Wrapping up the Week of the DNC Convention: What in the Heck Was McCain Thinking?

Certainly a strong evironmentalist – as long as that does not interfere in any way with the growing oil dividend ($3000 per person)that each Alaskan enjoys. The program is simple, charge everyone who visits Alaska an environmental tax ($50) while drilling as many holes as possible to keep the oil flowing.

This is a person who presides over a government that is in session 90 days per year. Also if you ever want to visit a vacant house, take a stroll past the governor’s mansion in Juneau.

Certainly a strong evironmentalist – as long as that does not interfere in any way with the growing oil dividend ($3000 per person)that each Alaskan enjoys. The program is simple, charge everyone who visits Alaska an environmental tax ($50) while drilling as many holes as possible to keep the oil flowing.

This is a person who presides over a government that is in session 90 days per year. Also if you ever want to visit a vacant house, take a stroll past the governor’s mansion in Juneau.

McCain didn’t select Palin for people like us, he selected her to reach evangelical Christians, women and blue collar workers

from that standpoint, it’s a great choice

–Richard Estes

McCain didn’t select Palin for people like us, he selected her to reach evangelical Christians, women and blue collar workers

from that standpoint, it’s a great choice

–Richard Estes

That much is true. What remains to be seen is whether this choice does anything for someone not to the right McCain. If his hope was to get moderate former Hillary supporters, it looks like a bad move.

That much is true. What remains to be seen is whether this choice does anything for someone not to the right McCain. If his hope was to get moderate former Hillary supporters, it looks like a bad move.

Oh, yes, but our local rabid Repug, Matt Rexroad (I’m a veteran, I’m a veteran!), just LUUUUUVS the Palin pick. Why, because she has more ‘executive’ experience. As if less than two years of governorship over a sparsely-populated state beats out a dozen years in the state legislature. But no, McCain could have picked the car from Knight Rider as his running mate and Rexroad (I go to church, I go to church!) would have gushed about how it was the perfect pick because choosing a car as a running mate signals how sensitive McBush is to high gas prices. Plus, the car can talk!
And it’s no different over at the Roughstank blog, where UC Davis gubment worker Walt Lucas (I’m a cowboy, I’m a cowboy!) waxes poetic about the pick is perfect because people call her by her first name. Excellent. I suppose Shrub was even better because people call him by only one letter.
This pick was pandering on several levels, and it is amazing that they could find a single person who in one stroke was a right-wing-evangelical, handicapped baby having, gun-toting, fossil fuel loving, anti-environmental, anti-evolution, anti-science, sexpot.
Hillary supports are not amused, and Matt Rexroad (I don’t like gay marriage, I don’t like gay marriage!) loses all credibility (none to begin with, now in deficit) with his endorsement of this ‘senior moment.’

Oh, yes, but our local rabid Repug, Matt Rexroad (I’m a veteran, I’m a veteran!), just LUUUUUVS the Palin pick. Why, because she has more ‘executive’ experience. As if less than two years of governorship over a sparsely-populated state beats out a dozen years in the state legislature. But no, McCain could have picked the car from Knight Rider as his running mate and Rexroad (I go to church, I go to church!) would have gushed about how it was the perfect pick because choosing a car as a running mate signals how sensitive McBush is to high gas prices. Plus, the car can talk!
And it’s no different over at the Roughstank blog, where UC Davis gubment worker Walt Lucas (I’m a cowboy, I’m a cowboy!) waxes poetic about the pick is perfect because people call her by her first name. Excellent. I suppose Shrub was even better because people call him by only one letter.
This pick was pandering on several levels, and it is amazing that they could find a single person who in one stroke was a right-wing-evangelical, handicapped baby having, gun-toting, fossil fuel loving, anti-environmental, anti-evolution, anti-science, sexpot.
Hillary supports are not amused, and Matt Rexroad (I don’t like gay marriage, I don’t like gay marriage!) loses all credibility (none to begin with, now in deficit) with his endorsement of this ‘senior moment.’

DG: “(If) McCain expected that Hillary voters would support a right wing, anti-choice, anti-health care, and anti-environmental woman just because she is a woman, he is in for a rude awakening.”

Unofortunately, Richard Estes beat me to the punch.

I think McCain and his circle originally had it in mind that the Republican ticket could improve among women voters if Hillary was not going to be the Democratic VP and McCain picked a female running mate. That is why they were floating Kay Bailey Hutchinson and a couple of others. That is why Palin, who seems utterly unqualified*, was even on their radar.

Because she has a reputation for independence and going against the establishment, she eventually became THE WOMAN that McCain wanted for his VP.

However, now that she will be the running mate, she serves a different purpose: she can help bring out the strongly pro-life evangelical Christians to vote and to work for McCain’s election.

The fact that she has five kids and that her last child was not aborted after she learned he had Down’s Syndrome is appealing to many people. The fact that she is a hunter and a lifelong NRA person will inspire some others. The fact that she isn’t an old Washington insider will excite a few more. None of those “inspired” voters would have voted for Obama; but many of them would not have come out or worked on behalf of McCain.

So while McCain himself can fight for the votes of moderates and try to portray himself as an independent, more than a Republican, Palin can quietly speak in churches and town halls in conservative suburbs and out of the way places under the radar.

* The problem for the Democrats in going hard after Palin for being unqualified is that their own presidential nominee, who ran in the primaries touting the fact that he was about change not experience, is terribly inexperienced. Obama was in the US Senate for 17 months when he decided to run for president. The majority of time he has been in his current job, he has been campaigning for the White House. Before he won his Senate seat in a lucky election**, he was less qualified to be president than Lois Wolk.

** When he ran for US Senate, the favored Democrat got in a sex scandal and had to drop out; then, after the Republicans nominated a popular guy who was favored in the polls, he too got in a sex scandal and dropped out. The guy Obama beat for the US Senate in Illinois, Alan Keyes, was not only not from that state, but he is nuts.

DG: “(If) McCain expected that Hillary voters would support a right wing, anti-choice, anti-health care, and anti-environmental woman just because she is a woman, he is in for a rude awakening.”

Unofortunately, Richard Estes beat me to the punch.

I think McCain and his circle originally had it in mind that the Republican ticket could improve among women voters if Hillary was not going to be the Democratic VP and McCain picked a female running mate. That is why they were floating Kay Bailey Hutchinson and a couple of others. That is why Palin, who seems utterly unqualified*, was even on their radar.

Because she has a reputation for independence and going against the establishment, she eventually became THE WOMAN that McCain wanted for his VP.

However, now that she will be the running mate, she serves a different purpose: she can help bring out the strongly pro-life evangelical Christians to vote and to work for McCain’s election.

The fact that she has five kids and that her last child was not aborted after she learned he had Down’s Syndrome is appealing to many people. The fact that she is a hunter and a lifelong NRA person will inspire some others. The fact that she isn’t an old Washington insider will excite a few more. None of those “inspired” voters would have voted for Obama; but many of them would not have come out or worked on behalf of McCain.

So while McCain himself can fight for the votes of moderates and try to portray himself as an independent, more than a Republican, Palin can quietly speak in churches and town halls in conservative suburbs and out of the way places under the radar.

* The problem for the Democrats in going hard after Palin for being unqualified is that their own presidential nominee, who ran in the primaries touting the fact that he was about change not experience, is terribly inexperienced. Obama was in the US Senate for 17 months when he decided to run for president. The majority of time he has been in his current job, he has been campaigning for the White House. Before he won his Senate seat in a lucky election**, he was less qualified to be president than Lois Wolk.

** When he ran for US Senate, the favored Democrat got in a sex scandal and had to drop out; then, after the Republicans nominated a popular guy who was favored in the polls, he too got in a sex scandal and dropped out. The guy Obama beat for the US Senate in Illinois, Alan Keyes, was not only not from that state, but he is nuts.

Sarah Palin”s nomination was brilliant to capture the all important “hockey mom”,caribou hunting,”drill it now”, big hair beauty queen pageant winning demographic that make up the Hillaryites who have not been swept up in Obamamania.
John McCain has been suffering from PTSD ever since he was shot down and brutalized for sixty six months over forty years ago. Because he thinks he is the embodiment of his “tough guy” heroes John Wayne, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan and “head shrinking” is for wusses, he won’t complete the therapy and medication that would keep him from being such a loose cannon with his hysterical out bursts and irrational snap judgements.
McCain and his Rovian-Machiavellian corporate lobbyists panicked when they saw Barrack Obama give the greatest speech in a flawless presentation that I have witnessed in my “boomer” lifetime.
So instead of going with “Mittens”, Paulenti or even Huckebee they freaked out and dropped down to about number 14 on their list of possibilities.Sarah was initially so far under the radar I don’t think they even had a chance to thoroughly vet her back ground beyond a Wiki search for skeletons in her closet.
So while the Dems were bracing for a VP nod for someone who could actually be a potential president,they are now trying to restrain their glee and keep a straight face.
The Rovians were hoping for a big bump from their “out of the box” pick to be acclaimed with a crescendo of Wows. Instead it was met with a collective “WTF”

Sarah Palin”s nomination was brilliant to capture the all important “hockey mom”,caribou hunting,”drill it now”, big hair beauty queen pageant winning demographic that make up the Hillaryites who have not been swept up in Obamamania.
John McCain has been suffering from PTSD ever since he was shot down and brutalized for sixty six months over forty years ago. Because he thinks he is the embodiment of his “tough guy” heroes John Wayne, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan and “head shrinking” is for wusses, he won’t complete the therapy and medication that would keep him from being such a loose cannon with his hysterical out bursts and irrational snap judgements.
McCain and his Rovian-Machiavellian corporate lobbyists panicked when they saw Barrack Obama give the greatest speech in a flawless presentation that I have witnessed in my “boomer” lifetime.
So instead of going with “Mittens”, Paulenti or even Huckebee they freaked out and dropped down to about number 14 on their list of possibilities.Sarah was initially so far under the radar I don’t think they even had a chance to thoroughly vet her back ground beyond a Wiki search for skeletons in her closet.
So while the Dems were bracing for a VP nod for someone who could actually be a potential president,they are now trying to restrain their glee and keep a straight face.
The Rovians were hoping for a big bump from their “out of the box” pick to be acclaimed with a crescendo of Wows. Instead it was met with a collective “WTF”

We will never see polar bears in Davis or San Luis Obispo; however, polar bears are important to the eco system in Alaska and the world.

