of the federal health care programs. And abortion should be legal.

I do support restrictions on access to abortion by minors, so long as there are judicial escape routes for extreme situations.

(kill the babies- any way you can- but don't put drug dealers in jail)

Kill the fetuses, if you want. And drug dealing shouldn't be a crime.



So, some good ideas in there. Some bad ones.

And if Democrats win in 2006, how many of those bills will pass with enough support to overcome the inevitable veto? If that happens, you should have two years of the spending nirvana you want. Dems won't pass the president's spending and he won't sign theirs. Everybody wins.

[Nephythys]

I agree with Bear that most of these are empty partisan silliness and, yes, Republicans do it, too. Since you seem to agree, you should not have titled your post as you did. There are, however, some serious issues here.


That was not the point of my post to JW-

I titled my post based on the articles title- not my words.

Thanks-

[CoasterMatt]

I wonder how many ex-senators would be allowed to vote if that voting rights bill passes? :)

[Alex]

All of them.

[€uroMeinke]

Sign Neph up for anarchy!

You know, I'd love to - but it kinda goes against the whole principle. Much better to remain affiliated with a party and act as the monkey wrench within

[innerSpaceman]

The devil would be in the details, but on the face of them ... I am in favor of every single one of those so-called Crackpot Democratic Bill Proposals.

[JWBear]

The devil would be in the details, but on the face of them ... I am in favor of every single one of those so-called Crackpot Democratic Bill Proposals.
Even the menu one??

[innerSpaceman]

Yes, even that. I'm totally for transparent food content and origin information. Everywhere food is sold. Nutrition, ingredients, sources, etc. What's wrong with letting consumers know what they are putting inside their bodies? And why let such VITAL health information be optional, when consumers can hardly count on businesses to look after the welfare of their customers?

[Alex]

The big problem with menu regulation is that the testing necessary for detailed nutritional information is expensive. It also precludes frequent menu changes as that would require relabelling, and requires absolute consistency in portion sizes or the restaurant opens itself up to lawsuits.

But why is it a relationship that requires government intervention? When I buy a package of Oreos it is very difficult to inquire as to what may be in the food I just purchased. But at a restaurant this is very easy.

If I don't want to eat foot with a lot of fat, just ask what is in the food and if they can't answer to your satisfaction, don't eat there. Frankly, if you need government mandated labelling to know that the 2-pound plate of fettucine alfredo at Olive Garden has a stupid amount of fat, calories, and sodium then it would be easier for the government ot just put you in an asylum for your own protection.

"Would you like some grated parmesan on your pasta? First I must inform you that it contains these 8 indredients, has 4 grams of fat per 1.5 cranks of the grater, 35 mg of sodium, 70 calories (35 of which are from fat), and I'm sorry but your food is now too cold to melt the parmesan so you probably should just pass on it. Would you care instead for some pepper which has 0 calories per twist of the pepper mill (0 calories is defined as less than 1 calorie per 5 grams), 0mg sodium (0mg calories is defined as less than 1mg per 50 grams), and 0mg fat (0mg fat is defined as less than 1mg per 50 grams). No? Then enjoy your meal, salt is on the table (contains a mix of sodium and potassium chloride; 0mg of sodium (0mg is defined as less than 1 gram per serving); serving size is one shake, approximately 0.75 grams."

[Gemini Cricket]

No playing tag in MA schools (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061020/ts_alt_afp/afplifestyleusschool_061020160352).
Lame.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Yeah, saw that one yesterday. I didn't even know where to begin commenting on the idocy, so I didn't post it.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Officials at McCarthy Elementary School in Framingham in the northeastern state, told local media that children have been ordered to invent a new no-contact version of the game for safety reasons.

Ordered to do the impossible. That should work out well.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Ordered to do the impossible. That should work out well.
Sweet, laser tag!

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Yeah, it's all fun and games until someone loses a retina.

[Moonliner]

Ordered to do the impossible. That should work out well.

How about this:

One child is selected to be "it". This player will be known as the principal. He or she will stuff their ears with cotton, blindfold themselves, and repeat over and over, "But you're safe now" in as loud a voice as possible.

All the other children will run in circles around "the principal" and shout out helpful suggestions such as "Exercise is good for you", and "we want to develop coordination".

If the "principal" actually hears any of these comments, then he or she loses the game and a new "principal" is selected.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Perfect! :)

[Gemini Cricket]

I heard they especially wanted to ban freeze tag for fear of kids getting hypothermia.

[Gemini Cricket]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b268/braddoc310/doonesbury.gif

[Moonliner]

Wow! This one (http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/20/text.suicide.ap/index.html)has got it all! I hope all our senators and congress men/woman are paying attention. They should be able to knock out a whole boatload of our freedoms in the name of safety on this one case alone.

A lovesick teenage girl drove into an oncoming car in a suicide attempt that she counted down "8, 7, 6..." in a text message to the female classmate who spurned her, authorities said. The teenager survived but a woman in the other car -- a mother of three -- died.

Just look at all the issues they could legislate on:

Cell phones
Text messages
Underage drivers
seat belts
car safety
gay rights
parent responsibility
and on and on.....


What a field day.

[Ghoulish Delight]

A gay student was text messaging a suicide countdown (http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/20/text.suicide.ap/index.html)to a fellow student who had spurned her while driving her parents Benz, when she hit '0' she deliberately crossed over the line creating a head on collision which killed a mother of three. A gay student, while driving her parents' Benz, was text messaging a suicide countdown to a fellow student who had spurned her. When she hit '0' she deliberately corssed over the line...

Sorry for the grammer nazi action, but that one took me a while to decipher.

[Moonliner]

Sorry for the grammer nazi action, but that one took me a while to decipher.

I have edited the original message for enhanced clarification, Sir! Now kindly step away from my kunckes with that ruler.

[CoasterMatt]

Now kindly step away from my kunckes with that ruler.
Is there anything else he can approach your 'kunckes' with? :evil:

[Ghoulish Delight]

How sad is it that "We're discussing our strategy in Iraq to evaluate if it's working and what can be changed to make it work better" is a newsworthy statement? Ummm, shouldn't you have been doing that? Daily? Since the moment this started?

[innerSpaceman]

The entire mustered might of the United States Armed Forces could not succeed one iota in its mission to quell the violence in the Capital City of the Country it is occupying. How frelling pathetic is that?

What's the big deal about withdrawal when it's clear we have been completely and humiliatingly defeated?

[JWBear]

The entire mustered might of the United States Armed Forces could not succeed one iota in its mission to quell the violence in the Capital City of the Country it is occupying. How frelling pathetic is that?

What's the big deal about withdrawal when it's clear we have been completely and humiliatingly defeated?
Because the neocons in control of the White House are not willing or able to admit that they were wrong.

[SacTown Chronic]

(California)CORPORATIONS CODE
SECTION 35000-35007





35000. This title may be cited as the Subversive Organization
Registration Law.



35001. This title is enacted in the exercise of the police power of
this State for the protection of the public peace and safety by
requiring the registration of subversive organizations which are
conceived and exist for the purpose of undermining and eventually
destroying the democratic form of government in this State and in the
United States.


35002. As used in this title, "subversive organization" means every
corporation, association, society, camp, group, bund, political
party, assembly, and every body or organization composed of two or
more persons or members, which comes within either or both of the
following descriptions:
(a) Which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches, or
practices, the duty, necessity, or propriety of controlling,
conducting, seizing, or overthrowing the Government of the United
States, of this State, or of any political subdivision thereof by
force or violence.
(b) Which is subject to foreign control as defined in Section
35003.Remember kids, give the govt plenty of warning before you bring them down.

Link (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=corp&group=34001-35000&file=35000-35007)

[Nephythys]

*snort* (http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000960.html)

No kidding-

I did not title this (http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/lillpop102506.htm)

But I found it interesting- but spare me any personal outrage- like I said I did not title it, nor write it- but if that's a liberal- bleaugh!

[Ghoulish Delight]

I did not title this (http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/lillpop102506.htm)

But I found it interesting- but spare me any personal outrage- like I said I did not title it, nor write it- but if that's a liberal- bleaugh!If embracing logical fallacies is what it takes to be conservative - bleaugh!

[Strangler Lewis]

Ooh, he has a handgun. I have a handgun, too. No, wait, that's my penis.

To avoid charges of political correctness, I will simply note that the author is a f****** retard.

[Nephythys]

Funny- I think that it's liberals who need that disconnect from logic. ;)

Seriously.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Funny- I think that it's liberals who need that disconnect from logic. ;)

Seriously.That list is so rife with logical flaws, loaded questions, exagerations, and enough spin to make the Tasmanian devil dizzy that it's not even worth my effort to go through it and point it out.

[Nephythys]

what a shame-because each of those sounds like the liberals I hear around me all the time. That's what makes it so sad.

[Ghoulish Delight]

what a shame-because each of those sounds like the liberals I hear around me all the time. That's what makes it so sad. Each of those sounds like a distorted, sound-byte version of liberal ideals menat to be inflamatory and completely devoid of actual merit. It belies the author's inability to discern reality from b.s. slogans he's been fed, and his reliance on distortion and fear-mongering rather than valid reasoning to support his positions.

If, after all these years, you really believe that supporting abortion rights = "I want to kill babies", a point-by-point response to that inane list isn't going to do much good.

[Strangler Lewis]

Megadittoes to GD.

[Alex]

For the most part, if you reverse each bullet item it sounds, as well, like the stereotypical religious fundamentalist conservative and sounds just as stupid.

That's the problem. There are reasonable assumptions underlying the apparent disconnects hinted at (but as GD says, terribly exaggerated and twisted) but the opposite sides aren't willing to discuss those differences. Better to just assume the other side is filled with unthinking morons.

Conservative stupidity

- It is a horrible sin to destroy a lump of cells but ok to murder a full grown human being.

- It's ok to hatefully target specific groups of people for hate speech, but simply burning the flag should be criminal.

- It is ok to decimate the environment and wipe out entire species just so Suburnite X can drive to work for $8.43 in gas rather than $9.12.

- Actively participating in the political debate is great, except when done by George Soros, Oprah Winfrey, and liberal Hollywood stars.

- Conservatives working to preserve bigoted hate mongers do so by claiming it is traditional American culture, but the "cultural heritage" of new immigrants must be destroyed at all costs.

