T1B

battery chucka' one wrote:I pray your right I pray I'm wrong.

Tom In VA wrote:
Strange fucking days.

Felix wrote:

battery chucka' one wrote:I pray your right I pray I'm wrong.

I'm sure god is either with you or against you on this one

battery chucka' one wrote:Rozy, I pray your right and that McCain will win, but I really think that Obama's going to win this election. Don't get me wrong, he SHOULDN'T, but I think he will. That's perhaps the most disgusting thing about this situation. That's what scares me the most. Again, I pray I'm wrong. I fear that I'm not.

rozy wrote:

battery chucka' one wrote:Rozy, I pray your right and that McCain will win, but I really think that Obama's going to win this election. Don't get me wrong, he SHOULDN'T, but I think he will. That's perhaps the most disgusting thing about this situation. That's what scares me the most. Again, I pray I'm wrong. I fear that I'm not.

http://www.zogby.com/50state/

Zogby polls

McCain leads in Pennsylvania…….... 49.1% - 44.3%
McCain leads in Florida……….......... 52.1% - 41.8%
McCain leads in Virginia………......... 50.3% - 43.8%
McCain leads in New Hampshire…... 49.1% - 42.8%
McCain leads in Ohio………….......... 49.8% - 43.9%
McCain leads in Colorado………....... 47.5% - 45.5%


Up to the moment. Certainly nothing more than just another poll, but interesting nonetheless.

rozy wrote:The Zogby Electoral College Map
Updated 9/25/2008

Clicking a link trumps pulling dates out of your ass every time.

State: New Hampshire

Updated: 9/25/2008

Summary:
McCain - 49.1%
Obama - 42.8%
Not Sure/Other - 8.1%

Still leans to McCain, but debates and Wall Street mess put New Hampshire very much up for grabs.

Electoral Votes: 4, Too close to call

Full crosstab data from New Hampshire is available to subscribers to the 2008 Presidential polling package.

Methodology: Zogby International conducted an online survey of 433 likely voters. The poll ran from Sept. 9-12. It carries a margin of error of +/- 4.8 percentage points.

rozy wrote:Semantical misdirections. So freaking predictable...

Now to decide if I wish to teach multiple English lessons on this useless tangent..

Your eternal defensive posture is duly noted.

You could have just said, "John is right"

rozy wrote:The Couric interview was a disaster. .

Cuda wrote:

rozy wrote:The Couric interview was a disaster. .

pffft. NO body watches that cunt anyway.

Cuda wrote:thousands? really?

Mississippi Neck wrote: If McCain wins and has a stroke we get Palin,

Palin Is Ready? Please.
McCain says that he always puts country first. In this important case, that is simply not true.

Fareed Zakaria
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Oct 6, 2008
Will someone please put Sarah Palin out of her agony? Is it too much to ask that she come to realize that she wants, in that wonderful phrase in American politics, "to spend more time with her family"? Having stayed in purdah for weeks, she finally agreed to a third interview. CBS's Katie Couric questioned her in her trademark sympathetic style. It didn't help. When asked how living in the state closest to Russia gave her foreign-policy experience, Palin responded thus:

"It's very important when you consider even national-security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America. Where—where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to—to our state."

There is, of course, the sheer absurdity of the premise. Two weeks ago I flew to Tokyo, crossing over the North Pole. Does that make me an expert on Santa Claus? (Thanks, Jon Stewart.) But even beyond that, read the rest of her response. "It is from Alaska that we send out those …" What does this mean? This is not an isolated example. Palin has been given a set of talking points by campaign advisers, simple ideological mantras that she repeats and repeats as long as she can. ("We mustn't blink.") But if forced off those rehearsed lines, what she has to say is often, quite frankly, gibberish.

Couric asked her a smart question about the proposed $700 billion bailout of the American financial sector. It was designed to see if Palin understood that the problem in this crisis is that credit and liquidity in the financial system has dried up, and that that's why, in the estimation of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, the government needs to step in to buy up Wall Street's most toxic liabilities. Here's the entire exchange:

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.

This is nonsense—a vapid emptying out of every catchphrase about economics that came into her head. Some commentators, like CNN's Campbell Brown, have argued that it's sexist to keep Sarah Palin under wraps, as if she were a delicate flower who might wilt under the bright lights of the modern media. But the more Palin talks, the more we see that it may not be sexism but common sense that's causing the McCain campaign to treat her like a time bomb.

Can we now admit the obvious? Sarah Palin is utterly unqualified to be vice president. She is a feisty, charismatic politician who has done some good things in Alaska. But she has never spent a day thinking about any important national or international issue, and this is a hell of a time to start. The next administration is going to face a set of challenges unlike any in recent memory. There is an ongoing military operation in Iraq that still costs $10 billion a month, a war against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan that is not going well and is not easily fixed. Iran, Russia and Venezuela present tough strategic challenges.

Domestically, the bailout and reform of the financial industry will take years and hundreds of billions of dollars. Health-care costs, unless curtailed, will bankrupt the federal government. Social Security, immigration, collapsing infrastructure and education are all going to get much worse if they are not handled soon.