Polar bears have been spotted drowning as the polar icecap is melting. Sarah Palin has worked to keep polar bears off of the endangered species list in order to protect the oil industry in Alaska.

Democrats could very well use polar bears in their broad appeal to show their commitment to the environment and to wildlife.

After all, who would not defend protecting polar bears and other wildlife.

Vote Obama/Biden to protect polar bears by placing them on the endangered species list and work to end global warming.

We will never see polar bears in Davis or San Luis Obispo; however, polar bears are important to the eco system in Alaska and the world.

Polar bears have been spotted drowning as the polar icecap is melting. Sarah Palin has worked to keep polar bears off of the endangered species list in order to protect the oil industry in Alaska.

Democrats could very well use polar bears in their broad appeal to show their commitment to the environment and to wildlife.

After all, who would not defend protecting polar bears and other wildlife.

Vote Obama/Biden to protect polar bears by placing them on the endangered species list and work to end global warming.

“Before he won his Senate seat in a lucky election**, he (Obama) was less qualified to be president than Lois Wolk.”

This is absolutely silly. Obama was qualified to be in the Senate and is qualified to be President.

“Before he won his Senate seat in a lucky election**, he (Obama) was less qualified to be president than Lois Wolk.”

This is absolutely silly. Obama was qualified to be in the Senate and is qualified to be President.

“Before he won his Senate seat in a lucky election**, he (Obama) was less qualified to be president than Lois Wolk”

This is true, not that it matters.

Lois Wolk has been in the California legislature for 6 years. She was also in Davis and Yolo County politics for 16 years before she ran for state office.

Prior to being elected to the US senate, Obama was in Illinois politics for 6 years. He lost in his race for congress in 2000. He never was elected anything before he got in the state legislature in Illinois. He only got in there because he challenged the signatures of the incumbent and the other people running for that job. Their names were taken off the ballot and so he won unopposed.

“Before he won his Senate seat in a lucky election**, he (Obama) was less qualified to be president than Lois Wolk”

This is true, not that it matters.

Lois Wolk has been in the California legislature for 6 years. She was also in Davis and Yolo County politics for 16 years before she ran for state office.

Prior to being elected to the US senate, Obama was in Illinois politics for 6 years. He lost in his race for congress in 2000. He never was elected anything before he got in the state legislature in Illinois. He only got in there because he challenged the signatures of the incumbent and the other people running for that job. Their names were taken off the ballot and so he won unopposed.

I have to concur with Rich Rifkin and Roger. What committed Obama supporters think of Ms. Palin doesn’t really matter, but come to think of it, how about Lois Wolk for President in 2016? As for as the remark about Alan Keyes goes, I heard him speak in person one time and I was bowled over. He may be nuts, but he is a powerful orator. This is the reason I do not watch any politicians on TV or listen to their speeches on the radio. I am to vulnerable to rhetoric. Knowing this is my weakness, I READ what they say, that is only way I can make a critical and objective judgment. In the case of DPD reading McCain’s body language, he may be right, but McCain could be twitchy for a million other reasons. We can’t really know what is going on in someone else’s mind or heart, and I just don’t trust my ability to guess once I get caught up in the emotions.

I have to concur with Rich Rifkin and Roger. What committed Obama supporters think of Ms. Palin doesn’t really matter, but come to think of it, how about Lois Wolk for President in 2016? As for as the remark about Alan Keyes goes, I heard him speak in person one time and I was bowled over. He may be nuts, but he is a powerful orator. This is the reason I do not watch any politicians on TV or listen to their speeches on the radio. I am to vulnerable to rhetoric. Knowing this is my weakness, I READ what they say, that is only way I can make a critical and objective judgment. In the case of DPD reading McCain’s body language, he may be right, but McCain could be twitchy for a million other reasons. We can’t really know what is going on in someone else’s mind or heart, and I just don’t trust my ability to guess once I get caught up in the emotions.

Just so everyone knows my comments are not partison, I don’t particularly care for either Obama or McCain. Nevertheless, I smell a whiff of jealousy on the part of Dems bc McCain stole a bit of Obama’s thunder when McCain rocked the boat w his unexpected VP pick. It was truly a stroke of genius, BTW.

If you truly listened w an objective mindset, Palin came off looking like a nonpolitico which was refreshing, sympathetic bc she has a Down’s Syndrome child, a maverick reformer bc she took on the unethical elements in Alaska and won, she gave back the highway to nowhere pork barrel spending her own Congressman enveigled for the state, etc, etc, etc. What’s not to like?

It is in stark contrast to Michele Obama, who doesn’t seem to particularly like America; Barack who seems to continually stick to the Democratic talking points bc he is afraid of putting his foot in his mouth which he has a nasty habit of doing; like Biden who has had problems with shooting his mouth off along with ethics violation problems.

There is plenty to criticize McCain about, but the inexperience of Palin is a stupid choice, because it opens the door to continually pointing to Obama’s inexperience. Instead, point out McCain’s tendency to flip-flop on issues, such as oil drilling, immigration, etc. He seems to change his positions whenever expedient. Yes he’s a maverick, for his own political gain. Campaign finance reform he shepherded through Congress has in fact been an abysmal failure.

IMHO, both candidates are lousy choices. Who is stepping up to the plate to run for office? Those with the ability to raise tremendous amounts of money. McCain married into it; Obama is connected to the mob in Chicago. Moderates in both parties have literally been driven out of Congress bc of all the nasty party bickering on both sides of the aisle.

In my lifetime, and I am 58 years old, I can’t remember seeing our gov’t so clueless, unfocused, despite being faced with enormous problems that need to be immediately addressed. Runaway spending by both parties is the order of the day. The only thing on the mind of most candidates is winning elections. They couldn’t care less about how well they do on the job.

Nevertheless, the public, God bless ’em, are beginning to yell bloody murder, and demand better. We have not had a decent energy policy for more than 30 years. Remember gas lines in 1976? Yet consumers are pushing for energy independence with vigor, because the price of gas has gone up to $4 a gallon. Never underestimate the power of the general public.

Just so everyone knows my comments are not partison, I don’t particularly care for either Obama or McCain. Nevertheless, I smell a whiff of jealousy on the part of Dems bc McCain stole a bit of Obama’s thunder when McCain rocked the boat w his unexpected VP pick. It was truly a stroke of genius, BTW.

If you truly listened w an objective mindset, Palin came off looking like a nonpolitico which was refreshing, sympathetic bc she has a Down’s Syndrome child, a maverick reformer bc she took on the unethical elements in Alaska and won, she gave back the highway to nowhere pork barrel spending her own Congressman enveigled for the state, etc, etc, etc. What’s not to like?

It is in stark contrast to Michele Obama, who doesn’t seem to particularly like America; Barack who seems to continually stick to the Democratic talking points bc he is afraid of putting his foot in his mouth which he has a nasty habit of doing; like Biden who has had problems with shooting his mouth off along with ethics violation problems.

There is plenty to criticize McCain about, but the inexperience of Palin is a stupid choice, because it opens the door to continually pointing to Obama’s inexperience. Instead, point out McCain’s tendency to flip-flop on issues, such as oil drilling, immigration, etc. He seems to change his positions whenever expedient. Yes he’s a maverick, for his own political gain. Campaign finance reform he shepherded through Congress has in fact been an abysmal failure.

IMHO, both candidates are lousy choices. Who is stepping up to the plate to run for office? Those with the ability to raise tremendous amounts of money. McCain married into it; Obama is connected to the mob in Chicago. Moderates in both parties have literally been driven out of Congress bc of all the nasty party bickering on both sides of the aisle.

In my lifetime, and I am 58 years old, I can’t remember seeing our gov’t so clueless, unfocused, despite being faced with enormous problems that need to be immediately addressed. Runaway spending by both parties is the order of the day. The only thing on the mind of most candidates is winning elections. They couldn’t care less about how well they do on the job.

Nevertheless, the public, God bless ’em, are beginning to yell bloody murder, and demand better. We have not had a decent energy policy for more than 30 years. Remember gas lines in 1976? Yet consumers are pushing for energy independence with vigor, because the price of gas has gone up to $4 a gallon. Never underestimate the power of the general public.

“IMHO, both candidates are lousy choices. Who is stepping up to the plate to run for office? Those with the ability to raise tremendous amounts of money. McCain married into it;”

I think this is an unfair criticism of this year’s presidential nominees. While I hate the way money is raised for elections in our country, it’s not the case that the big monied interests in either major party were the reasons we got Obama or McCain.

Obama easily raised the most money among Dems, but that was mostly in small contributions from millions of people who liked his message. That’s about as clean a fundraising operation as you can have using private money.

McCain was also not the favorite of the big money in the Republican Party. (I think Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney were.) While McCain had a more grass-roots operation in 2000, it’s not as if his 2008 campaign was funded by his wife’s money.

Everyone has the right to say “lousy choices.” But these were the most popular choices among the voters. It’s not as if Obama and McCain were picked in backroom deals.