- Not allowing Caucasian men to discriminate based on race or gender is racism against Caucasian men.

- Conservatives are too stupid to see a difference between one government invading another and the social problem causing spontaneous illegal immigration from Mexico. However, if we lobotomize ourselves to view them as equal and similar things, then conservatives think it is ok to invade another country for no reason at all but it is wrong to do so in search of a better life.

- Those who believe English should be the official American language are engaged in linguistic stpudity exposed by history throughout the world. However, simply because it was the language they were raised speaking they think everybody else should be forced to speak it.

- Conservatives don't believe there should be a minimum wage but use the wage suppressing black labor market as an argument against amnesty and work programs.

- Conservatives can't see the logical fallacy in this statement: Blocking the sale of port security to UAE was necessary to protect homeland security, but securing the border with Mexico would "scapegoat" Hispanics.

- It is worth having thousands of extra untested drivers on the road so that if caught driving poorly you can give them an extra ticket.

- Freedom of speech must never be repressed, except when the life of a flag hangs in the balance.

- Taxes are bad when collected from people with money but good when collected from people without money.

- The religion that controls all three branches of the government, is adhered to by 80% of the population, has two national Federal holidays (compared to zero for all other religions) and has a stranglehold on religious representation in popular culture is under attack and at risk of being stifled into non-existence.

- Government can offer no effiiciencies in any task, so it is best to leave it all to raw capitalism even if that means large swaths of the population would not be served by basic elements of infrastructure.

- Military force must never be used when a Democrat president is in the Oval Office. But once a Republican is in place daddy-revenge is sufficient motive.

[Strangler Lewis]

This actually makes me change my view. The author is not a retard. He's a REEEEE-TAARRRD!

[SacTown Chronic]

Monica Lewinsky should be the national spokesperson for Nathan's Hot Dogs. Just sayin'.

[Ghoulish Delight]

There's something I don't like about the cries of racism in the Tenessee ad against Harold Ford just because they've got a white woman pretending to come on to him and he happens to be black. I mean...really? Racist? That requires me to accept some pretty insulting assumptions.

[innerSpaceman]

Yes, the insulting assumptions that are part and parcel of Tennessee culture, where the election is to take place.

Sorry, GD, perhaps as an enlightened Californian, it's hard for you to relate to the racist fears of white women shacking up with black men that is still rife in the South.


A commercial which might not be racist in Los Angeles is certainly racist in Chattanooga.

[Nephythys]

Border fence?

Mexican President calls it an embarrassment (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061027/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/mexico_border_fence)

Frankly I think it's an embarassment that we do not adhere to our own laws and deport illegals-

[innerSpaceman]

Really, did you find the Berlin Wall simply a method of enforcing communist laws? Or did you cheer when beloved Ronnie brought it down?

[Nephythys]

The Berlin wall divided a country- this divides two countries, one of which is flooding illegally into the other. Different situation.

[innerSpaceman]

Really? Well, how long have the U.S. and Mexico been two countries?


How long were East Germany and West Germany two countries?



What is your time limit on when two countries made from one are legitimately two countries not subject to reunification? 50 years? A hundred? Two?


What makes your chosen time limit unarbitrary?




Or is the southern half of the United States simply rightfully "ours" because it's ours, and East Germany was never rightfully the East Germans' because it was "theirs?"

[Alex]

Is there no difference between a wall designed to keep people out and a wall designed to keep people in?

What is your time limit on when two countries made from one are legitimately two countries not subject to reunification? 50 years? A hundred? Two?
When were the United States and Mexico a single country? Or would you be ok with such a wall if it were simply farther north so that illegally entering Mexicans couldn't get to the parts of the country that were never part of Mexico?

I don't really support the building of this fence but I don't see what is so abhorrent about building a wall to make more difficult the passage of people into areas that they are not supposed to go. When you cross the border in San Diego, you pass through a wall. Is that wall an embarrassment or just when it is made much longer?

What makes your chosen time limit unarbitrary?
Do you honestly believe that the goal of illegal immigration from Mexico is reunification? Do you really believe that those illegal immigrants would want to see the Southwestern United States once again become part of Mexico? Is it not then a betrayal of those ideals that so many of them end up in Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and Florida?

How long were East Germany and West Germany two countries
Six years when the wall was built

Really? Well, how long have the U.S. and Mexico been two countries?
If the wall is built next year it will be 197 years since they both existed as these separate entities. Much, much longer if you count since they they were separate political entities. If you mean since the various parts of the United States that used to be part of Mexico then 169 years for most of what is Texas, 159 years for large parts of New Mexico, Arizona, and California. 153 years for the final pieces of southern Arizona and New Mexico purchased (to allow railroad construction along a preferred route) in 1854.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I'm offended by the wall only in the sense that it's a huge waste of money and resources and is just a distraction from solving the underlying issues that make risking life and limb to cross the border an attractive option. Until those problems are solved, no amount of bandaids is going to stop the bleeding.

[Alex]

That's pretty much why I don't support it. But the idea of a wall itself doesn't offend me.

If anybody should be embarrassed it is Vicente Fox for having a country so many people are so eager to get away from.

[Nephythys]

"You can't make socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society" - John Dewey, "the father of modern education," - avowed socialist, co-author of the "Humanist Manifesto." & member of 15 Marxist front organizations.

:eek:

[JWBear]

Influence of religious right may hurt GOP. (http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_4555589)

Interesting, but not surprising.

[BarTopDancer]

Is the election over yet?

[wendybeth]

I know, BTD. I can't believe how vicious some campaigns are becoming, and every time (which thankfully hasn't been too often) a Dem succumbs to the temptation to smear, I cringe. I am also amazed by the crossovers, on both sides. I am voting for a Repub sheriff, as are a lot of local Dems, and today I saw a large billboard for a Dem candidate for Congress (Peter Goldmark) that was paid for by 'Republicans for Pete'. I really think the people are starting to work through this devisive crap that has held us all back and aren't falling for the rhetoric any more. Then again, I am a 'glass is half full' kind of person and it could just be wishful thinking.

[sleepyjeff]

^Back in the 80s Portland had a Democrat Mayor who belonged to "Democrats for Reagan"......a few years later we had a Republican Mayor who belonged to "Republicans for Dukakis".

The latter may have been the only memeber of his organization;)

[sleepyjeff]

^....just what is a memeber anyway?

:blush: /spelling or typo....you decide.

[scaeagles]

I know, BTD. I can't believe how vicious some campaigns are becoming, and every time (which thankfully hasn't been too often) a Dem succumbs to the temptation to smear, I cringe.

I had to laugh when I read that. Not at your assertion, but at the varying perspective, because if you substitute the word "Dem" for "Repub" in your sentence above, it's something I'd say.

I guess one man's smearing is another man's truth telling.

[wendybeth]

I had to laugh when I read that. Not at your assertion, but at the varying perspective, because if you substitute the word "Dem" for "Repub" in your sentence above, it's something I'd say.

I guess one man's smearing is another man's truth telling.

Huh?

If I do that to the sentence you quoted, I...well, I can't because the word 'Repub' isn't in that sentence. 'Repubs' is in the post, so I did what you suggested:

"I know, BTD. I can't believe how vicious some campaigns are becoming, and every time (which thankfully hasn't been too often) a Dem succumbs to the temptation to smear, I cringe. I am also amazed by the crossovers, on both sides. I am voting for a Dem sheriff, as are a lot of local Dems, and today I saw a large billboard for a Dem candidate for Congress (Peter Goldmark) that was paid for by 'Dem for Pete'. I really think the people are starting to work through this devisive crap that has held us all back and aren't falling for the rhetoric any more. Then again, I am a 'glass is half full' kind of person and it could just be wishful thinking."

:D

[scaeagles]

Don't be a weenie.:p

You know I meant " substitute the word "Dem" with "Repub" ".

Weenie.:p

[wendybeth]

Lol!!!

So, instead of 'whiny lib', I'm a 'weenie lib'? I guess you can call me 'WeenieBeth'.:D

[CoasterMatt]

You got it wb - from now on, you're "WEENIEBeth" :p

[Strangler Lewis]

You got it wb - from now on, you're "WEENIEBeth" :p

And bringing it home to the schoolyard: "WeenieButt."

[wendybeth]

God, I hate my name.

[scaeagles]

I like WeenieButt. Good name.

Anyway.....a few random thoughts in the random thread......

Venezuela leader Chavez has been linked to a woting machine manufacturer. If the dems win, can I complain that it must have been fixed? Relax, it's a joke.

If Al Qaida releases a threatening video, is that a Republican dirty trick? Apparently they are a few weeks behind in their regular official tape releases to Al Jazeera.

Bill Clinton apparently thinks a whole lot of himself. He tried to throw a birthday party for himself with a pricetag of 500,000 to attend. What???? So few accepted that the price tag has been lowered to 5,000 so the Clintons can avoid the embarrassment of throwing a party no one came to. Ego is a requirement of being a politician, but 500K? Yikes.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Bill Clinton apparently thinks a whole lot of himself. He tried to throw a birthday party for himself with a pricetag of 500,000 to attend. What???? So few accepted that the price tag has been lowered to 5,000 so the Clintons can avoid the embarrassment of throwing a party no one came to. Ego is a requirement of being a politician, but 500K? Yikes.

Just to add some pesky facts...

One didn't have to pay $500K to attend, tickets were always also available for $60K. Also, all money was to go to his charitable foundation to fight aids and poverty throughout the world.

[wendybeth]

Just to add some pesky facts...

One didn't have to pay $500K to attend, tickets were always also available for $60K. Also, all money was to go to his charitable foundation to fight aids and poverty throughout the world.

The ego of that man- how dare he!!!!! ;)

[scaeagles]

I knew all the money was goping to the charitable foundation, but was unaware of the discount rate of 60K. What a bargain!

Still, it does remain that tickets didn't sell even at the lower price. And like I said, having an ego is a prerequisate of being a politician.

[wendybeth]

Remember- the government is calling on private organizations to fund charities these days. He's only doing his part. If this was a fundraiser for GW and the Republican party, I doubt you would have said anything*. (But I would, of course).;):p


*I would have used a more direct comparison, such as a fundraiser by GW for a charity, but I'm not sure he does that sort of thing.