And the American government is stretched to the limit. Between the Bush tax cuts, homeland-security needs, Iraq, Afghanistan and the bailout, the budget is looking bleak. Plus, within a few years, the retirement of the baby boomers begins with its massive and rising costs (in the trillions).

Obviously these are very serious challenges and constraints. In these times, for John McCain to have chosen this person to be his running mate is fundamentally irresponsible. McCain says that he always puts country first. In this important case, it is simply not true.

Can we now admit the obvious? Sarah Palin is utterly unqualified to be vice president.

mvscal wrote: A trained parakeet is qualified to be vice president.

BOSTON (Reuters) - Mocked by comedians, derided by prominent conservatives and reeling from flustered interviews with national media, Sarah Palin is proving a risky gamble in Republican John McCain's quest for the White House.

"Palin is Ready? Please" a headline in Newsweek said this week of the moose-hunting Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate, capping a turbulent week in which Palin's fitness for the job came under growing scrutiny.

"Sarah Palin is utterly unqualified to be vice president," Newsweek International Editor Fareed Zakaria wrote.

"She is a feisty, charismatic politician who has done some good things in Alaska. But she has never spent a day thinking about any important national or international issue, and this is a hell of a time to start," he said.

The column could be dismissed as one of hundreds of biting news stories in the hard-fought race between McCain and Democrat Barack Obama, with less than six weeks before the November 4 presidential election.

But it follows a whirlwind of criticism and ridicule from Republicans and Democrats alike since interviews with CBS news anchor Katie Couric, Fox News' Sean Hannity and ABC News' Charles Gibson that raise question over her nomination and dealings with the media.

History shows most Americans vote for presidents, not vice presidents and Palin's folksy appeal energizes far larger crowds than those drawn to gaffe-prone Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, whom she debates on Thursday.

But the governor's troubles are piling up -- from a stubborn investigation into charges that as governor she abused her power by firing a public safety commissioner to her latest stumbles with the media.

Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, an early Palin supporter, on Friday bluntly called on Palin to step down to "save McCain, her party, and the country she loves".

"Quick study or not, she doesn't know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin, should conditions warrant her promotion," Parker wrote in the conservative National Review.

Palin could withdraw from the race for personal reasons such as wanting to spend more time with her newborn, added Parker, who in September rallied behind Palin for showing "strength, conviction, determination" and confidence.

mvscal wrote:Republicans who weren't voting for McCain anyway. The comparison to Eagleton is ridiculous. Palin brings votes to the ticket. Lots of them. Quite frankly, McLoon would be dead in the water without her.

mvscal wrote:Palin never would have occured to me, but I can't imagine anyone else out there who would have been a better pick. The relentless vitriol, disgusting personal smears and lies coming from the left is a pretty good indicator that she scares them shitless. Not only did she deliver the Amen Corner for McLoon, she actually has them fired up. She will also chisel a more than a few Clintonistas from Onogga. It won't take many to make a difference since each one is a net pick up of two votes.

Tactically speaking, it was the most deft move in the campaign on either side. He hasn't really followed through on it and sealed the deal, though. If he doesn't start stabbing Obilgepump in the neck, he could lose even to a n...igger.

War Wagon wrote:I'll take a born again "nutcase" over the likes of a Bill Mayer anyday.

At least the nutcases have a compass and know which direction they'd like to go.

mvscal wrote: Palin's experience dwarfs Onogga's. She's run a city and a state. What the fuck has he ever run?

BSmack wrote:

War Wagon wrote:I'll take a born again "nutcase" over the likes of a Bill Mayer anyday.

At least the nutcases have a compass and know which direction they'd like to go.

So did Bush. Look where that got us.

poptart wrote:Wagon, we've had very few "terror attacks" on our soil in the history of our nation.
In that true context, the fact that it's been 7 years since 9/11 doesn't prove diddly squat.

Gore, Kerry, Bush, McCain, Clinton, ... nobody "big" said much at all about a looming financial meltdown, true.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, has been ON IT for a VERY long time.

I know that hurts the fuck out of your ears.

Wagon wrote:I'll give the guy credit for being a squeaky wheel, but until such time as he actually puts the infrastructure in place to make a solid run, he'll remain the Ralph Nader or Ross Perot of fringe candidates.

Dins and I speak of him to y'all.

poptart wrote:He's voted nearly 100% in accordance with the Constitution.
Marginalized ... for doing what he's sworn to do.

Every Fucking Member of The Senate (and every member of the House takes a similar one wrote:I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

poptart wrote:What would you have a leader do?

Piss on the Constitution like the rest of the representatives of the people do?

Crater on his fundamental DUTY so that he gains appeal within his party ... and so that sheeple like you will then recognize him?

Is that the leadership you're speaking of?

Dinsdale has very accurately detailed for you ... over and over again ... why Ron Paul is YOUR guy.

You just won't have it.

Mister Bushice wrote: If this guy is so great - WHY is he not in contention RIGHT NOW?