sweetheart-mine

Wikipedia has a bunch of examples, but this is the one that immediately came to mind:

oh yah, that one leaps to mind immediately. i believe to this day that people who fell for that scenario and its timing would probably fall for anything that supported what they already had bought. it's a magnificent example of political manipulation and gain at its "best." ugh.

I'm reading all these pre-debate articles and getting pretty ill over all the hand-wringing over how Biden approaches Palin in order not to appear like he's picking on the poor defenseless little woman. Please. I mean, I know, I know. Clearly we don't live in a perfect world where gender equality is yet a reality, but this whole "delicate flower" crap really is setting the cause of feminism back about 50 years.

thank you, this is right on. why don't more people say it? palin is not poor, not defenseless, not a "delicate flower." and even if she were, she would have to prove her intelligence and capability in the real world just like anyone else. opportunity is one thing, and no doubt still to be fought for on some (even many) fronts; but to use the feminism challenges of 50 (or less) years ago as some kind of fallback-finger-pointing position whenever a public woman either is or acts stupid or naive, yes, it sets back the causes of feminism and of the larger human condition.

Change sounds good but for the majority of the population change is scarier than anything really. You know comfort zones and all that.

there is a lot of truth to that, and it's one reason why, no matter how the polls move and the debates go, i will basically be a nervous wreck right up to the election.

Homer Simpson tries to vote for Obama

and and

I'm just so pleased that I might have made a point in this thread (I do not support palin, just for clarification)

 

But I do think the point I made is valid. I once enjoyed dave matthews when I was in college and he was a nobody. Now I refuse to go to his shows in part because of his recordings but mostly because of the fans I would have to endure.

i'm getting confused. is this the election thread or the red sox i mean baseball playoffs thread?

tbs just said that pedroia is sometimes called (no doubt by papi) cavajito? cavallito? meaning "little pony." that's damned cute.

No one's supposed to wear white (socks) after Labor Day, anyway. So it works out.

white socks should not exist, never mind be worn. in my opinion.

Well, you knew it had to happen, here we have the right manufacturing a controversy that will surely be used to dampen the damage Palin will undoubtedly do the GOP ticket tomorrow night - any and all failures on her part will be placed squarely on the moderator, Gwen Ifill. So fucking sad and predictable. The irony is, is that in all likelihood, Ifill will be a bit more forceful with Biden to make up for any imagined liberal bias - Ifill is a consummate pro.

 

Controversy brews up around VP debate moderator Ifill

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/01/gwen.ifill/index.html

hollow controversy. all they have to do is sit back, let others stick their necks out, and then poke with sticks. sort of like so-called "debate" that takes place on some message boards.

You know how sometimes one dislikes a musical artist's fans more than that artist? I think some of that (I still recognize the disdain of the candidate herself) is in play with the criticism of palin. I think it frightens a lot of you that so many americans agree with her points of view. No? Just wondering.

yes, very frightening, though the number of americans thinking she'd make a good v.p., for whatever reason, seems to be dwindling. this could be a reason to celebrate americans' ability to eventually choose even slightly longer-term evaluation over love at first sight, at least when it comes to basic leadership. we'll see.

You Sox fans sure are cocky and greedy when October hits.

cocky doesn't sound accurate, but there might be an element of greed after 86 YEARS and then two championships. i don't think they're going to win it all this year, mostly due to injuries in bad spots, but whatever happens, i'm still high from 04 and double high from last year. not that it wouldn't be nice to make it again this year. and lester just now got out of a very bad predicament, so who knows?!?!?

for lester

I'm just excited to have found a pic of Red Sox fans at Fenway that wasn't 100% caucasian.

yes, that can't have been easy.

What's Manny Delcarmen doing in the stands?