If you compare Obama with all the top of the ticket Democrats in my time as a voter, he ranks pretty high:

1. Bill Clinton 1996
2. Bill Clinton 1992
3. Barack Obama
4. Al Gore*
5. John Kerry
6. Walter Mondale
7. Michael Dukakis

If you compare McCain with all the top of the ticket Republicans in my time as a voter, he ranks pretty high:

1. Ronald Reagan 1984
2. George H. W. Bush 1988
3. John McCain
4. George H. W. Bush 1992
5. Bob Dole
6. George W. Bush 2004
7. George W. Bush 2000

* Gore should have been better. Regardless of the Florida debacle, Ralph Nader and the national popular vote, he made the mistake of running against the accomplishments of Bill Clinton. In 2000, we had peace and prosperity and Gore ran against Clinton’s policies. He would have done better had he said, “We are well off as a country because of Clinton-Gore and I want to keep up the prosperity and the peace.” Instead, he turned to the left and lost.

“IMHO, both candidates are lousy choices. Who is stepping up to the plate to run for office? Those with the ability to raise tremendous amounts of money. McCain married into it;”

I think this is an unfair criticism of this year’s presidential nominees. While I hate the way money is raised for elections in our country, it’s not the case that the big monied interests in either major party were the reasons we got Obama or McCain.

Obama easily raised the most money among Dems, but that was mostly in small contributions from millions of people who liked his message. That’s about as clean a fundraising operation as you can have using private money.

McCain was also not the favorite of the big money in the Republican Party. (I think Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney were.) While McCain had a more grass-roots operation in 2000, it’s not as if his 2008 campaign was funded by his wife’s money.

Everyone has the right to say “lousy choices.” But these were the most popular choices among the voters. It’s not as if Obama and McCain were picked in backroom deals.

If you compare Obama with all the top of the ticket Democrats in my time as a voter, he ranks pretty high:

1. Bill Clinton 1996
2. Bill Clinton 1992
3. Barack Obama
4. Al Gore*
5. John Kerry
6. Walter Mondale
7. Michael Dukakis

If you compare McCain with all the top of the ticket Republicans in my time as a voter, he ranks pretty high:

1. Ronald Reagan 1984
2. George H. W. Bush 1988
3. John McCain
4. George H. W. Bush 1992
5. Bob Dole
6. George W. Bush 2004
7. George W. Bush 2000

* Gore should have been better. Regardless of the Florida debacle, Ralph Nader and the national popular vote, he made the mistake of running against the accomplishments of Bill Clinton. In 2000, we had peace and prosperity and Gore ran against Clinton’s policies. He would have done better had he said, “We are well off as a country because of Clinton-Gore and I want to keep up the prosperity and the peace.” Instead, he turned to the left and lost.

Rich, I cannot understand why you can’t see that money is driving both campaigns. Hollywood is being courted for its money contributions. Big business is being courted for its money contributions. Big oil interests contributed to both Dems and the GOP. Obama had to give back contributions from foreign interests. His mob connections are not aiding his candidacy.

It is all about the money – who can raise the most. Newspaper articles are rife with articles talking about candidate so-and-so raised thus and such, so much more than so-and-so. Look at our local politicians. It used to be one could run for City Council on a shoestring. Not anymore. There is great concern about Lois Wolk’s campaign bc her Republican rival has raised three times more than she has.

Ethics is now gone in politics because of the corrupting influence of money. See Zell Miller’s speech at the Republican Nat’l Convention at the time of his retirement. He was saddened that the moderate voices in politics, the ethics in politics, is disappearing. Many politicians have echoed this very same sentiment, and good moderates are leaving Congress in droves. Who remains? The likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Tom Delay. Ugh!

Rich, I cannot understand why you can’t see that money is driving both campaigns. Hollywood is being courted for its money contributions. Big business is being courted for its money contributions. Big oil interests contributed to both Dems and the GOP. Obama had to give back contributions from foreign interests. His mob connections are not aiding his candidacy.

It is all about the money – who can raise the most. Newspaper articles are rife with articles talking about candidate so-and-so raised thus and such, so much more than so-and-so. Look at our local politicians. It used to be one could run for City Council on a shoestring. Not anymore. There is great concern about Lois Wolk’s campaign bc her Republican rival has raised three times more than she has.

Ethics is now gone in politics because of the corrupting influence of money. See Zell Miller’s speech at the Republican Nat’l Convention at the time of his retirement. He was saddened that the moderate voices in politics, the ethics in politics, is disappearing. Many politicians have echoed this very same sentiment, and good moderates are leaving Congress in droves. Who remains? The likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Tom Delay. Ugh!

The Polar Bear Association of America (PBAA) released a statement today endorsing Obama. It read, “We were going to endorse the guy with the white fur, but then he went and chose the hot chick who wants to deny us endangered species rights. Its hard to vote for someone who endorses your genocide.”

The PBAA announcement was quickly followed by one from Michael Phelps saying, “I can’t argue with a club whose members swim in freezing water bare naked in sub-zero temperatures, so I’m endorsing Obama too.”

And right after Phelps’s announcement, the Supreme PoohBah of the Fraternal Order of Elks issued a press release stating, “If our fellow Tundrans can’t support the Hot Chick, then all Elks throughout America should show their support for Polar Bears everywhere, and vote early and vote often (in the true Chicago tradition) for Obama/Biden.”

Sources say that the Moose, the Odd Fellows and the Rotarians are all considering their position in light of the Elks strong endorsement.

The Polar Bear Association of America (PBAA) released a statement today endorsing Obama. It read, “We were going to endorse the guy with the white fur, but then he went and chose the hot chick who wants to deny us endangered species rights. Its hard to vote for someone who endorses your genocide.”

The PBAA announcement was quickly followed by one from Michael Phelps saying, “I can’t argue with a club whose members swim in freezing water bare naked in sub-zero temperatures, so I’m endorsing Obama too.”

And right after Phelps’s announcement, the Supreme PoohBah of the Fraternal Order of Elks issued a press release stating, “If our fellow Tundrans can’t support the Hot Chick, then all Elks throughout America should show their support for Polar Bears everywhere, and vote early and vote often (in the true Chicago tradition) for Obama/Biden.”

Sources say that the Moose, the Odd Fellows and the Rotarians are all considering their position in light of the Elks strong endorsement.

What was McCain thinking? He was thinking that all the women who are pissed because Hillary didn’t get the nomination will flock to support him. Wrongo! How stupid and shallow does he think women are? As for experience (or lack of it) whatever experience Dubya brought to the table has me thinking that experience, in some cases, is highly overrated.

What was McCain thinking? He was thinking that all the women who are pissed because Hillary didn’t get the nomination will flock to support him. Wrongo! How stupid and shallow does he think women are? As for experience (or lack of it) whatever experience Dubya brought to the table has me thinking that experience, in some cases, is highly overrated.

“Rich, I cannot understand why you can’t see that money is driving both campaigns. … It is all about the money – who can raise the most. … Ethics is now gone in politics because of the corrupting influence of money.”

For the record, I am generally in favor of public financing for political campaigns. As one who tends to favor less gov’t spending, I am inclined to believe that a lot of wasteful gov’t spending is done in order to pay back those special interests (such as farmers, insurance companies, defense contractors and public service unions) who finance campaigns.

In the Obama-McCain race, having ample money will be mostly important in get-out-the-vote efforts. I don’t think it will make much of a difference otherwise.

“Rich, I cannot understand why you can’t see that money is driving both campaigns. … It is all about the money – who can raise the most. … Ethics is now gone in politics because of the corrupting influence of money.”

For the record, I am generally in favor of public financing for political campaigns. As one who tends to favor less gov’t spending, I am inclined to believe that a lot of wasteful gov’t spending is done in order to pay back those special interests (such as farmers, insurance companies, defense contractors and public service unions) who finance campaigns.

In the Obama-McCain race, having ample money will be mostly important in get-out-the-vote efforts. I don’t think it will make much of a difference otherwise.

I don’t think it will make much of a difference otherwise…. in terms of who wins. It might make a big difference in terms of legislation and policy which follows.

I don’t think it will make much of a difference otherwise…. in terms of who wins. It might make a big difference in terms of legislation and policy which follows.

Another thing bothers me about McCain, as a person, is the narrative told about his divorcing his first wife, Carol. She got into an auto accident, had disfiguring injuries and limited mobility, then later he has extra-marital affairs and he divorces her.

I’m sure there is more context to the story that might offer more rationale, but whenever I hear mention of his heroism as a POW, as if that is an indicator of personal character, I think what happened to his first wife and wonder.

Another thing bothers me about McCain, as a person, is the narrative told about his divorcing his first wife, Carol. She got into an auto accident, had disfiguring injuries and limited mobility, then later he has extra-marital affairs and he divorces her.

I’m sure there is more context to the story that might offer more rationale, but whenever I hear mention of his heroism as a POW, as if that is an indicator of personal character, I think what happened to his first wife and wonder.

Richard Estes, you see what your favorite dictator is up to?

Washington Post:

“MOSCOW, Aug. 31 — A leading opposition figure in Russia’s volatile Ingushetia province was shot and killed Sunday after being detained by police, authorities said. His colleagues issued a call for protests in response, and human rights groups demanded an investigation.”

“Magomed Yevloyev, a businessman and the owner of a Web site that angered Kremlin-backed local leaders with its coverage of official corruption and police abuse, suffered a gunshot wound to his head while in a police car taking him to a station for interrogation, a spokesman for the Russian prosecutor’s office told the Interfax news agency.”

Richard, I guess that Russian blogger had it coming, just like the people in Chechnya and Georgia who Putin murdered?

Richard Estes, you see what your favorite dictator is up to?

Washington Post:

“MOSCOW, Aug. 31 — A leading opposition figure in Russia’s volatile Ingushetia province was shot and killed Sunday after being detained by police, authorities said. His colleagues issued a call for protests in response, and human rights groups demanded an investigation.”