[Prudence]

*I would have used a more direct comparison, such as a fundraiser by GW for a charity, but I'm not sure he does that sort of thing.

Oh, I'm sure some of those GOP candidates he's been stumping for are *ahem* charity cases.

[BarTopDancer]

Venezuela leader Chavez has been linked to a woting machine manufacturer.

What is a woting machine manufacturer? What is a woting machine for that matter?

[wendybeth]

What is a woting machine manufacturer? What is a woting machine for that matter?

I'm not sure, but I'm sure if we ask Elmer Fudd......:D

[innerSpaceman]

I think Ensign Chekov would be a better authority to consult.

[CoasterMatt]

It's probably some sort of wibewal conspiwacy.

[scaeagles]

When I tell you guys I have a horrid degenerative nerve disease that makes it hard to type, you're all going to feel really badly about teasing me for typos.:p

And yes, Chekov is more like it. Dirty Commie.

[CoasterMatt]

I don't know, liberals and conservatives from both ends of the spectrum are sooo much fun to pick on - but friends is friends despite the different views.

[Ghoulish Delight]

When I tell you guys I have a horrid degenerative nerve disease that makes it hard to type, you're all going to feel really badly about teasing me for typos.:p Hasn't stopped us from going after Lisa.

[Nephythys]

Democrat House Candidate Deb Eddy Admits Theft of King County GOP Property

Democrat Deb Eddy, 48th District state House candidate, has admitted to illegally removing lawfully posted campaign signs belonging to the King County GOP. (documentation here) :

(KCGOP) is asking that [Bellevue Police Dept.], in conjunction with Prosecutor Maleng, take the following action with regard to Deb Eddy who has admitted to acts against the property of the KCGOP constituting theft in the first degree (RCW 9A.56.030), possession of stolen property in the first degree (RCW 9A.56.150) and the lesser included offense of removing or defacing political advertising (RCW 29A.84.040). Theft in the first degree and possession of stolen property in the first degree are both class B felonies (RCW 9A.56.030 and 9A.56.150). Removing political advertising is a misdemeanor. A conviction of either felony charge would warrant removal from public office under RCW 42.12.010.

Link (http://soundpolitics.com/archives/007238.html)

heh-no, dems don't do things like this! :rolleyes:

-and she has admitted it.

[Ghoulish Delight]

heh-no, dems don't do things like this! :rolleyes:
For the umpteenth time, it's not about "Repubs are corrupt and Dems aren't." Duh, no one believes that. It's about the fact that Repubs bank their entire existence as a party on the "fact" that they represent the "moral majority", that to vote Democrat is a morally bankrupt choice, that their shining moral compass is what will save this country. So yes, whenever it comes to light that "moral" Republicans ain't so moral afterall (omg, they're human, not mesiahs?!) they're going to, rightfully, take more flack than Democrats who never claimed, as a group, to be morally superior in the first place.

[JWBear]

For the umpteenth time, it's not about "Repubs are corrupt and Dems aren't." Duh, no one believes that. It's about the fact that Repubs bank their entire existence as a party on the "fact" that they represent the "moral majority", that to vote Democrat is a morally bankrupt choice, that their shining moral compass is what will save this country. So yes, whenever it comes to light that "moral" Republicans ain't so moral afterall (omg, they're human, not mesiahs?!) they're going to, rightfully, take more flack than Democrats who never claimed, as a group, to be morally superior in the first place.
Thank you! Exactly!

[Nephythys]

yeah- the notion that it is ok to be morally bankrupt as long as you tout it like your best asset.

- and oddly enough I am not conservative for any of those reasons.

Ah well-

[Prudence]

I wish they'd go after those from all parties who litter the public right-of-way with political signs.

Alas, wishful thinking.

[Bornieo: Fully Loaded]

Near where I work there is a long stretch of road near a golf course and lots of housing that is surrounded by lush vegitation. Very pretty.

In the center of the divided highway are about 40 small signs each with either No on "whatever" and the other half were Yes on "whatever". The funny part is that they are set up so each follows the other and if you read it at 35 mph, you get yesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesno yesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesnoyesno

I wish someone would make up thier mind! ;)

[Not Afraid]

Hasn't stopped us from going after Lisa.

No, but that degenerative nerve disease excuse is a good one!

[Prudence]

Oh, you're all just a bunch of degenerates.

[CoasterMatt]

Oh, you're all just a bunch of degenerates.
That's the sweetest thing anybody's typed to me all day... :)

[Nephythys]

Oh, you're all just a bunch of degenerates.


HEH- at least we are in good company.:D

[Moonliner]

That's the sweetest thing anybody's typed to me all day... :)

Hey Matt:

Stevia rebaudiana

[Nephythys]

Kerry is a fvckin idiot who can't take responsiblity for his own words (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/31/D8L3OTV00.html)

Yeah you doofus- it's a Republican smear to point out that you are an insulting gasbag.

God he is loathsome.

[Gn2Dlnd]

Is it the witching hour already?

[Strangler Lewis]

Kerry is a fvckin idiot who can't take responsiblity for his own words (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/31/D8L3OTV00.html)

Yeah you doofus- it's a Republican smear to point out that you are an insulting gasbag.

God he is loathsome.

And he didn't do that well at Yale, which I guess is why he wound up in Viet Nam. Unlike . . . well the list on both sides of the aisle is endless.

While he was making a questionable joke, I think he touched on the very real ambivalence that people with educational ambitions harbor about dangerous working class jobs. Whether it's the military, building bridges or collecting the garbage, we respect the people who do them while at the same time urging our children to get an education so they don't have to do them.

I think that while some people certainly say they join to serve their country, most join for want of other opportunity, a limitation that is often due to educational failings. The military today is what the clergy was for the second sons of 19th century literature.

[Nephythys]

Sorry- it was no joke. He's an idiot- like a little kid who says something stupid and hurtful and then tries to pass it off as a "joke".

Even John McCain whom I do not like much says Kerry should be apologizing- he does not see it as a joke.

As if serving in Vietnam makes you an untouchable saint who can say anything stupid you like and then blame it on anyone else-

He's a sad pathetic man- and I hope he tries to run in 2008. I can laugh for months.

[Gn2Dlnd]

The Massachusetts senator, who is considering another presidential run in 2008, had opened his speech at Pasadena City College with several one-liners, joking at one point that Bush had lived in Texas but now "lives in a state of denial."

Then he said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

Hey, I know you're on a roll, so, go ahead, have fun, but, for anyone who didn't read TFA, the "joke" appears to have been directed at GW, not the troops. Knock yourself out.

[Strangler Lewis]

Sorry- it was no joke. He's an idiot- like a little kid who says something stupid and hurtful and then tries to pass it off as a "joke".

Even John McCain whom I do not like much says Kerry should be apologizing- he does not see it as a joke.

As if serving in Vietnam makes you an untouchable saint who can say anything stupid you like and then blame it on anyone else-

He's a sad pathetic man- and I hope he tries to run in 2008. I can laugh for months.

That's fine. Kerry shouldn't make fun of people in the military. However, right wing non-combatants like Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough who get all giggly when they talk about military culture don't strike the right note either. The military is not a fourth branch of government. I'd take all this Republican bowing down to our fighting men and women a lot more seriously if they called for a draft or compulsory military service. Without that, military service is just another dirty job to be done by people who are not quite like us.

[JWBear]

I'm sorry... I listened to what he said; what was so insulting? I don't get it.

[Not Afraid]

We've got two threads going on this topic at the moment. Tramspotter started an individual thread about the Kerry comment. Just FYI.

[Nephythys]

We've got two threads going on this topic at the moment. Tramspotter started an individual thread about the Kerry comment. Just FYI.


yeah, but mine came first ;)

[Not Afraid]

So, post where you want. I obviously care a whole lot. ;)

[Nephythys]

Hey, I know you're on a roll, so, go ahead, have fun, but, for anyone who didn't read TFA, the "joke" appears to have been directed at GW, not the troops. Knock yourself out.


I see- so if a joke is tasteless and rude and insulting it's MY problem for not thinking it is funny.

Got it.:rolleyes:

[Nephythys]

So, post where you want. I obviously care a whole lot. ;)


Damn nazi cake whoring admin from heck! ;)

[Not Afraid]

Heck? I thought I was going to hell!

[wendybeth]

I'm sorry... I listened to what he said; what was so insulting? I don't get it.

That's it! Off to Iraq with you!;)


(Feigning outrage is a well-known diversionary tactic- personally, I find it interesting that this could generate so much feeling while people who are suffering and dying in George's little war get a 'meh').

[Gn2Dlnd]

I see- so if a joke is tasteless and rude and insulting it's MY problem for not thinking it is funny.

Got it.:rolleyes:

Well, are you all het up because he insulted the president, or do you still think he was making a comment about the troops?

And yes, I think it is your problem for misinterpreting a news article.

Get it? Good.

[Nephythys]

NA- well I am dressed as a devil today, so maybe so.

Gn2Dlnd- I did not misinterpret anything- got it? Good.

Kerry is a troglodyte with no sense of the impact of the asinine things he says. I don't care about pot shots at the POTUS- sorry, not all wrapped up in some love thing with Bushie and can't handle critical comments-

-and he WAS referring to the troops- I guess McCain is oblivious too, didn't "get it"

[Gn2Dlnd]

-and he WAS referring to the troops-

Honestly, how do you get that?

[Motorboat Cruiser]

-and he WAS referring to the troops- I guess McCain is oblivious too, didn't "get it"

Sorry, I'm not seeing the reason for outrage either. And yet, I would be surprised if there is any republican out there that isn't making sure that everyone knows how incredibly outrageous this is. I would expect nothing less with an election coming up. They can't talk about Iraq, they can't talk about the economy, they can't talk about making the world safer. They can't talk about any of these without everyone realizing how full of crap they are.

They are about to lose their all-encompassing power and they are grasping furiously at any possible way to deflect the attention away from the real issues, the ones that they have failed miserably at. That's all this is, a smoke screen and feigned outrage at one line of a speech that had little to do with the troops and everything to do with their inability to do anything to fix the education system in this country, a system that is failing way too many of our kids, who graduate unable to read and write and can either go to Burger King or into the military.