I received one, though I think my wife may have tossed it. I

I love this Obama quote from early April:

 

"Foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain."

obama is clearly more deeply interested in active diplomacy than either of them. he has his foreign-policy priorities straight. to me that means he does understand the world better, will listen to the rest of the world rather than merely talk at it, and is in a better position both to carry out effective diplomacy and to make subsequent decisions based on it. no contest.

in the last thread someone, i can't remember who, had received one of the terrorism!-vote-mccain propaganda discs and was going to listen and report on it. did that happen and i missed it? can't find it but am very interested.

Damn straight!

 

GO RED SOX!

i love your avatar today.

i'm worried about the injuries.

but most important,

GO SOX!!!

Awesome...simply awesome.

 

There have been some bad choices for VP in history but this has to be the worst, correct?

at least since 1972, yes, this is the worst, by far. if she surprises positively, and with truly her own thinking on thursday, i will do something unheard of.

I saw someone interviewed on CNN (I think) - and they said that they were voting for McCain as he would be the best person to stop the people in Iraq from coming over here and blowing up more buildings.

if only the wrong assumptions in that could be funny. they would call for:

Whats wrong with talking to them?

absolutely nothing. i'm surprised by this article and find it heartening. who knows if anything will come of it in the long run, but at least someone is making the effort.

p.s. didn't even see this thread yesterday.

upset republicans who voted no and who spoke to the press yesterday referred to their own alternate plans that according to them weren't even considered. i wonder what those plans are. they didn't say, and i find it hard to believe that they have main street's interests in mind any more than the other people who were working night and day on this thing. not that i think congress should be in the huge hurry bush and paulson were to basically loot the treasury, which is what their hurry sure looked like.

I keep meaning to tell McCain about the dream I had about the Vietnamese submarine aircraft carriers sneaking up the Hudson to attack Poughkeepsie.

the "law and order" crime fighters are going to beat them to it. i've noticed those guys really have it in for poughkeepsie. especially jerry orbach. of course, he's dead.

And.....it's been that way since 1945!!

 

-Robert

well, that's even more interesting, thank you for the info.

it was only since the current "war" began that i started to absorb the kind of money we spend on what is called defense.

After 72 years of republican endorsements, paper endorces OBAMA

The choice is clear: OBAMA

 

Kucinich sums up my thoughts on the Bailout in 1 minute

Kucinich on bailout

these are great. i love kucinich. in some ways it's a miracle he keeps getting elected, when pretty much without fail he says what he thinks, decade after decade -- though at the moment i think he's speaking for a lot more people than usual, including people who at other times might not give him the time of day.

With all due respect, and in essence I agree with you, Obama often comes across every bit as militaristic as McCain, his saber-rattling towards Iran and Pakistan every bit as bellicose. The unfortunate fact is, regardless of who is in the White House, the US, more often than not, does not respect borders or the autonomy of other nations.

it usually disappoints me when obama talks about fighting the "war on terror." at the same time, i recognize that he has to do it -- he has to have a perspective on it and plans for possible actions he might consider taking IF he found them necessary as president. i completely disagree that obama "comes across every bit as militaristic as mccain" and that his saber-rattling is "every bit as bellicose" as mccain's. they're not even close. also, obama's military talk is only one aspect of his broader foreign-policy perspective. mccain appears to have little to no other perspective -- the military filter is always there.

re: waste in defense spending brought up earlier, most of you probably know that the u.s. now spends more on our military (and military ventures) than all the rest of the countries in the world combined. strange? lopsided beyond belief? here the years vary only slightly and are all twenty-first-century figures:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

$623 billion -- u.s. military expenditures

$500 billion -- the rest of the world, including $65 billion by china, $50 billion by russia, and it's downward from there.

i'm no economist, but really, what does this tell the world about our priorities?

ah. great and real message . . .

I know, what am I gonna do for fun after the election?

daily show and colbert report reruns might help . . . . . . in hard retrospect, but also in the almost-wistful nostalgia about somewhat humorous nastiness you can remember yet hope never to fight through again, eh?