“Magomed Yevloyev, a businessman and the owner of a Web site that angered Kremlin-backed local leaders with its coverage of official corruption and police abuse, suffered a gunshot wound to his head while in a police car taking him to a station for interrogation, a spokesman for the Russian prosecutor’s office told the Interfax news agency.”

Richard, I guess that Russian blogger had it coming, just like the people in Chechnya and Georgia who Putin murdered?

Money is important, but it clearly is not the determining factor in who wins.
Mitt Romney spent $92 million ($42 million of his own money!) on his race.
Steve Forbes spent $38 million of his own money in 1996.
Ross Perot spent $63.5 million of his own money in 1992.
Governor Gray Davis ran against self-financed millionaires more than once, and beat them all.

Money is important, but it clearly is not the determining factor in who wins.
Mitt Romney spent $92 million ($42 million of his own money!) on his race.
Steve Forbes spent $38 million of his own money in 1996.
Ross Perot spent $63.5 million of his own money in 1992.
Governor Gray Davis ran against self-financed millionaires more than once, and beat them all.

But the ability to *raise* money (from other people) is a significant factor.

But the ability to *raise* money (from other people) is a significant factor.

I have not heard Corky Brown this impassioned since 1970 when he took the stage at the Varsity Theater noon matinee, and told the children in attendance that he was the coolest UCD cop ever to patrol the campus. This was just prior to the meteoric rise of Nick Concolino from the UCD ranks.

Corky, why don’t you dust off your badge and run for Sheriff?

Talk about “skeletons in the closet” LOL

I have not heard Corky Brown this impassioned since 1970 when he took the stage at the Varsity Theater noon matinee, and told the children in attendance that he was the coolest UCD cop ever to patrol the campus. This was just prior to the meteoric rise of Nick Concolino from the UCD ranks.

Corky, why don’t you dust off your badge and run for Sheriff?

Talk about “skeletons in the closet” LOL

Below, are links that explain McCain’s “family values” leaving his wife Cindy behind, because he was turning 40 and wanting to be 25 again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-divorce11-2008jul11,0,5924926,full.story

Carol his former wife said, ‘My accident is well recorded. I had 23 operations, I am five inches shorter than I used to be and I was in hospital for six months. It was just awful, but it wasn’t the reason for my divorce. My marriage ended because John McCain didn’t want to be 40, he wanted to be 25. You know that happens…it just does.’

According to the Times, Nancy Reagan was less forgiving and it changed their relationship forever. They portray him “as a self-centered womanizer who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to ‘play the field’. They accuse him of finally settling on Cindy, a former rodeo beauty queen, for financial reasons.”

I hope McCain and Palin don’t end up having an affair. Oh wait, she’s too old and not wealthy enough for him.

Geez, this is about as bad as John Edwards screwing around on his wife too!!!

Why can’t they keep the zipper up?

Below, are links that explain McCain’s “family values” leaving his wife Cindy behind, because he was turning 40 and wanting to be 25 again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-divorce11-2008jul11,0,5924926,full.story

Carol his former wife said, ‘My accident is well recorded. I had 23 operations, I am five inches shorter than I used to be and I was in hospital for six months. It was just awful, but it wasn’t the reason for my divorce. My marriage ended because John McCain didn’t want to be 40, he wanted to be 25. You know that happens…it just does.’

According to the Times, Nancy Reagan was less forgiving and it changed their relationship forever. They portray him “as a self-centered womanizer who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to ‘play the field’. They accuse him of finally settling on Cindy, a former rodeo beauty queen, for financial reasons.”

I hope McCain and Palin don’t end up having an affair. Oh wait, she’s too old and not wealthy enough for him.

Geez, this is about as bad as John Edwards screwing around on his wife too!!!

Why can’t they keep the zipper up?

Corky IS COOL!!! We love him! We agree. He would make a great Sheriff.

Corky IS COOL!!! We love him! We agree. He would make a great Sheriff.

Bring on!!! The poor scorned women!!!

Bring on!!! The poor scorned women!!!

Rifkin you never cease to amaze me for your wonkish stupidity. Claiming Wolk would be better than Obama you are completely nuts. First of all Wolk can barely even raise enough money to run for state senate not to mention the US Senate. Have you ever heard her give a speech that would motivate 40,000,000 people? The best comparable analogy would be like claiming that you would be a better sheriff than Bull Conner.

Rifkin you never cease to amaze me for your wonkish stupidity. Claiming Wolk would be better than Obama you are completely nuts. First of all Wolk can barely even raise enough money to run for state senate not to mention the US Senate. Have you ever heard her give a speech that would motivate 40,000,000 people? The best comparable analogy would be like claiming that you would be a better sheriff than Bull Conner.

BTW, Wolk did go to Harvard Law. Oh no that was Bruce Wolk. Sorry I stand corrected.

BTW, Wolk did go to Harvard Law. Oh no that was Bruce Wolk. Sorry I stand corrected.

“Below, are links that explain McCain’s “family values” leaving his wife Cindy behind, because he was turning 40 and wanting to be 25 again.”

Thanks for the links! Can’t wait to send them to all my anti-Obama friends!

BTW, did anyone hear the NPR story about Cindy McCain’s half-siblings coming out of the closet after she repeatedly declared in speeches that she was the ONLY child of her father? Maybe she thinks she’s entitled to this title because she’s the only one who got the inheritance. Hmmm– seems Cindy and John were meant for each other. Can we spell “INTEGRITY?”

But back to the subject—what was McCain thinking? He figured a nation that would re-elect George “C in economics” Bush and Ronnie “reads scripts well” Reagan two HIGHLY qualified presidents 🙂 wouldn’t think a former newscaster was any less qualified to lead our Great Nation. Same people who thought bombing Iraq to fight for freedom was a great thing. It doesn’t matter what the talking heads think, the people of this country are going to do things that don’t make a whole lot of sense.

“Below, are links that explain McCain’s “family values” leaving his wife Cindy behind, because he was turning 40 and wanting to be 25 again.”

Thanks for the links! Can’t wait to send them to all my anti-Obama friends!

BTW, did anyone hear the NPR story about Cindy McCain’s half-siblings coming out of the closet after she repeatedly declared in speeches that she was the ONLY child of her father? Maybe she thinks she’s entitled to this title because she’s the only one who got the inheritance. Hmmm– seems Cindy and John were meant for each other. Can we spell “INTEGRITY?”

But back to the subject—what was McCain thinking? He figured a nation that would re-elect George “C in economics” Bush and Ronnie “reads scripts well” Reagan two HIGHLY qualified presidents 🙂 wouldn’t think a former newscaster was any less qualified to lead our Great Nation. Same people who thought bombing Iraq to fight for freedom was a great thing. It doesn’t matter what the talking heads think, the people of this country are going to do things that don’t make a whole lot of sense.

I just can’t let this one go Rifkin its too ridiculous.

Obama just defeated the Clinton political machine something not even the Bush’s could do. Nobody gives anybody a party nomination for the Presidency even W had to slime McCain to earn it.

Rifkin what your remarks do is make a good case against affirmative action because if Obama were white this inexperience argument wouldn’t resonate with people like you. The fact that he just won the Democratic Nomination, over Hillary Clinton, destroys any idea that he isn’t ready to be president.

You want to talk about affirmative action, about not being ready, how about Palin.

I just can’t let this one go Rifkin its too ridiculous.

Obama just defeated the Clinton political machine something not even the Bush’s could do. Nobody gives anybody a party nomination for the Presidency even W had to slime McCain to earn it.

Rifkin what your remarks do is make a good case against affirmative action because if Obama were white this inexperience argument wouldn’t resonate with people like you. The fact that he just won the Democratic Nomination, over Hillary Clinton, destroys any idea that he isn’t ready to be president.

You want to talk about affirmative action, about not being ready, how about Palin.

So now it comes out her 17 year old unmarried daughter is pregnant. Okay, stuff happens. But I’m sick of listening to lectures from right wingers about family values, when they cannot even control their own family.

So now it comes out her 17 year old unmarried daughter is pregnant. Okay, stuff happens. But I’m sick of listening to lectures from right wingers about family values, when they cannot even control their own family.

BB: “Rifkin you never cease to amaze me for your wonkish stupidity.”

You’re welcome!

BB: “Claiming Wolk would be better than Obama you are completely nuts.”

I never made this claim. Not once. Not ever. I think, because you have accused me of being stupid, you ought to try to get your own “facts” right.

What I said was before Barack Obama was elected to the US Senate — that means, prior to November, 2004 — Lois Wolk’s electoral resume trumped his, thus making her (at that point) better qualified.

Being “better qualified” doesn’t mean everything. I never implied that she would be a better president than state senator Obama. However, Lois has a lot of good qualities. She was a good mayor in Davis, among her many other elected positions, so who knows?

BB: “First of all Wolk can barely even raise enough money to run for state senate not to mention the US Senate.”

I am fairly certain Lois will win her election to the state senate. However, I have never once commented on her fundraising.

Because 2008 will be a big Democratic year in California and Obama will bring out a lot of new voters in our region, Wolk should win her race easily, even if she is outspent 4:1.

BB: “Have you ever heard her give a speech that would motivate 40,000,000 people?”

I have not.

BB: “The best comparable analogy would be like claiming that you would be a better sheriff than Bull Conner.”

Bull had a better water canon.

BB: “Rifkin you never cease to amaze me for your wonkish stupidity.”

You’re welcome!

BB: “Claiming Wolk would be better than Obama you are completely nuts.”

I never made this claim. Not once. Not ever. I think, because you have accused me of being stupid, you ought to try to get your own “facts” right.

What I said was before Barack Obama was elected to the US Senate — that means, prior to November, 2004 — Lois Wolk’s electoral resume trumped his, thus making her (at that point) better qualified.