Sorry, I'm not buying this outrage, no matter how many times the republicans stomp their feet and tell me this is despicable. What is despicable is that our fine soldiers have been turned into cannon fodder in a war that NEVER should have been started in the first place, by a bunch of guys who had better things to do when their country called on them.

[Nephythys]

There will be no meeting of the minds- because it's an idiotic merry go round of different views and no way to validate one over the other.

You're my friend MBC- despite the fact that we seem to be on opposite sides of the world these days. ;)

[JWBear]

Can someone please explain what was so offensive about his remarks? I really don't understand the outrage.

[Alex]

False outrage is the primary tool of modern American politics. It's quite boring, really, and I just ignore it from both sides.

Now that I'm working again and its the week before MouseAdventure, that is all the political talking you'll get out of me.

[BarTopDancer]

So what's going to happen before the election?

Are we going to find Bin Ladden?
Are we suddenly going to pull out of Iraq?
Is there going to be some immenent threat that only Bush and his cronies can protect us from?
Will we find WMDs in Iraq?
Will N. Korea pull out of talks and threaten to bomb CA?
Will gas drop drastically?

[scaeagles]

Not going to find bin Laden.
Not going to pull out of Iraq.
There never was the words imminent threat. It was "gathering threat".
Already found some (I know! They were very old)
N. Korea is led by a madman and is unpredictable.
Gas prices are a function of the market and oil supply, and is far too complex to be controlled by any person.

I realize those were rhetorical, but iI suppose I didn't have a very good breakfast.:p

[Nephythys]

I guess I would feel there was a point- except for the fact that it is not just the right or the conservatives that feel outrage about it- or who think it was an asinine insulting thing to say.

This is not ME misinterpreting something- or if so I am in vast company.

[SacTown Chronic]

If Kerry apologizes for this, I'm going to kick him in the nuts if I ever get close enough to him.


Asinine, Neph? Does that mean you preach military service over education to your children? Or are Kerry's words closer to what you say in private than you care to admit?

[Ghoulish Delight]

This is not ME misinterpreting something- or if so I am in vast company.No one has yet been able to communicate exactly what the offensive interpretation is.

[Scrooge McSam]

Get out your kickers, Sac.

[SacTown Chronic]

He apologized? Bastard obviously has no nuts for me to kick. I bet his wife has 'em.

[Scrooge McSam]

Kerry apologizes for "botched" Iraq joke (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061101/pl_nm/usa_elections_kerry_dc_3)

[Ghoulish Delight]

Kerry apologizes for "botched" Iraq joke (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061101/pl_nm/usa_elections_kerry_dc_3)
Wow, that's what he "meant" to say? That's quite the botch job.

Oh well, I still don't see how the way he read it is terribly offensive.

[Not Afraid]

"Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush

I prefer the comment as he originally said it. It makes more sense.

But, poloticians on ALL sides seem to be a bunch of spinning bufoons. But, what is that about bad publicity is better than no publicity?

[SacTown Chronic]

Work hard, study, and be smart or you'll end up being president?


You suck, Kerry.

[Not Afraid]

Work hard, study, and be smart or you'll end up being president?


You suck, Kerry.


See, this is where the phrase "I like pancakes" comes in handy. ;)

[SacTown Chronic]

I like blowjobs.

[Gn2Dlnd]

This is not ME misinterpreting something- or if so I am in vast company.

This IS you misinterpreting something, and you ARE in vast company. Why can you not read the remarks as stated, in context, and make your own interpretation.

[JWBear]

This IS you misinterpreting something, and you ARE in vast company. Why can you not read the remarks as stated, in context, and make your own interpretation.
Why go to the trouble of making up your own mind when you can blindly parrot right wing talking points? Much easier.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

My favorite fakenewsmen will be on the cover of Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/jon_stewart_stephen_colbert_americas_anchors/page/1) this month. You should go read the article's excerpt. It's a riot.

[Alex]

If you apologize on the Don Imus show does that mean it only happened in the '80s?

[Nephythys]

If Kerry apologizes for this, I'm going to kick him in the nuts if I ever get close enough to him.


Asinine, Neph? Does that mean you preach military service over education to your children? Or are Kerry's words closer to what you say in private than you care to admit?


no

[Nephythys]

This IS you misinterpreting something, and you ARE in vast company. Why can you not read the remarks as stated, in context, and make your own interpretation.


I have- did before it was ever posted here.

This is my main frustration with people here- some of you see perfectly fit to tell me what I think, what I've done or not done- how I misunderstand, misspoke- whatever- and you lay it at my feet no matter what I say is my intent, what I have done, what I personally think.

This guy makes an ass of himself- and you spin yourself into dervishes finding ways to say "he did not mean it that way" - it's everyone elses problem- not his. He is not responsible for the reactions- or for upsetting anyone.

THAT has been the main thing that has undermined my respect for certain people and their tactics- it's only used when it suits their own bias.

[€uroMeinke]

THAT has been the main thing that has undermined my respect for certain people and their tactics- it's only used when it suits their own bias.

Is there anyone in politics who this doesn't apply to? I mean, isn't that the crux of politicing? Who do you think is not being self-serving in today's political arena?

[innerSpaceman]

Oh, I think anybody is responsible for the words they say ... but how can anyone be responsible for other people's reactions or upset? Those reactions are completely up to the persons having them ... or do they have no free will while the speaker has complete free will? (don't answer that, Alex).


In a very real sense, I feel a speaker bears a certain responsiblity for how his or her words are taken ... in that if they are not taken they way the speaker meant, then the speaker has failed in some way. I think John Kerry failed in a big way. But even that failure does not make him, or anyone, responsible for reactions. He is only responsible for his words, not what others make of them.

If, based on reactions, a speaker judges to adjust his words, that is wisdom. If anyone claims a speaker responsible for the reactions to those words, that is folly.

[lizziebith]

Totally what I've been trying to tell people ALL FREAKING DAY. Thanks, iSm.

[wendybeth]

Hey, I read a columnist today- don't remember who, but if it's important I'll look it up.... Anyway, she suggested that perhaps the opponents of stem cell research should think about providing tiny coffins and services for all those frozen embryos that will be destroyed. I mean, they're babies, right? Morbid and macabre, but a valid question nonetheless.

[lizziebith]

Wow that brings back memories...I used to argue with anti-choice people about why they didn't have funerals for MaxiPads...because a lot of early miscarriages happen during the first trimester. They look like periods. I know, because I had one. Do I want someone else telling me that was my son's older brother/sister? Nope. Should I have had a funeral? I don't believe so...as the fertized egg was obviously not viable. What if I was considering aborting? *throws that out*

[Gn2Dlnd]

This was your opening post:
Kerry is a fvckin idiot who can't take responsiblity for his own words (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/31/D8L3OTV00.html)

Yeah you doofus- it's a Republican smear to point out that you are an insulting gasbag.

God he is loathsome.

Dervish much?

Once again, I am going to post the quote from the article:
The Massachusetts senator, who is considering another presidential run in 2008, had opened his speech at Pasadena City College with several one-liners, joking at one point that Bush had lived in Texas but now "lives in a state of denial."

Then he said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

Looks to me like a slam at the president. Looks to me that if anyone reads it differently they are willfully misinterpreting the meaning of what was said.

So:
This is my main frustration with people here- some of you see perfectly fit to tell me what I think, what I've done or not done- how I misunderstand, misspoke- whatever- and you lay it at my feet no matter what I say is my intent, what I have done, what I personally think.

This guy makes an ass of himself- and you spin yourself into dervishes finding ways to say "he did not mean it that way" - it's everyone elses problem- not his. He is not responsible for the reactions- or for upsetting anyone.

THAT has been the main thing that has undermined my respect for certain people and their tactics- it's only used when it suits their own bias.

Gosh, imagine my disappointment at losing the respect of one of the more disrespectful people I've ever run across.

[Nephythys]

:rolleyes:

gee thanks-as if I care? People who actually bother to know ME beyond the difference in political beliefs know better than someone who can't see past their politics and doesn't know DIDDLY about me.

If the left, libs, dems- would do ANYTHING to be deserving of respect maybe I would have some to show for them-meanwhile, excuse me if I show the disgust disdain and mistrust I have for them and their apologists and supporters.

Go ahead- try and tell me it is different on the left- that they do not show disrespect disdain and disgust for MY side, people like me.

I guess a boatload of dems also willfully misinterpreted poor Kerry's words.

[Nephythys]

Is there anyone in politics who this doesn't apply to? I mean, isn't that the crux of politicing? Who do you think is not being self-serving in today's political arena?


No one-

I was mainly referring to people here. It disappoints me to see the double standard.

I say something. Someone else takes my meaning and intent wrongly and gets upset. I say I did not mean it that way- and the predominant response is "you have to apologize and correct your way of saying things- it is not our problem." Putting it on me to take responsibility for their feelings and my words no matter my intent.

But take what Kerry said- same issue- and they are blaming everyone BUT him. It is everyone BUT him who misinterpreted. Other people created outrage where they was none- because he did not mean anything by it. Kerry does not have to correct himself, apologize or take responsibility for his own words- it's everyone else who has to correct themselves.

It's hypocritical, a clear double standard and I think shows a willingness to excuse people who share their ideaology but to slam and accuse those who don't- no matter their intent.

I'm sure it can cut both ways- but for now I am seeing it from this side of the fence and I find it sad.

[innerSpaceman]

Why is it a double standard to apply to you the responsibility you wish others to apply to Kerry? And why is it not your double standard to want a certain set of rules applied to you that you are not willing to apply to Kerry.

Either a person is responsible for other people's reactions or they are not. I contend they are not. Why, Neph, are YOU the one contending it's one way for you and another for Kerry?

And even if you claim others are equally double-standarding, how does that make your double-standarding any less wrong?

[Nephythys]

Well, because I am conservative and therefore inherently superior. Doh! ;)

While I have often taken that reponsibility- Kerry has not. The guy could not even take responsibility for falling down while skiing- he blamed someone else. "I didn't fall, the SOB knocked me down"

He will always be a joke- a two faced joke.

[Ghoulish Delight]

I wonder if today someone might actually articulate the offense in the original statement. Still haven't seen it.

[innerSpaceman]

Actually, GD, in one of these threads, I have articulated the offense in the original statement. Taken out of context, I find it to strongly imply that people who don't do well iln school end up, in large numbers, serving in the military.