Being “better qualified” doesn’t mean everything. I never implied that she would be a better president than state senator Obama. However, Lois has a lot of good qualities. She was a good mayor in Davis, among her many other elected positions, so who knows?

BB: “First of all Wolk can barely even raise enough money to run for state senate not to mention the US Senate.”

I am fairly certain Lois will win her election to the state senate. However, I have never once commented on her fundraising.

Because 2008 will be a big Democratic year in California and Obama will bring out a lot of new voters in our region, Wolk should win her race easily, even if she is outspent 4:1.

BB: “Have you ever heard her give a speech that would motivate 40,000,000 people?”

I have not.

BB: “The best comparable analogy would be like claiming that you would be a better sheriff than Bull Conner.”

Bull had a better water canon.

BB: “Nobody gives anybody a party nomination for the Presidency even W had to slime McCain to earn it.”

No doubt. However, just because someone can win his party’s nomination does not mean either that he will make a good president or that he is the most ready to take on the job of president.

You use the example of GW Bush. He won the nomination in 2000, with a very thin resume in public life, and proved in 2001 (and beyond) that he wasn’t well prepared to be president, let alone a good president.

However, I have never said that Obama could not make a good president. I have simply said he has a very thin resume in public office.

BB: “The fact that (Obama) just won the Democratic Nomination, over Hillary Clinton, destroys any idea that he isn’t ready to be president.”

Destroys?

Obama’s a very bright guy and a good communicator. Those are both assets in a chief executive. Winning his party’s nomination does not mean he is “ready to be president.” We won’t know until he takes office and has a chance.

BB: “Nobody gives anybody a party nomination for the Presidency even W had to slime McCain to earn it.”

No doubt. However, just because someone can win his party’s nomination does not mean either that he will make a good president or that he is the most ready to take on the job of president.

You use the example of GW Bush. He won the nomination in 2000, with a very thin resume in public life, and proved in 2001 (and beyond) that he wasn’t well prepared to be president, let alone a good president.

However, I have never said that Obama could not make a good president. I have simply said he has a very thin resume in public office.

BB: “The fact that (Obama) just won the Democratic Nomination, over Hillary Clinton, destroys any idea that he isn’t ready to be president.”

Destroys?

Obama’s a very bright guy and a good communicator. Those are both assets in a chief executive. Winning his party’s nomination does not mean he is “ready to be president.” We won’t know until he takes office and has a chance.

Hey- Rifkin, as in “canon” were you suggesting Bull sprinkled protesters with holy water??

How’s Carol these days?

Hey- Rifkin, as in “canon” were you suggesting Bull sprinkled protesters with holy water??

How’s Carol these days?

“Her pedigree is just not impressive. I have to believe the Republicans could have found someone more qualified. She’s been the Governor of a small state for a short period of time. Before that, she was part-time mayor of a city of 9,000 people. I cannot even think of a parallel person to this in California.”

And this coming from an Obama supporter? What’s his experience? He’s been in the senate for how many days? 120?

Second, Palin is not running for President. She’s going to be Vice President.

“Her pedigree is just not impressive. I have to believe the Republicans could have found someone more qualified. She’s been the Governor of a small state for a short period of time. Before that, she was part-time mayor of a city of 9,000 people. I cannot even think of a parallel person to this in California.”

And this coming from an Obama supporter? What’s his experience? He’s been in the senate for how many days? 120?

Second, Palin is not running for President. She’s going to be Vice President.

“Second, Palin is not running for President. She’s going to be Vice President.”

McCain will be an older man when he takes office. Although he is functionally healthy, he has had some health issues. Palin could reasonably be President if her ticket wins. It is a valid question.

“Second, Palin is not running for President. She’s going to be Vice President.”

McCain will be an older man when he takes office. Although he is functionally healthy, he has had some health issues. Palin could reasonably be President if her ticket wins. It is a valid question.

It’s the “heartbeat away” argument, she is in fact running for president.

Palin’s experience is as a part-time mayor of a town of 9000 and a governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year.

Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004.

It’s the “heartbeat away” argument, she is in fact running for president.

Palin’s experience is as a part-time mayor of a town of 9000 and a governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year.

Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004.

Random thoughts on Palin:

McCain must take a vow not to eat any pretzels for the next 4 years.

McCain must have been Flailin to pick Palin.

Voting for Palin instead of Hillary Clinton is like replacing Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas.

Talk about Republicans as out of the mainstream. McCain had to go all the way to Alaska to find someone suitable to the right wing of his party.

Palin, I guess the right wing is no longer against affirmative action.

Intelligent Design… I’m just kidding.

So much for abstinance only education.

Random thoughts on Palin:

McCain must take a vow not to eat any pretzels for the next 4 years.

McCain must have been Flailin to pick Palin.

Voting for Palin instead of Hillary Clinton is like replacing Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas.

Talk about Republicans as out of the mainstream. McCain had to go all the way to Alaska to find someone suitable to the right wing of his party.

Palin, I guess the right wing is no longer against affirmative action.

Intelligent Design… I’m just kidding.

So much for abstinance only education.

“Palin’s experience is as a part-time mayor of a town of 9000 and a governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year.”

She is terribly unprepared to step in, should McCain die in office*. Harry Truman was probably the most “unready” VP to have actually assumed the top job, and compared with Palin HST was very accomplished in public office, not to mention the fact that he was a captain in WWI, a farmer, a judge, and a haberdasher….

Ultimately, for an “unready” VP to be acceptable I think it comes down to the person’s native intelligence and their strength of character. I have no idea how Palin stands on those grounds.

“Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004.”

He was. However, most of the past 3.5 years he has not been in Washington working as a US Senator. I would not be surprised to know that he has spent less than 200 full days in D.C. since January, 2005.

Beginning in 2006, a year after he took his Senate seat, he began travelling around the country speaking on behalf of fellow Democrats running for office that year**. (I read that he spent over a month in Tennessee stumping for Harold Ford.) And then in early 2007, he began stumping for himself in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and so on. He has largely been doing that for the last 18 months.

* While I can see some political benefit from McCain picking Palin, I think it’s a sign of bad judgment by him to pick someone that unprepared to take the top job.

** Part of the reason Barack Obama was such a good candidate for the president so early was borne out of his experience travelling to almost every state stumping for others. He became well known and well practiced; and many of his fellow pols felt they owed him.

“Palin’s experience is as a part-time mayor of a town of 9000 and a governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year.”

She is terribly unprepared to step in, should McCain die in office*. Harry Truman was probably the most “unready” VP to have actually assumed the top job, and compared with Palin HST was very accomplished in public office, not to mention the fact that he was a captain in WWI, a farmer, a judge, and a haberdasher….

Ultimately, for an “unready” VP to be acceptable I think it comes down to the person’s native intelligence and their strength of character. I have no idea how Palin stands on those grounds.

“Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004.”

He was. However, most of the past 3.5 years he has not been in Washington working as a US Senator. I would not be surprised to know that he has spent less than 200 full days in D.C. since January, 2005.

Beginning in 2006, a year after he took his Senate seat, he began travelling around the country speaking on behalf of fellow Democrats running for office that year**. (I read that he spent over a month in Tennessee stumping for Harold Ford.) And then in early 2007, he began stumping for himself in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and so on. He has largely been doing that for the last 18 months.

* While I can see some political benefit from McCain picking Palin, I think it’s a sign of bad judgment by him to pick someone that unprepared to take the top job.

** Part of the reason Barack Obama was such a good candidate for the president so early was borne out of his experience travelling to almost every state stumping for others. He became well known and well practiced; and many of his fellow pols felt they owed him.

“Voting for Palin instead of Hillary Clinton is like replacing Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas.”

Setting aside Marshall’s accomplishments and qualities as a younger man, he appeared to be out of touch in his later years on the court. Whether you agree with Thomas’s jurisprudence or not, he has always, thus far, been clear-minded as a justice. And if he voted in the liberal way that Marshall did, I doubt any of Thomas’s critics would (today) worry about whether he was the best person for the job. No one (without laughing) claims that Souter was a great choice based on his track record in New Hampshire. Yet the Clarence Thomas haters don’t mind that pick (today).

I would prefer that, liberal or conservative, the best legal minds were chosen for our highest court. But that has mostly not been the case in our history. And most critics judge the justices based solely on whether they vote the way the critics would like them to, not the profundity of their reasoning.

“Voting for Palin instead of Hillary Clinton is like replacing Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas.”

Setting aside Marshall’s accomplishments and qualities as a younger man, he appeared to be out of touch in his later years on the court. Whether you agree with Thomas’s jurisprudence or not, he has always, thus far, been clear-minded as a justice. And if he voted in the liberal way that Marshall did, I doubt any of Thomas’s critics would (today) worry about whether he was the best person for the job. No one (without laughing) claims that Souter was a great choice based on his track record in New Hampshire. Yet the Clarence Thomas haters don’t mind that pick (today).

I would prefer that, liberal or conservative, the best legal minds were chosen for our highest court. But that has mostly not been the case in our history. And most critics judge the justices based solely on whether they vote the way the critics would like them to, not the profundity of their reasoning.

governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year.

This is the first time I’ve heard Alaska referred to as a *small* state. I guess I understand the point, though.

governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year.

This is the first time I’ve heard Alaska referred to as a *small* state. I guess I understand the point, though.

In population Alaska ranked 48th in 2000 census.

In population Alaska ranked 48th in 2000 census.

When Thurgood Marshall was asked what he thought of Clarence Thomas he replied “A snake is a snake.”

When Thurgood Marshall was asked what he thought of Clarence Thomas he replied “A snake is a snake.”