I don't take particular offense at that statement, but others do. Perhaps the context was Bush's No Child Left Behind, but since the undereducated have been flocking to the military option since loooooong before NCLB, I find the statement in and of itself to have the very meaning that some are finding offensive.

[Nephythys]

I wonder if today someone might actually articulate the offense in the original statement. Still haven't seen it.


Haven't seen it or haven't seen anything that is convincing enough for you to believe?

[Gn2Dlnd]

gee thanks-as if I care? People who actually bother to know ME beyond the difference in political beliefs know better than someone who can't see past their politics and doesn't know DIDDLY about me.



You've given me no reason to want to get to know you. How would that enrich my life? You present yourself as a screeching harpy. If I recall, several years ago, when you were having issues with your son, I offered some personal experience that I thought would be helpful. You responded with the same sort of "how dare you assume you know anything about me" nonsense. I can't tell you the number of times people have said to me, "Oh, but she's so nice in person." Who cares? Stop being an unpaid attack ad. Stop being so insulting. Stop making generalizations about me and my politics. Stop making provocative posts and frothing up whenever someone responds. Stop being a living example of the phrase "double-standard."

The Kerry issue has nothing for me to do with politics. He said something that has been taken out of context and misinterpreted. If the entire world got their panties in a bunch over GW's verbal gaffes (http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm) I would be just as irritated. Instead, thoughtful people laugh at him, while his supporters interpret it as good ol' boy speak.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —President George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushism-harm.htm)

Stop being so childish and start taking responsibility for the results of your behavior.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Haven't seen it or haven't seen anything that is convincing enough for you to believe?Haven't seen it, though iSm's is more towards the latter.

People may be interpreting it that way, but that's not what the statement says. We're talking about judging it based on the words spoken, right. Well, the words say "Uneducated people end up in the military." I'd like to know what the offense in that statement is. NOT the offense in the alternate interpretation, which he didn't say.

[Nephythys]

You've given me no reason to want to get to know you. How would that enrich my life? You present yourself as a screeching harpy. If I recall, several years ago, when you were having issues with your son, I offered some personal experience that I thought would be helpful. You responded with the same sort of "how dare you assume you know anything about me" nonsense. I can't tell you the number of times people have said to me, "Oh, but she's so nice in person." Who cares? Stop being an unpaid attack ad. Stop being so insulting. Stop making generalizations about me and my politics. Stop making provocative posts and frothing up whenever someone responds. Stop being a living example of the phrase "double-standard."

The Kerry issue has nothing for me to do with politics. He said something that has been taken out of context and misinterpreted. If the entire world got their panties in a bunch over GW's verbal gaffes (http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm) I would be just as irritated. Instead, thoughtful people laugh at him, while his supporters interpret it as good ol' boy speak.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —President George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushism-harm.htm)

Stop being so childish and start taking responsibility for the results of your behavior.


Harpy-cool- now I can be an Egyptian Demon Bitch Harpy.

I take more responsibility than you can ever imagine-and I don't recall any advice from you-perhaps it was offered at a bad time and my tension showed through. How about you stop carrying that chip around- for goodness sake- let it go.

I have no froth. I have every right to be as hostile about what I consider vile politics as you do- because I have seen plenty of nasty comments from you about conservative politics. I don't choose to take them all personally.


Even better- use ignore- works wonders for me.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Well, the words say "Uneducated people end up in the military." I'd like to know what the offense in that statement is.

Yes, I've been waiting for that answer for several days. My conclusion is that they're reading it into the statement.

[Nephythys]

Maybe because there are plenty of "uneducated" people who do not choose the military- and there are plenty of people in the military who have a greater education than some in the private sector. To imply that choosing the military meant you had no choice because you are too uneducated to know any better or choose any better is insulting.

There are options outside the military-

[Ghoulish Delight]

To imply that choosing the military meant you had no choice because you are too uneducated to know any better or choose any better is insulting.Once again, that's NOT what the statement said, that's what people have read into it. It did NOT say "If you choose the military, you're uneducate." It said "If you're uneducated, the military is nearly your only option." You may decide it IMPLIES that, but let's try sticking to the actual statement he made instead.

Maybe because there are plenty of "uneducated" people who do not choose the militaryTwo-thirds of people who take the ASQT don't pass. And of the 1/3 that pass, some portion never make it into active duty. So yes, there are a large number who do not choose military, though not for lack of trying. And of those that don't choose military, most of them don't make a living wage. So, to updated the claim a bit, people unable to succeed in the education system are left with little viable option that will net them a livable earning beyond applying for military service.

[SacTown Chronic]

Link (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/02/national/main2146361.shtml)

A school bus driver fired after she reportedly made an obscene gesture at President Bush has filed a union grievance in an attempt to get her job back.

The 43-year-old driver, whose name was not released, was driving middle school children back to school after a zoo visit on June 16 when the president and Republican Rep. Dave Reichert drove slowly by in a motorcade.

From the bus, the children waved; with the windows down in their car, Bush and Reichert waved back.

That's when the driver gave the president the finger, according to Reichert and Issaquah superintendent Janet Barry.

"The congressman hadn't seen it, but the president turned to him and said, 'That one's not a fan,'" said Reichert spokeswoman Kimberly Cadena.
"That one's not a fan" Nice one, Mr. Bush.:snap:

"The bus driver was not terminated for making an obscene gesture at the president. The bus driver was terminated for making an obscene gesture in view of the students," Niegowski said. "That's not the role modeling we need for our students."

[innerSpaceman]

I have to say that, now I've heard a bit more of what was said immediately BEFORE the too-quoted comment-of-death, soldiers were not the subject of the sentence at all.

Show me where in the sentence he mentions soldiers? Why did people assume he was talking about the education of potential soldiers, when his prior sentence reveals he was talking about Bush's education, and about George W. StupidAss Bush getting stuck in Iraq?

The assumption that he was talking about soldiers or students who might become soldiers was made up out of whole cloth. Almost any sentence taken out of its context can be alleged to be about anything. If I use the word "you" in a sentence and only my previous sentence revealed who "you" was, any hack could present my second sentence and claim the "you" was anyone.

So, I hereby revise my earlier opinion. I was misinformed and led to believe Kerry was taking about No Child Left Behind. Um, he wasn't. From what I've read of the more complete remarks, he was talking about George W. Bush, and it was Bush who is "stuck in Iraq" - a phrase which applies to soldiers, true ... but is perfectly applicable to the President of the U.S.

[Ghoulish Delight]

So, I hereby revise my earlier opinion. I was misinformed and led to believe Kerry was taking about No Child Left Behind. Um, he wasn't. From what I've read of the more complete remarks, he was talking about George W. Bush, and it was Bush who is "stuck in Iraq" - a phrase which applies to soldiers, true ... but is perfectly applicable to the President of the U.S.Yes, that I believe is true. Basically, there are 3 things going on.

1) He was talking about Bush and the speech was written to specifically mention Bush in that line, he screwed it up

2) The way he read it, it COULD reasonably have been interpreted as "If you fail at school, you'll end up in the military." That's been what I've been talking to, choosing to ignore the manufactured outrage and discus what I found to be an interesting side topic unintentially breached by the misstatement. Even assuming he did really mean (or Freudianly mean) it as spoken, to me that's the "worst" interpretation of the joke. That got me thinking of No Child Left Behind and how it was tailored to steer more and more youth towards military service.

3) Opponents of Kerry took a false logical leap and decided that "Bad students end up in the military" is the same as "Everyone in the military is uneducated/stupid." Thus, outrage.

So, there you have it.

[Gn2Dlnd]

I have to say that, now I've heard a bit more of what was said immediately BEFORE the too-quoted comment-of-death, soldiers were not the subject of the sentence at all.


Was it only three days ago that I pointed out the same thing? With linkies? It seems so long ago now.

See post 1599. And relive the future of today.

[innerSpaceman]

Hmmm, no links in your post 1599, but I believe you if you say you provided this information previously. Sometimes I skim these threads that get my blood boiling, so as to keep my cystolic within healthy range.

Sorry if I missed it.


I'm back now.

[Gn2Dlnd]

^ Oh, oops. It was a quote, not a link. But the quote was from the link (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/31/D8L3OTV00.html) in Nephythys' OP (http://www.loungeoftomorrow.com/LoT/showpost.php?p=103123&postcount=1595) #1595.

[Gn2Dlnd]

I have every right to be as hostile about what I consider vile politics as you do- because I have seen plenty of nasty comments from you about conservative politics.

No, you haven't.

Having just scanned through my 1,186 posts, I'm unable to find the nasty comments to which you refer. I've ridiculed the preznit's bad grammar. I've spoken up about anti-gay bias. I've ranted about willful misrepresentation of facts (Disney's Path to 9/11, John Kerry). I've railed against the mismanagement of the Katrina disaster, and I've called Tucker Carlson a dick. None of which rise to the level of "Kerry is a fvckin idiot who can't take responsiblity for his own words. Yeah you doofus- it's a Republican smear to point out that you are an insulting gasbag. God he is loathsome."

Please do not misrepresent me. Please do not willfully misinterpret what I post. Please don't think it's clever to use my negative characterization of your behavior on the board in your sig line, it's not. Last of all, I will not put you on ignore, nor will I play "cute board feud" with you. The importance of addressing the outrageous things you post far outweighs the irritation I experience in doing so.

[Nephythys]

Live up to your own standards- do not misrepresent me either.

You may not like my bluntness or my admitted lack of tact when dealing with some issues- that does not give you license to personally malign and attack me, or tell me what my intent is- or that I am "frothing" as if I am some rabid dog.

You have been insulting and rude.

Cheers- off to vote.

[wendybeth]

No, you haven't.

Having just scanned through my 1,186 posts, I'm unable to find the nasty comments to which you refer. I've ridiculed the preznit's bad grammar. I've spoken up about anti-gay bias. I've ranted about willful misrepresentation of facts (Disney's Path to 9/11, John Kerry). I've railed against the mismanagement of the Katrina disaster, and I've called Tucker Carlson a dick. None of which rise to the level of "Kerry is a fvckin idiot who can't take responsiblity for his own words. Yeah you doofus- it's a Republican smear to point out that you are an insulting gasbag. God he is loathsome."