I think the character question about Palin is pretty clear. She had a baby at 44 and did not terminate her preganancy even though she knew the baby had Down Syndrome, AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one. Obama on the other hand, said he would not ‘punish’ his daughters with having a baby if they got pregnant. It makes me wonder how they feel when they hear their father regarding his potential grandchildren a a ‘punishment’.

I think this says it all about who these people are and what their priorities are.

I think the character question about Palin is pretty clear. She had a baby at 44 and did not terminate her preganancy even though she knew the baby had Down Syndrome, AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one. Obama on the other hand, said he would not ‘punish’ his daughters with having a baby if they got pregnant. It makes me wonder how they feel when they hear their father regarding his potential grandchildren a a ‘punishment’.

I think this says it all about who these people are and what their priorities are.

“It’s the “heartbeat away” argument, she is in fact running for president. Palin’s experience is as a part-time mayor of a town of 9000 and a governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year. Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004.”

And what was Obama’s attendance record? More often than not, Congressmen are AWOL most of the time. John Kerry was.Furthermore, being governor is more of a leadership role than being senator. Sorry, but VP role is not the same as the role of President, the “only a heartbeat away” argument notwithstanding. Let’s face it, Obama lacks experience, and so does Palin. Obama’s inexperience trumps Palin’s, bc he is running for President. Just plain ol’ logic. I can’t stand either candidate, and will be voting for the evil of two lessers!

“It’s the “heartbeat away” argument, she is in fact running for president. Palin’s experience is as a part-time mayor of a town of 9000 and a governor of a small state that meets 90 days out of the year. Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004.”

And what was Obama’s attendance record? More often than not, Congressmen are AWOL most of the time. John Kerry was.Furthermore, being governor is more of a leadership role than being senator. Sorry, but VP role is not the same as the role of President, the “only a heartbeat away” argument notwithstanding. Let’s face it, Obama lacks experience, and so does Palin. Obama’s inexperience trumps Palin’s, bc he is running for President. Just plain ol’ logic. I can’t stand either candidate, and will be voting for the evil of two lessers!

“I would prefer that, liberal or conservative, the best legal minds were chosen for our highest court. But that has mostly not been the case in our history.”

Sandra Day O’Connor was an outstanding Supreme Court Justice. So was Brennan and Rhenquist. Read some of their opinions.

“I would prefer that, liberal or conservative, the best legal minds were chosen for our highest court. But that has mostly not been the case in our history.”

Sandra Day O’Connor was an outstanding Supreme Court Justice. So was Brennan and Rhenquist. Read some of their opinions.

For civility: Sorry that it took me 28 minutes to see the comment. You’re absolutely correct it needed to be removed.

For civility: Sorry that it took me 28 minutes to see the comment. You’re absolutely correct it needed to be removed.

“I think the character question about Palin is pretty clear. She had a baby at 44 and did not terminate her preganancy even though she knew the baby had Down Syndrome, AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one. Obama on the other hand, said he would not ‘punish’ his daughters with having a baby if they got pregnant. It makes me wonder how they feel when they hear their father regarding his potential grandchildren a a ‘punishment’.
I think this says it all about who these people are and what their priorities are.”

I agree w your assessment of Palin and her character, but McCain’s character is another matter. Someone who dumped his wife bc he wanted to be 25 instead of 40 (he copped to this) doesn’t have much character. And he clearly married his second wife for her money and connections as well as good looks.

That’s OK. Obama’s character doesn’t appear to be very pristine either, with his mob connections. But then there is Ted Kennedy and Chappaquidick, John Kerry and his pandering to the enemy, Tom Delay and his ethics violations, and the list goes on. Politicians are not known for their good character, so I actually find Palin refreshing.

“I think the character question about Palin is pretty clear. She had a baby at 44 and did not terminate her preganancy even though she knew the baby had Down Syndrome, AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one. Obama on the other hand, said he would not ‘punish’ his daughters with having a baby if they got pregnant. It makes me wonder how they feel when they hear their father regarding his potential grandchildren a a ‘punishment’.
I think this says it all about who these people are and what their priorities are.”

I agree w your assessment of Palin and her character, but McCain’s character is another matter. Someone who dumped his wife bc he wanted to be 25 instead of 40 (he copped to this) doesn’t have much character. And he clearly married his second wife for her money and connections as well as good looks.

That’s OK. Obama’s character doesn’t appear to be very pristine either, with his mob connections. But then there is Ted Kennedy and Chappaquidick, John Kerry and his pandering to the enemy, Tom Delay and his ethics violations, and the list goes on. Politicians are not known for their good character, so I actually find Palin refreshing.

Mob connections?

Mob connections?

“Sandra Day O’Connor was an outstanding Supreme Court Justice. So was Brennan and Rhenquist. Read some of their opinions.”

I’m neither a legal scholar nor any sort of lawyer, so I don’t have the background to make an informed judgment as to the quality of their legal opinions, even if I read them. (I have a copy of the Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court and have therein read a number of famous opinions.)

In judging justices from the past, (to the extent I have any opinion at all) I mostly rely on the concensus of historians (unless I have a good reason to think otherwise).

That said, it’s interesting to me that you think O’Connor was “outstanding.” I am fully aware that for most of the time she was on the court she was the swing vote and therefore tits most important member. But almost all of the court observers I have heard discuss her qualities as a legal mind have said that she was terribly inconsistant in her reasoning and never a compelling writer. It’s entirely possible that you are right and they are wrong — I don’t know — but that is my understanding of the concensus on SDO.

“Sandra Day O’Connor was an outstanding Supreme Court Justice. So was Brennan and Rhenquist. Read some of their opinions.”

I’m neither a legal scholar nor any sort of lawyer, so I don’t have the background to make an informed judgment as to the quality of their legal opinions, even if I read them. (I have a copy of the Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court and have therein read a number of famous opinions.)

In judging justices from the past, (to the extent I have any opinion at all) I mostly rely on the concensus of historians (unless I have a good reason to think otherwise).

That said, it’s interesting to me that you think O’Connor was “outstanding.” I am fully aware that for most of the time she was on the court she was the swing vote and therefore tits most important member. But almost all of the court observers I have heard discuss her qualities as a legal mind have said that she was terribly inconsistant in her reasoning and never a compelling writer. It’s entirely possible that you are right and they are wrong — I don’t know — but that is my understanding of the concensus on SDO.

“Mob connections?”

I don’t know what the various posters who mentioned “mob connections” are specirfically refering to. I Googled “barack obama mob” and found this rather weak link from the NY Post:

OBAMA’S ‘MOB-TIE’ $IDEKICK
By CHARLES HURT Bureau Chief
September 5, 2007

WASHINGTON – A man who has long been dogged by charges that the bank his family owns helped finance a Chicago crime figure will host a Windy City fund-raiser tonight for Sen. Barack Obama.

Giannoulias is so tainted by reputed mob links that several top Illinois Dems, including the state’s speaker of the House and party chairman, refused to endorse him even after he won the Democratic nomination with Obama’s help.

“Mob connections?”

I don’t know what the various posters who mentioned “mob connections” are specirfically refering to. I Googled “barack obama mob” and found this rather weak link from the NY Post:

OBAMA’S ‘MOB-TIE’ $IDEKICK
By CHARLES HURT Bureau Chief
September 5, 2007

WASHINGTON – A man who has long been dogged by charges that the bank his family owns helped finance a Chicago crime figure will host a Windy City fund-raiser tonight for Sen. Barack Obama.

Giannoulias is so tainted by reputed mob links that several top Illinois Dems, including the state’s speaker of the House and party chairman, refused to endorse him even after he won the Democratic nomination with Obama’s help.

“AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one.”

In terms of public policy (not her private family matters), I think the fact that Gov. Palin has opposed teaching sex ed “because it promotes sex” and has opposed making contraception widely available to high schoolers for the same reason, yet has promoted “abstinance only” education, which by comparison has been a dismal failure everywhere its been employed, I think her daughter’s pregnancy should be embarrassing to her on a policy level.

The fact that Bristol Palin had “abstinance only” education and was clearly not abstaining and presumably not using birth control (and certainly not using effective birth control) does not make the case against Gov. Palin’s policy preference. But it sure is a bad anecdote for someone trying to push a very unscientific agenda.

“AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one.”

In terms of public policy (not her private family matters), I think the fact that Gov. Palin has opposed teaching sex ed “because it promotes sex” and has opposed making contraception widely available to high schoolers for the same reason, yet has promoted “abstinance only” education, which by comparison has been a dismal failure everywhere its been employed, I think her daughter’s pregnancy should be embarrassing to her on a policy level.

The fact that Bristol Palin had “abstinance only” education and was clearly not abstaining and presumably not using birth control (and certainly not using effective birth control) does not make the case against Gov. Palin’s policy preference. But it sure is a bad anecdote for someone trying to push a very unscientific agenda.

“AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one.”

In terms of public policy (not her private family matters), I think the fact that Gov. Palin has opposed teaching sex ed “because it promotes sex” and has opposed making contraception widely available to high schoolers for the same reason, yet has promoted “abstinance only” education, which by comparison has been a dismal failure everywhere its been employed, I think her daughter’s pregnancy should be embarrassing to her on a policy level.

The fact that Bristol Palin had “abstinance only” education and was clearly not abstaining and presumably not using birth control (and certainly not using effective birth control) does not make the case against Gov. Palin’s policy preference. But it sure is a bad anecdote for someone trying to push a very unscientific agenda.

“AND she is fully supporting her daughter’s pregnancy even though it is not a convenient or timely one.”

In terms of public policy (not her private family matters), I think the fact that Gov. Palin has opposed teaching sex ed “because it promotes sex” and has opposed making contraception widely available to high schoolers for the same reason, yet has promoted “abstinance only” education, which by comparison has been a dismal failure everywhere its been employed, I think her daughter’s pregnancy should be embarrassing to her on a policy level.

The fact that Bristol Palin had “abstinance only” education and was clearly not abstaining and presumably not using birth control (and certainly not using effective birth control) does not make the case against Gov. Palin’s policy preference. But it sure is a bad anecdote for someone trying to push a very unscientific agenda.

About having children in Alaska.

One thing to consider is that each child born into a family generates $3000 annually (from the state to the family). I hope people are not having children in order to get the oil dividend. However, the $3000 would certainly promote fewer abortions. I assume a $3000 annual stipend per child would significantly reduce abortion rates nationwide.

About having children in Alaska.

One thing to consider is that each child born into a family generates $3000 annually (from the state to the family). I hope people are not having children in order to get the oil dividend. However, the $3000 would certainly promote fewer abortions. I assume a $3000 annual stipend per child would significantly reduce abortion rates nationwide.

Geez! All these platitudes over a V.P. pick? Alright! Let’s get back to business as usual. You remember that don’t you? The V.P. as a ceremonial figure head, attends state funerals, ribbon cuttings, dedications, etc. Lives in that smaller house around the corner!
Like I said “let’s get back”.

No one will ever wear the “big boy” pant’s again like the “Dickster” (Cheney) has.

How about a strong cabinet? With Joe Lieberman as Secretary of State, and Rudy G. as Director of Homeland Security. That ought to be enough to put the V.P. on auto pilot should McCain lose the proverbial “heartbeat”. Take solice in the knowledge that Ronald Reagan also got his start in sports broadcasting!!

Geez! All these platitudes over a V.P. pick? Alright! Let’s get back to business as usual. You remember that don’t you? The V.P. as a ceremonial figure head, attends state funerals, ribbon cuttings, dedications, etc. Lives in that smaller house around the corner!
Like I said “let’s get back”.

No one will ever wear the “big boy” pant’s again like the “Dickster” (Cheney) has.

How about a strong cabinet? With Joe Lieberman as Secretary of State, and Rudy G. as Director of Homeland Security. That ought to be enough to put the V.P. on auto pilot should McCain lose the proverbial “heartbeat”. Take solice in the knowledge that Ronald Reagan also got his start in sports broadcasting!!

lots of interesting comments to think about:

1. DPD clearly reminds us that he is not an unbiased observer – he has a point of view that he would like to persuade the readers to follow. He is not a fact provider, he is an opinion provider.

2. Vincente – where where are you coming from? Do you have children? None of us control our families – need we discuss Bill Clinton’s predilections again?

3. There are a couple of big issues here for McCain – first and foremost is the decision and vetting process that he used to conclude that Sarah Palin was his running mate. If facts show that this was not well vetted and researched, then this decision will reflect poorly on judgement in McCain’s decision process. If he did his homework properly, and invited her to the ticket, then it speaks to his willingness to take a well thought out risk to win.

4. Richard Estes is correct – this choice has nothing to do with most readers of this blog – they are generally a lost hope for McCain. But he could win if he solidifies the conservative base and attracts a number of independents.

5. Facts and time are generally on McCain’s side. Obama has a very undistinguished senate and legislative record — he really has not done anything on his own, and his scant Senate voting record shows him to be among the most liberal of all senators. I understand this record plays well in Davis, SF et al, but it doesn’t play well in the heartland. Additionally, Obama’s primary attri

6. Cecelia and Evelyn Greenwald – very few people are going to cast their vote based on polar bears. If you want Obama to win, find a different issue to promote.

7. Rich Rifkin – thanks for making several valid points and providing discussion that most Obama followers are apparently unwilling to face up to.

8. Finally, Christine … is so on point for many Americans. Obama really fails on the moral leadership regarding abortion and protections for those unable to make decisions for themselves. His statements on the matter are clear, and while abortion issues are not the only issue, it would be a mistake to think that pro life issues are not significant to a pretty large group of evangelicals.

In the end, neither obama or palin are qualified to run the country on their prospective first days in office. That fact is a plus for McCain, who is more than prepared to lead today. Obama has become a cult figure that peaked too early, and for whom the passage of time will not be helpful.

lots of interesting comments to think about:

1. DPD clearly reminds us that he is not an unbiased observer – he has a point of view that he would like to persuade the readers to follow. He is not a fact provider, he is an opinion provider.

2. Vincente – where where are you coming from? Do you have children? None of us control our families – need we discuss Bill Clinton’s predilections again?

3. There are a couple of big issues here for McCain – first and foremost is the decision and vetting process that he used to conclude that Sarah Palin was his running mate. If facts show that this was not well vetted and researched, then this decision will reflect poorly on judgement in McCain’s decision process. If he did his homework properly, and invited her to the ticket, then it speaks to his willingness to take a well thought out risk to win.

4. Richard Estes is correct – this choice has nothing to do with most readers of this blog – they are generally a lost hope for McCain. But he could win if he solidifies the conservative base and attracts a number of independents.

5. Facts and time are generally on McCain’s side. Obama has a very undistinguished senate and legislative record — he really has not done anything on his own, and his scant Senate voting record shows him to be among the most liberal of all senators. I understand this record plays well in Davis, SF et al, but it doesn’t play well in the heartland. Additionally, Obama’s primary attri

6. Cecelia and Evelyn Greenwald – very few people are going to cast their vote based on polar bears. If you want Obama to win, find a different issue to promote.

7. Rich Rifkin – thanks for making several valid points and providing discussion that most Obama followers are apparently unwilling to face up to.

8. Finally, Christine … is so on point for many Americans. Obama really fails on the moral leadership regarding abortion and protections for those unable to make decisions for themselves. His statements on the matter are clear, and while abortion issues are not the only issue, it would be a mistake to think that pro life issues are not significant to a pretty large group of evangelicals.

In the end, neither obama or palin are qualified to run the country on their prospective first days in office. That fact is a plus for McCain, who is more than prepared to lead today. Obama has become a cult figure that peaked too early, and for whom the passage of time will not be helpful.

“But almost all of the court observers I have heard discuss her qualities as a legal mind have said that she was terribly inconsistant in her reasoning and never a compelling writer.”

You must be reading left-leaning court observers. I have read many of her decisions, and O’Connor was an extremely pragmatic thinker. We need more like her, that don’t necessarily stick to political ideologies. She was also very respectful of her Supreme Court peers, which is more than I can say for some of them.

Rhenquist was also a very good Supreme Court justice, even if you didn’t agree with his very conservative views. Justice Brennan was a good liberal counterpoint to the conservatives on the court, and was very strong about protecting individual rights of the disenfranchised. He was an excellent Justice, even if you don’t agree with his liberal views.

The problem with assessing current justices, is that “observers” tend to base their view on political ideology. Only time will tell if history is kind to the justices I have mentioned as being excellent. I think I will be proved correct in my assessment some years down the line. O’Connor will be remembered as the first woman on the Supreme Court, who had a fine legal mind, and was not afraid to take the practical view.

“But almost all of the court observers I have heard discuss her qualities as a legal mind have said that she was terribly inconsistant in her reasoning and never a compelling writer.”

You must be reading left-leaning court observers. I have read many of her decisions, and O’Connor was an extremely pragmatic thinker. We need more like her, that don’t necessarily stick to political ideologies. She was also very respectful of her Supreme Court peers, which is more than I can say for some of them.

Rhenquist was also a very good Supreme Court justice, even if you didn’t agree with his very conservative views. Justice Brennan was a good liberal counterpoint to the conservatives on the court, and was very strong about protecting individual rights of the disenfranchised. He was an excellent Justice, even if you don’t agree with his liberal views.

The problem with assessing current justices, is that “observers” tend to base their view on political ideology. Only time will tell if history is kind to the justices I have mentioned as being excellent. I think I will be proved correct in my assessment some years down the line. O’Connor will be remembered as the first woman on the Supreme Court, who had a fine legal mind, and was not afraid to take the practical view.

“In terms of public policy (not her private family matters), I think the fact that Gov. Palin has opposed teaching sex ed “because it promotes sex” and has opposed making contraception widely available to high schoolers for the same reason, yet has promoted “abstinance only” education, which by comparison has been a dismal failure everywhere its been employed, I think her daughter’s pregnancy should be embarrassing to her on a policy level. The fact that Bristol Palin had “abstinance only” education and was clearly not abstaining and presumably not using birth control (and certainly not using effective birth control) does not make the case against Gov. Palin’s policy preference. But it sure is a bad anecdote for someone trying to push a very unscientific agenda.”

I don’t care for Palin for other reasons, but the above argument is ridiculous. The only safe sex is abstinence. That is a fact. It is what should be taught, along with other things, like moral values, the virtues of involvement in the community as opposed to dating early, avoidance of casual sex, avoidance of using sex to fix self-esteem, etc. Murder still occurs, but we don’t stop preaching nonviolence because it “hasn’t worked”.

Let’s fact it, parents are up against it when it comes to the sex issue. Children are being given mixed messages. Parents are not getting married, but living together in uncommitted relationships. Sex is used to advertise everything. Television and movies promote casual sex. Porn is everywhere, including the internet.

And you want to fault a parent for the failure of her child to remain celibate in this permissive day and age? If you did that, you would have to fault just about every parent that exists. Too many of our children are engaging in premarital sex.

I had a daughter who was emotionally abused by her father (my ex-husband). After suffering through anorexia because of it, she then got involved with an abusive boyfriend, whom she lived with for a while. I taught her better, but was not able to overcome the outside forces drawing her in the other direction.

Eventually the abusive boyfriend dumped my daughter, and she learned a hard lesson. But don’t condemn her or me for being imperfect – and I still preach abstinence, something my daughter has since embraced (or so she indicates).

Today’s mores are awful, and very destructive to a child’s psyche. We have a lot of children growing up confused about sex, and the current sex education courses in school are not really addressing the underlying problem – an ambivalent society that does not embrace moral values when it comes to sex.