Please do not misrepresent me. Please do not willfully misinterpret what I post. Please don't think it's clever to use my negative characterization of your behavior on the board in your sig line, it's not. Last of all, I will not put you on ignore, nor will I play "cute board feud" with you. The importance of addressing the outrageous things you post far outweighs the irritation I experience in doing so.
Now, there ya go bringing logic and facts into this again. Rush listeners have a hard time processing information when it's presented in this form- you know that, silly!

[wendybeth]

Well, what do you know- looks like more people think Rumsfield needs to go (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15552211/).

"This is not about the midterm elections," continued the editorial, which will appear in the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times, and Marine Corps Times on Monday. "Regardless of which party wins Nov. 7, the time has come, Mr. President, to face the hard bruising truth: Donald Rumsfeld must go."

[JWBear]

Well, what do you know- looks like more people think Rumsfield needs to go (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15552211/).

"This is not about the midterm elections," continued the editorial, which will appear in the Army Times, Air Force Times, Navy Times, and Marine Corps Times on Monday. "Regardless of which party wins Nov. 7, the time has come, Mr. President, to face the hard bruising truth: Donald Rumsfeld must go."
That would mean that Bush would have to admit that his administration's course in Iraq is wrong. That will never happen. He would rather see this country go down the toilet than admit he made a mistake.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

From the same article:

In the same interview, Bush said he did not foresee a change in the immediate future in the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. He said that U.S. generals have assured him that "they've got what they can live with."

What they can live with? What the hell does that mean? Hom many times has Bush said that whatever the generals ask for, they will get? What they have asked for and what they can live with sure sound like two very different things to me.

Not that it is a surprise or anything.

[wendybeth]

CNN and MSNBC are both reporting this, while FauxNews is doing it's usual bang-up job of not spinning by not reporting.

Looks like the Neo-Rats are deserting the sinking ship: Bush screwed it up! (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/03/iraq.critics.ap/index.html).

[scaeagles]

What they can live with? What the hell does that mean? Hom many times has Bush said that whatever the generals ask for, they will get? What they have asked for and what they can live with sure sound like two very different things to me.

If this was Kerry, of course, it would be understood that when Bush said "what they can live with" is the same as "what they need". After all, if you can live with it, you have what you need, right?

I AM SHOCKED AND APPALLED BY SUCH SPIN, MBC!

[Moonliner]

If this was Kerry, of course, it would be understood that when Bush said "what they can live with" is the same as "what they need". After all, if you can live with it, you have what you need, right?

I AM SHOCKED AND APPALLED BY SUCH SPIN, MBC!


That's one big if. I'll be waiting for Bush (or his peeps) to issue the correction to his statement.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I AM SHOCKED AND APPALLED BY SUCH SPIN, MBC!

But of course you are. :)

[scaeagles]

CNN and MSNBC are both reporting this, while FauxNews is doing it's usual bang-up job of not spinning by not reporting.

Looks like the Neo-Rats are deserting the sinking ship: Bush screwed it up! (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/03/iraq.critics.ap/index.html).

Gosh...maybe Fox news didn't report it because what Perle said was completely misrepresented.

From a statement made by Perle yesterday:

I believed we should not repeat that mistake with Saddam Hussein, that we could not responsibly ignore the threat that he might make weapons of mass destruction available to terrorists who would use them to kill Americans. I favored removing his regime. And despite the current difficulties, I believed, and told Mr. Rose, that “if we had left Saddam in place, and he had shared nerve gas with al Qaeda, or some other terrorist organization, how would we compare what we’re experiencing now with that?”

I believe the president is now doing what he can to help the Iraqis get to the point where we can honorably leave. We are on the right path.

Now that doesn't sound like someone leaving the ship. It sounds like he believes there are some things we could be doing better, and those items were taken out of context. The nedia trying lying to someone to get a sound bite to try to influence the election? I'm shocked!

Did MSNBC or CNN report that soundbite? Could be. I don't know....but I doubt it.

[Nephythys]

Oh no- not FACTS!


ahhhhhhhhhhh! ;)

Wuv ya Leo!

[innerSpaceman]

Thanks, Leo. I always prefer hearing things in context. I wish all speakers would be given that accord and respect, and I loathe the soundbite culture that makes almost every comment a zinger to be used as a weapon.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Perle says that he was assured by Vanity Fair that the story wouldn't be released until after the election, which it isn't. It is scheduled to be in the January issue. However, the press release from the magazine gave excerpts from the article before the election and now he is doing damage control.

In other words, party before country.

[Nephythys]

Funny you would mention party before country- sounds like the Democrat party through and through.

Editorial by Orson Scott-Card (http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2006-10-29-1.html)

Very long- but worth reading. Even he, as a Dem, can see the Dems are putting political power over the safety of our country.

What really scares me is the 2008 election. The Democratic Party is hopeless -- only clowns seem to be able to rise to prominence there these days, while they boot out the only Democrats serious about keeping America's future safe. But the Republicans are almost equally foolish, trying to find somebody who is farther right than Bush -- somebody who will follow the conservative line far better than the moderate Bush has ever attempted -- and somebody who will "kick butt" in foreign policy.

So if we get one of the leading Democrats as our new President in 2009, we'll be on the road to pusillanimous withdrawal and the resulting chaos in the world.

While if we elect any of the Republicans who are extremist enough to please the Hannity wing of the party, our resulting belligerence will likely provoke Islam into unifying behind one of the tyrants, which is every bit as terrifying an outcome.

I hope somebody emerges in one of the parties, at least, who commits himself or herself to continuing Bush's careful, wise, moderate, and so-far-successful policies in the War on Terror.

Meanwhile, we have this election. You have your vote. For the sake of our children's future -- and for the sake of all good people in the world who don't get to vote in the only election that matters to their future, too -- vote for no Congressional candidate who even hints at withdrawing from Iraq or opposing Bush's leadership in the war. And vote for no candidate who will hand control of the House of Representatives to those who are sworn to undo Bush's restrained but steadfast foreign policy in this time of war.


Heh- my kind of Dem. Too bad the moonbats seem to run the party.

[wendybeth]

Oh no- not FACTS!


ahhhhhhhhhhh! ;)

Wuv ya Leo!


Pssst, Nephy- that's what commonly known as 'spin', which is why you are so quick to buy it! Getting dizzy yet, dear?

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Even he, as a Dem, can see the Dems are putting political power over the safety of our country.

A democrat in the grand tradition of Zell Miller. C'mon, the reason this guy considers himself a dem is solely based on his pro gun legislation stance. Otherwise, he has always been pro-war, pro-bush, and anti-gay. So I'm not in the least surprised that he feels the way he does.

And his view that we are winning the war in Iraq and on Terrorism in general has no basis in reality. Y'all can keep repeating those lines as much as possible. It doesn't change the fact that it isn't true. Just listen to what the military leaders are saying. They are there and they understand that they are in a hopeless situation.

And the sad fact is, I think that most republicans understand this as well. Unfortunately, it is more important to retain power than to try to figure out a way to putting an end to our soldiers being killed on a daily basis in an unwinnable war, simply because the administration refuses to admit that they erred in starting this war.

And yet, had they paid any attention to this (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/04/war.games.ap/index.html):

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A series of secret U.S. war games in 1999 showed that an invasion and post-war administration of Iraq would require 400,000 troops, nearly three times the number there now.

And even then, the games showed, the country still had a chance of dissolving into chaos.

In the simulation, called Desert Crossing, 70 military, diplomatic and intelligence participants concluded the high troop levels would be needed to keep order, seal borders and take care of other security needs.

The documents came to light Saturday through a Freedom of Information Act request by George Washington University's National Security Archive, an independent research institute and library.

"The conventional wisdom is the U.S. mistake in Iraq was not enough troops," said Thomas Blanton, the archive's director. "But the Desert Crossing war game in 1999 suggests we would have ended up with a failed state even with 400,000 troops on the ground."

[Nephythys]

I guess you buy the media and the spin that best fits your appetite.

I know I would not trust the left with protecting this country.

It's not about wanting a change- it's about trust. It's about a party that shows disdain or open hostility for the military, America, Christians.....

Meh-

[JWBear]

I guess you buy the media and the spin that best fits your appetite.

I know I would not trust the left with protecting this country.

It's not about wanting a change- it's about trust. It's about a party that shows disdain or open hostility for the military, America, Christians.....

Meh-
My... that's a mighty big brush you're painting with, nephy. Care to back up that outrageous accusation with some facts?

Silly me... I should know better than to ask you for that.

Most Democrats respect and honor the men and women who serve in the military. So much so, in fact, that they are doing their best to bring them home from Iraq – a place they should never have been sent in the first place. Republicans love the military? What about the veteran’s benefits the Republican lead Congress and the Republican President cut? What about the callous disregard with which the Republican administration sent them off to die in the thousands just so the Republican President can get off on being a “War President”.

Democrats hate America??? Where do you get that sh*t??? Just because Democrats don’t agree with you and Bush and the way things are headed in this country, you say they hate America? How arrogant! Yes, millions of Democrats (and independents, and even Republicans too) are fighting to turn this country around, and head it in the right direction – a direction away from heedless aggression, despotism, economic collapse, and the shredding of the Constitution. They must really hate America to want too see it made better, freer, stronger.

Democrats hate Christians? That must be news to the millions of Christian Democrats. They must be self-hating Christians. Thanks for letting them know. :rolleyes:

[Motorboat Cruiser]

It's about a party that shows disdain or open hostility for the military, America, Christians.....


Certainly you should have no problem providing a cite that shows the democratic party showing disdain or open hostility towards Christians, the military, or americans. Not a cite that shows someone who considers themselves a democrat saying it but a statement or evidence that the Democratic party is anti-Christian, anti american, or anti-military.

I know that this is what the religious right would like voters to believe but I would like to see it backed up with something more than blind accusations. Seriously, just because Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Rush say it is true doesn't mean that it is.

[Gn2Dlnd]

It's about a party that shows disdain or open hostility for the military, America, Christians.....


As opposed to a "grand ol' " party that shows disdain and open hostility to the citizenry?

As for the military, they'll do just fine once they have leaders who don't disregard their safety.

America? Do you mean all of it, or an aspect of it? I'm unaware of any politicians in or running for office who think we should disband the country. I'll bet you're talking about border control, aren't you?

Christians? Please. They're (you're?) doing fine. They'll pray good ol' Rev. Haggard up some het'rosexuality and a cure from crystal meth (how I'd love to be a fly on that wall), Christmas and Easter will survive, and, hopefully, they'll take their ridiculous anti-science notions home and pray to Jesus to shut their mouths, 'cause they sure love to broadcast their ignorance. Any Christians reading this who don't behave this way need to get on the phone or write a letter, because these morons aren't doing you any good.

[Strangler Lewis]

It's not about wanting a change- it's about trust. It's about a party that shows disdain or open hostility for the military, America, Christians.....

Meh-

Holy culture of victimization!

Let me be the first to say . . . Happy holidays!

[Nephythys]

When the groups on the left stop claiming victimized status by the right- you might have a point with the snarky comments.

I am so frelling sick of the double standard.

Repeatedly I have seen the entire party maligned as evil, bigoted and out to get people-but when I comment on the view from this side- you defend the party.

I believe it because of personal experience-

Meh-I am sick of it all. I'll vote tomorrow- but the way my life is being lived won't change a whit no matter the outcome.

[JWBear]

When the groups on the left stop claiming victimized status by the right- you might have a point with the snarky comments.

I am so frelling sick of the double standard.

Repeatedly I have seen the entire party maligned as evil, bigoted and out to get people-but when I comment on the view from this side- you defend the party.

I believe it because of personal experience-

Meh-I am sick of it all. I'll vote tomorrow- but the way my life is being lived won't change a whit no matter the outcome.
We rip Republican politicians for their actions and policies. You rip Democrats in general simply because you hate Democrats. Big difference Nephy. If you can’t see the difference, then I feel sorry for you.

[Nephythys]

:p
:decap:

[Not Afraid]

Holy culture of victimization!


BINGO!

[wendybeth]

Sure your life may change, Neph! Maybe we can get out of this damned war before your kids get drafted, because that is the next step, you know. They can fudge the mumbers all they want; we are understaffed and there are not enough new ones coming in to be of much help. Just ask any service member who is on their third or fourth tour. Even the generals and the leadership of the Reserves are getting very vocal in their criticism and concerns with regards to how this war is being conducted and it's impact on the home front. Hell, ask the GAO, who's September report is scathingly critical of our economy and the inevitable coming crash.

You think the Dems might be problematic; I know the Repubs have been so.

[Scrooge McSam]

What's with the robo-calling?

Did they not expect to get caught? Or is winning all that matters?

[Nephythys]

heh- according to Pelosi there are two choices for the outcome of the election:

"we either win, or they cheat"

So- if the GOP loses it is a national rejection of their policies.
If the Dems lose it's because the election was stolen.

If the GOP loses it's because people want change and believe in the Dems to provide it.
If the Dems lose it has nothing to do with their policies, it's because someone cheated.

I've never seen so many whiners in my life- "we don't lose because people don't like our politics- we lose because everyone else cheats"

Charming.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Eh, let's just see how it plays out first before we start speculating what everyone's reaction is going to be.

At this point, I consider it an anything-can-happen tossup and am not getting my hopes up.

I'll just be happy when it is over, and even happier if some balance of power is brought back into our system of government. Everyone should want that balance of power, if for no other reason than to bring some control over spending.

As far as I'm concerned, a balance of power is FAR more important to the health of the government, than one side or the other winning. Unfortunately, most on the right don't seem to understand this concept and think that anything other than complete control is a loss. It isn't.

[Nephythys]

This is not a guess- this is history. Nothing new- already been said.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Well, without a cite, it's a good as a guess. I have yet to see this reported anywhere and that's after reading a number of quotes from Nancy Pelosi that took place over the last few days. I'm willing to change my mind, depending on the source. I've heard her express concern over the integrity of the election but nowhere have I heard her say "We either win or they cheat". And Google comes up empty on that phrase as well.

Care to offer a different quote or provide a cite for this bit of history?

[wendybeth]

I've heard more whining here than in any political speeches.:rolleyes:

[Not Afraid]

Eh, no matter WHAT happens, there's gonna be some stupid spin happening causing me to roll my eyes and hat politics all the more.

[Nephythys]

Well, without a cite, it's a good as a guess. I have yet to see this reported anywhere and that's after reading a number of quotes from Nancy Pelosi that took place over the last few days. I'm willing to change my mind, depending on the source. I've heard her express concern over the integrity of the election but nowhere have I heard her say "We either win or they cheat". And Google comes up empty on that phrase as well.

Care to offer a different quote or provide a cite for this bit of history?


Link (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/11/05/PELOSI.TMP&type=printable)

Let's see-

Pelosi cautioned that the number of Democratic House victories could be higher or lower and said her greatest concern is over the integrity of the count -- from the reliability of electronic voting machines to her worries that Republicans will try to manipulate the outcome.

"That is the only variable in this," Pelosi said. "Will we have an honest count?''




"If indeed it turns out the way that people expect it to turn out, the American people will have spoken, and they will have rejected the course of action the president is on."


...and now, feel free to spin away my paraphrase cause that of course is what matters.

Dems win- rejection of the course the President has set us on.
Dems lose- was it an honest count?

It's a common refrain from Dems when they lose- this is not new this year, and won't be new in any other election they may lose.

[scaeagles]

I voted.

AZ has the longest ballot it has ever had (due to 15 or so propostitions). I got there at 6:00 when the polls opened, was the 33rd person to vote, and I didn't get out of there until 6:45. That's going to be some long, long wait times if it's taking 1.5 minutes or so per person in line.

[Nephythys]

I voted.

AZ has the longest ballot it has ever had (due to 15 or so propostitions). I got there at 6:00 when the polls opened, was the 33rd person to vote, and I didn't get out of there until 6:45. That's going to be some long, long wait times if it's taking 1.5 minutes or so per person in line.


Figured.

I tried voting on Thursday- line was too long, tried early voting again on Friday- too long again. I came in an hour and a half early to work so I could take a long lunch and vote after the lunch rush.

:snap: for voting

[Scrooge McSam]

My voting went very smoothly this morning.

Check in was quick. Ha, my mom was working poll checkin this morning and trying her best to be shiny and happy so early in the morning. The machines were calibrated properly. We had visible audit trail printers on each machine.

I'm happy.

[Nephythys]

While I am frustrated to have to go three times to get it done- I did get something accomplished on Friday. I found out that I changed my address after the deadline so I need to vote under my old address. Good thing I did not move far away!

[Alex]

It feels like I voted about three years ago. I'm on permanent absentee status and I sent it in as early as possible.

Deep down I have a problem with people voting at various times with different amounts of information available but it is nice that I voted with little pushed awareness of candidates and mostly pulled information that I sought out.

[Snowflake]

After my move, I reregistered in CA just in time to make the deadline to spare with a few days.

Since I am on early hours at work, can't vote before coming in. I'm leaving work at 3 to get home and then get myself to the polls with plenty of time to vote/stand in line, whatever.

I don't care where you stand, left right, center, up, down, underground. if you don't vote, you lose all rights to bitch about the outcome if you don't agree with it!

[innerSpaceman]

While it's possible for voting irregularities to go either way ... funny how it just so happens that all the instances found in early voting (and there have been many ... check Maryland, Florida and Georgia for but a few examples) .... all the "errors" have gone in favor of Republicans.

Imagine that! Coincidence??

[Nephythys]

In wards 7, 19, 51 in Philly, PA, the crowds are going wild. Inside several voting locations, individuals have poured white out onto the polling books and the poll workers are allowing voters to go into the polls and vote without first registering. Several individuals are on hand demanding that voters vote straight Democrat.

RNC lawyers have headed to the scene of the incidents, which are occurring in mostly hispanic precinct locations. The District Attorney has also been contacted.

More from the ground: Reports of voter intimidation by son-in-law of Philadelphia City Commissioner in 19th Ward. Carlos Mantos is not allowing Republican poll watchers with valid poll-watching certificates monitor polling places.


(no link yet- will look)

[Scrooge McSam]

In wards 7, 19, 51 in Philly, PA, the crowds are going wild. Inside several voting locations, individuals have poured white out onto the polling books and the poll workers are allowing voters to go into the polls and vote without first registering. Several individuals are on hand demanding that voters vote straight Democrat.

RNC lawyers have headed to the scene of the incidents, which are occurring in mostly hispanic precinct locations. The District Attorney has also been contacted.

More from the ground: Reports of voter intimidation by son-in-law of Philadelphia City Commissioner in 19th Ward. Carlos Mantos is not allowing Republican poll watchers with valid poll-watching certificates monitor polling places.


(no link yet- will look)

What do you mean "no link yet"?

That's a direct lift from redstate.com.

[Nephythys]

I was looking for a news link- clearly I know the audience. Excuse me for trying to find a cross reference.

I could have posted the Redstate link- which would have been soundly rejected- or I could look for an alternate link with more info from a different source- I chose option B.

If I find more- I'll post it.

[Scrooge McSam]

How's that going? I'm having no luck.

[Nephythys]

I'm hardly sitting here surfing for one link- if something comes up during the day I will post it.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

...and now, feel free to spin away my paraphrase cause that of course is what matters.


I'm sorry but when you put something in quotations, that implies that it is a direct quote, not a paraphrase.

It does matter.

[Nephythys]

I'm sorry but when you put something in quotations, that implies that it is a direct quote, not a paraphrase.

It does matter.


Excuse me I made a mistake in typing.

...and here it is AGAIN-

"Neph- you made a mistake- you put quotes around the words. That means something- now take reponsibility for it"

"Mr Kerry- you just made a mistake on a joke. It did not mean anything- your words were twisted by people who don't "get it"- you have no responsibility"

:rolleyes:

Honest to God- I need a smilie throwing up his arms and saying Fvck it.

[Ghoulish Delight]

"Mr Kerry- you just made a mistake on a joke. It did not mean anything- your words were twisted by people who don't "get it"- you have no responsibility"
How about, "Mr. Kerry Said A, meant to say B, other people decided he meant C which would have been offensive if he had either said it or meant to say it. But since he said A, and meant B, what the hell does C have to do with it?"

Compared to,

"Neph said A, menat B, people had a problem with B."