“In terms of public policy (not her private family matters), I think the fact that Gov. Palin has opposed teaching sex ed “because it promotes sex” and has opposed making contraception widely available to high schoolers for the same reason, yet has promoted “abstinance only” education, which by comparison has been a dismal failure everywhere its been employed, I think her daughter’s pregnancy should be embarrassing to her on a policy level. The fact that Bristol Palin had “abstinance only” education and was clearly not abstaining and presumably not using birth control (and certainly not using effective birth control) does not make the case against Gov. Palin’s policy preference. But it sure is a bad anecdote for someone trying to push a very unscientific agenda.”

I don’t care for Palin for other reasons, but the above argument is ridiculous. The only safe sex is abstinence. That is a fact. It is what should be taught, along with other things, like moral values, the virtues of involvement in the community as opposed to dating early, avoidance of casual sex, avoidance of using sex to fix self-esteem, etc. Murder still occurs, but we don’t stop preaching nonviolence because it “hasn’t worked”.

Let’s fact it, parents are up against it when it comes to the sex issue. Children are being given mixed messages. Parents are not getting married, but living together in uncommitted relationships. Sex is used to advertise everything. Television and movies promote casual sex. Porn is everywhere, including the internet.

And you want to fault a parent for the failure of her child to remain celibate in this permissive day and age? If you did that, you would have to fault just about every parent that exists. Too many of our children are engaging in premarital sex.

I had a daughter who was emotionally abused by her father (my ex-husband). After suffering through anorexia because of it, she then got involved with an abusive boyfriend, whom she lived with for a while. I taught her better, but was not able to overcome the outside forces drawing her in the other direction.

Eventually the abusive boyfriend dumped my daughter, and she learned a hard lesson. But don’t condemn her or me for being imperfect – and I still preach abstinence, something my daughter has since embraced (or so she indicates).

Today’s mores are awful, and very destructive to a child’s psyche. We have a lot of children growing up confused about sex, and the current sex education courses in school are not really addressing the underlying problem – an ambivalent society that does not embrace moral values when it comes to sex.

“In the end, neither obama or palin are qualified to run the country on their prospective first days in office. That fact is a plus for McCain, who is more than prepared to lead today. Obama has become a cult figure that peaked too early, and for whom the passage of time will not be helpful.”

By that standard, Lincoln also was not prepared to lead the country on his first day of office, but it seems that a good number of historians give Lincoln credit for being one of the more capable presidents.

The fact that Obama was able to defeat Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination is a notable feat for organization and attracting capable talent.

“In the end, neither obama or palin are qualified to run the country on their prospective first days in office. That fact is a plus for McCain, who is more than prepared to lead today. Obama has become a cult figure that peaked too early, and for whom the passage of time will not be helpful.”

By that standard, Lincoln also was not prepared to lead the country on his first day of office, but it seems that a good number of historians give Lincoln credit for being one of the more capable presidents.

The fact that Obama was able to defeat Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination is a notable feat for organization and attracting capable talent.

“The only safe sex is abstinence. That is a fact. It is what should be taught, along with other things, like moral values…”

Here is the political problem. (I don’t care about the family situation with the Palins. That’s their business, not mine.) Gov. Palin has advocated “abstinence only” education in the public schools. And we know from studies that that curricula leads to more unwanted pregnancies and more disease transmission compared with comprehensive sex education.

You may share Gov. Palin’s political or religious persuasion, but the facts are what they are. If you search the topic in scientific journals, you will consistantly find that “abstinence only” education does not lead to less premarital sex, even if, as you say, abstaining is the only true safe sex.

Here is a brief summary from the American Psychology Association:

“The research on adolescents’ sexual behavior shows that comprehensive sexuality education programs that discuss the appropriate use of condoms do not accelerate sexual experiences. On the contrary, evidence suggests that such programs actually increase the number of adolescents who abstain from sex and also delay the onset of first sexual intercourse. Furthermore, these programs decrease the likelihood of unprotected sex and increase condom use among those having sex for the first time.”

“The only safe sex is abstinence. That is a fact. It is what should be taught, along with other things, like moral values…”

Here is the political problem. (I don’t care about the family situation with the Palins. That’s their business, not mine.) Gov. Palin has advocated “abstinence only” education in the public schools. And we know from studies that that curricula leads to more unwanted pregnancies and more disease transmission compared with comprehensive sex education.

You may share Gov. Palin’s political or religious persuasion, but the facts are what they are. If you search the topic in scientific journals, you will consistantly find that “abstinence only” education does not lead to less premarital sex, even if, as you say, abstaining is the only true safe sex.

Here is a brief summary from the American Psychology Association:

“The research on adolescents’ sexual behavior shows that comprehensive sexuality education programs that discuss the appropriate use of condoms do not accelerate sexual experiences. On the contrary, evidence suggests that such programs actually increase the number of adolescents who abstain from sex and also delay the onset of first sexual intercourse. Furthermore, these programs decrease the likelihood of unprotected sex and increase condom use among those having sex for the first time.”

Rich – what you quoted does not say abstinence only programs are not as effective as comprehensive programs. Read it more carefully –

“The research on adolescents’ sexual behavior shows that comprehensive sexuality education programs that discuss the appropriate use of condoms do not accelerate sexual experiences. On the contrary, evidence suggests that such programs actually increase the number of adolescents who abstain from sex and also delay the onset of first sexual intercourse. Furthermore, these programs decrease the likelihood of unprotected sex and increase condom use among those having sex for the first time.”

Also, note the wording “evidence suggests”, not “evidence proves”. Furthermore, even if so-called experts insisted that comprehensive programs work better than abstinence only, I would point to the fact that at one time the experts thought the world was flat! Absolutely insisted on it. Even believed it themselves.

I will repeat, the only safe sex is abstinence. That is not an opinion, not open for debate, is not a matter of religion, but FACT, FACT, FACT.

Rich – what you quoted does not say abstinence only programs are not as effective as comprehensive programs. Read it more carefully –

“The research on adolescents’ sexual behavior shows that comprehensive sexuality education programs that discuss the appropriate use of condoms do not accelerate sexual experiences. On the contrary, evidence suggests that such programs actually increase the number of adolescents who abstain from sex and also delay the onset of first sexual intercourse. Furthermore, these programs decrease the likelihood of unprotected sex and increase condom use among those having sex for the first time.”

Also, note the wording “evidence suggests”, not “evidence proves”. Furthermore, even if so-called experts insisted that comprehensive programs work better than abstinence only, I would point to the fact that at one time the experts thought the world was flat! Absolutely insisted on it. Even believed it themselves.

I will repeat, the only safe sex is abstinence. That is not an opinion, not open for debate, is not a matter of religion, but FACT, FACT, FACT.

I really can’t agree that “McCain is ready to lead ” on day one. Forget his VP pick for what that says about his judgement, how about his apparent total lack of understanding the different way that natives in a muslim country(Iraq, for starters) will view our occupation (for even 10 years, let alone 100) than the natives in Germany or Korea have. And, BTW, I know of many Germans who do not hate us, but resent having our troups there for sooo long.
For disclosure, I do not like anonymous blogs, but do not yet have a goggle tag.
One more thing about being ready for office: Obama demonstrates not just effective oration – he obviously has a great (deep) understanding of issues. Read his books; try to listen to what he says – unbiasedly. If you can.

I really can’t agree that “McCain is ready to lead ” on day one. Forget his VP pick for what that says about his judgement, how about his apparent total lack of understanding the different way that natives in a muslim country(Iraq, for starters) will view our occupation (for even 10 years, let alone 100) than the natives in Germany or Korea have. And, BTW, I know of many Germans who do not hate us, but resent having our troups there for sooo long.
For disclosure, I do not like anonymous blogs, but do not yet have a goggle tag.
One more thing about being ready for office: Obama demonstrates not just effective oration – he obviously has a great (deep) understanding of issues. Read his books; try to listen to what he says – unbiasedly. If you can.

“Forget his VP pick for what that says about his judgement, how about his apparent total lack of understanding the different way that natives in a muslim country(Iraq, for starters) will view our occupation (for even 10 years, let alone 100) than the natives in Germany or Korea have. And, BTW, I know of many Germans who do not hate us, but resent having our troups there for sooo long.”

how do you know what Muslim natives think in Iraq, Afghanistan, or otherwise?

Second, if the Germans didn’t want our troops there, then they shouldn’t have started a second World War.

“One more thing about being ready for office: Obama demonstrates not just effective oration – he obviously has a great (deep) understanding of issues. Read his books; try to listen to what he says – unbiasedly. If you can.”

Obviously? According to whom?

Obama doesn’t think Iran is a serious threat to us. He was caught saying so to his base.

He did not vote against the Iraq war, he voted present. That is not the opposition he claims. He couldn’t make up his mind. That is not what I would say is an understanding of anything.

“Forget his VP pick for what that says about his judgement, how about his apparent total lack of understanding the different way that natives in a muslim country(Iraq, for starters) will view our occupation (for even 10 years, let alone 100) than the natives in Germany or Korea have. And, BTW, I know of many Germans who do not hate us, but resent having our troups there for sooo long.”

how do you know what Muslim natives think in Iraq, Afghanistan, or otherwise?

Second, if the Germans didn’t want our troops there, then they shouldn’t have started a second World War.

“One more thing about being ready for office: Obama demonstrates not just effective oration – he obviously has a great (deep) understanding of issues. Read his books; try to listen to what he says – unbiasedly. If you can.”

Obviously? According to whom?

Obama doesn’t think Iran is a serious threat to us. He was caught saying so to his base.

He did not vote against the Iraq war, he voted present. That is not the opposition he claims. He couldn’t make up his mind. That is not what I would say is an understanding of anything.