The outrage over Kerry had not to do with what he said, but what people decided he meant. MBC was going on exactly what you said. If it's not what you meant, fine you corrected it. But he didn't pull some 3rd interpretation out of nowhere.

[BarTopDancer]

And I thought there wasn't going to be anything good to watch today since the networks were covering the election.

;)

[Nephythys]

How about, "Mr. Kerry Said A, meant to say B, other people decided he meant C which would have been offensive if he had either said it or meant to say it. But since he said A, and meant B, what the hell does C have to do with it?"

Compared to,

"Neph said A, menat B, people had a problem with B."

The outrage over Kerry had not to do with what he said, but what people decided he meant. MBC was going on exactly what you said. If it's not what you meant, fine you corrected it. But he didn't pull some 3rd interpretation out of nowhere.


How's this?

I am over it.

Fvcking over it.

Move on- new topic- we will never agree and I am fvkcing sick of it all.

(ok- sorry- I am just angry today- it is not about the election or you guys- it's just...a no good horrible very bad day)

[BarTopDancer]

How's this?

I am over it.

Fvcking over it.

Move on- new topic- we will never agree and I am fvkcing sick of it all.

Promise?

[Not Afraid]

Damn. I thought this was going to be entertaining.

[BarTopDancer]

Damn. I thought this was going to be entertaining.

I know! Now you have to go be productive. And I have to work.

Bah!

[SacTown Chronic]

There's no whining over election fraud, Neph. At least that's always been your stance before today. Or is it only moonbat-ish to raise concerns over Republican shenanigans?

[Nephythys]

There's no whining over election fraud, Neph. At least that's always been your stance before today. Or is it only moonbat-ish to raise concerns over Republican shenanigans?


What are you talking about?

I have never said no one should whine or not whine- I said they should freaking get over it when there is no proof of something that DID NOT happen years ago.

Concerns- fine
Being cautious- fine
Getting it right- very good

Harping on as if the only way the GOP wins is through fraud.
Complaining about stolen elections that were NOT stolen-

gets frelling old really fast.

[BarTopDancer]

Thought you were over it?

[JWBear]

So Nephy… If the Democrats win control of Congress today, and Republicans demand recounts, can we tell them to, “get over it”?

[Ghoulish Delight]

Move on- new topic- we will never agree and I am fvkcing sick of it all.
*shrug* You were the one who brought it back up with a poor analogy, but okay, you're over it. I'm more than willing to move on.

[Nephythys]

*shrug* You were the one who brought it back up with a poor analogy, but okay, you're over it. I'm more than willing to move on.


Spiffy.

Next topic?:p

[Nephythys]

A poll worker was arrested Tuesday and charged with assault and interfering with an election for allegedly choking a voter and pushing the voter out the door, an official said.
Election officials called police, and the voter wanted to file charges, said Paula McCraney, a spokeswoman for the Jefferson County Clerk.

"That about tops off the day," McCraney said.

It wasn't immediately clear what sparked the altercation. The name of the poll worker was not released and a Louisville police spokesman did not immediately return calls seeking comment.


Link (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/07/D8L8C9RO0.html)

:rolleyes:

[Not Afraid]

That's too bad. But, so what? Yeah, there are dumb people who do wrong things and think intimidation is the way to go.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I wish I could say that I'm surprised by that story but I suspect that today will be filled with story after story of people letting their emotions get the best of them today.

I suppose it is a good thing to see people so passionate about today's outcome but this election has really brought out the worst in everyone.

[wendybeth]

I'm sorry but when you put something in quotations, that implies that it is a direct quote, not a paraphrase.

It does matter.

I was going to point that out as well. As far as the Redstate snippet, you were right about it's reception, and right on to Scrooge for catching that. (I thought it was Rush, but I can only bring myself to scan FauxNews to see what the other side is up to and my Rush is rusty).

Why are you working so hard to make the Dems look like your side- so you can say "They do it too?"

[JWBear]

I thought you were dropping the subject, Nephy......

[BarTopDancer]

So, I went to vote today and I have a provisional ballot because they claim they didn't get my address change in time. I think it was a vast right wing conspiracy to prevent me from voting. stomp stomp stomp pout pout fakeyage its not fair stomp stomp.

[Scrooge McSam]

stomp stomp stomp pout pout fakeyage its not fair stomp stomp.

Give that girl some cha cha heels!

[Nephythys]

"A man who reportedly believed Republicans were conspiring to steal today's election entered an Allentown polling site, signed in and proceeded to smash the screen of one of the electronic voting machines with a metal cat paperweight, poll volunteers said.

Michael Young, 43, of 375 Auburn St., will be charged with felony criminal mischief and tampering with voting machines, according to Ronald Manescu, chief of investigations for Allentown police.

Police gave no motive, but a source said Young, a registered Independent, believed Republicans had conspired to win the election by using electronic ballots. This is the first time electronic machines are being widely used in a Pennsylvania general election.

"He smashed it with the cat's ears," said volunteer Jim Govostis, who watched the incident unfold at Raker Center, a nursing home owned by Good Shepherd, around 12:30 p.m."

Oh lordie- :rolleyes:

Link requires registration on Chicago Tribune website.

Voting went smoothly for me- just took over 2 hours- which is why I was not here enjoying such charming company. ;)

[BarTopDancer]

Haven't you seen Man of the Year? They are conspiring to win with electronic voting machines! And they aren't counting my vote either! stomp stomp [hair toss]

[CoasterMatt]

Oh lordie- :rolleyes:

Link requires registration on Chicago Tribune website.

Voting went smoothly for me- just took over 2 hours- which is why I was not here enjoying such charming company. ;)

Hey at least it wasn't a crazy cat LADY smashing the screen!

[Nephythys]

Hey at least it wasn't a crazy cat LADY smashing the screen!


Ok- that would have been too much for words! LOL:eek:

However- despite differences Lisa is too damn cool and classy to do any such thing. Her passion is for things other than politics. ;)

[JWBear]

Hey at least it wasn't a crazy cat LADY smashing the screen!
That paints a vivid image.....

[Nephythys]

Link (http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=elections&id=4737362)

The US Attorney for New Jersey has dispatched investigators to run down complaints of voting machine problems which are preventing voters from casting ballots for GOP Senate hopeful Tom Kean, Jr.

The counsel for the NJ Republican State Committee, Mark Sheridan, says he has four sworn affidavits and has received more than two dozen calls alleging that some of New Jersey's electronic voting machines were either "pre-voted" for Democratic incumbant Bob Menendez, or were otherwise inoperable when voters sought to cast votes for Kean.

[wendybeth]

Link (http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=elections&id=4737362)
I'll see your voting machine tampering, and raise you one voter intimidation (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15603344/) !

[Scrooge McSam]

OMG Corruption poker!

*socks flying*

[wendybeth]

It's not strip poker, Scrooge.

[Scrooge McSam]

You're no fun anymore

[wendybeth]

Let me get the Tequila.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Laura Ingraham is apparently telling people that it would be a good idea to call and jam the phone lines that are being used to report voter fraud issues. ThinkProgress.com has the audio available of her saying this.

[Nephythys]

It's a random thread-and since I have learned not to click on certain posts I am happily posting into random silence for all I know or care.

Though the cat thing was amazing- I hope no one's votes were lost because of that idiot.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Let me get the Tequila.

Oh, if I didn't have to play a gig tonight, I would be so in on this! :)

[Nephythys]

Laura Ingraham is apparently telling people that it would be a good idea to call and jam the phone lines that are being used to report voter fraud issues. ThinkProgress.com has the audio available of her saying this.


Does she identify herself- has there been a voice print comparison?

I mean come on- maybe yes and maybe no.

Just saying.

[JWBear]

Are you just sitting around, trolling the internet for examples of voting proplems that involve Democrats? Have you nothing better to do?

[JWBear]

Does she identify herself- has there been a voice print comparison?

I mean come on- maybe yes and maybe no.

Just saying.
Ahha! You are reading posts!

[wendybeth]

Just random ones.

[Nephythys]

Poll worker mistakenly asks for IDs
An inexperienced poll worker in Wauwatosa asked residents standing in line for the first five minutes after the polls opened today to get their photo IDs ready, the city's deputy clerk said.

Resident Michael Schall told the Journal Sentinel he was in line at Washington Elementary School when the poll worker told everyone to have a driver's license or other picture ID ready "or I don't think we'll be able to let you vote."

Schall said his wife automatically reached for her ID, but he told her it wasn't required. The couple has voted at the same polling location for many years, he said.

When they got up to the table to vote, however, no one asked to see a photo ID, Schall said.
Deputy Clerk Bernadette Williams said no one was.

"She (the poll worker) made a mistake, and as soon as the ward chair heard her saying that, she corrected her. They were never required to show their ID," Williams said.

A representative for the state Democratic Party called the city to raise concerns but was satisfied when told the poll worker would be told to stop, she said.





OH MY GOD- not ID- heaven forbid you have to identify yourself with gov't issued ID.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! :rolleyes:

link (http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=22&date=11/07/2006&id=14002)

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Does she identify herself- has there been a voice print comparison?

I mean come on- maybe yes and maybe no.

Just saying.

If I'm not mistaken (and I could be), doing so is blatantly illegal. If it is true, my guess is that we will find out soon enough. It is being reported by people all over the country though that they heard her say it on her show.

We'll just have to wait and see.

[Ghoulish Delight]

OH MY GOD- not ID- heaven forbid you have to identify yourself with gov't issued ID.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! :rolleyes:

link (http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=22&date=11/07/2006&id=14002)Whether you agree with it or no, the fact is that current laws forbid requiring ID. A change in those laws may or may not be a good idea, but poll-worker ignorance is once of the biggest sources of voter confusion/disenfranchisement/fraud.

[Nephythys]

If I'm not mistaken (and I could be), doing so is blatantly illegal. If it is true, my guess is that we will find out soon enough. It is being reported by people all over the country though that they heard her say it on her show.

We'll just have to wait and see.


That's all I wondered.

[Nephythys]

Whether you agree with it or no, the fact is that current laws forbid requiring ID. A change in those laws may or may not be a good idea, but poll-worker ignorance is once of the biggest sources of voter confusion/disenfranchisement/fraud.


yeah- cause people are so scared and stupid that someone asking them for their ID makes them afraid to vote.