In recent elections, the pro-western Democratic Party won big by securing 38% of the vote . Their main opposition, the nationalist Radical Party received 29%. Both parties believe they can form a governing coalition.
HSBC has set aside another $3.2 billion for bad loans Ed. Note: (is that what they call a writedown?) due to continuing fallout of the mortgage crisis and increased credit card delinquencies. Five percent of mortgages were in arrears by 60 days or more.
On this day:
Lots of celebrity birthdays:
Comedian George Carlin (1937)
Libertarian Sci-fi Author L. Neil Smith (1946)
Punk/New Wave Singer Ian Dury (1942)
Baseball players Felipe Alou (1935) and Yogi Berra
(1925)
Fourth generation NASCAR driver Adam Petty died in an accident during practice at the age of 20 (2000).
Texas Democrats flee the state in order to prevent Republicans from proceeding with redistricting plans
. Democrats were needed in the chamber to constitute a quorum. (2003)
__________________________
I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
Ender (and other admins)
I'm getting some SQL errors and warnings when I post open threads lately. They occur when I edit the story, so I would assume you'd get the same messages if you attempt to edit today's story.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
I've been getting them too
every time I post a diary.
Something's wrong on Ender's end.
checking it out guys n/t
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Out of town for a while
Going to a wedding and will spend some extra time seeing friends and family.
I probably won't be around much over the next two weeks, so have fun =)
__________________________Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
I'm going to a wedding too
In lovely Destin, Fla.
__________________________qui tacet consentire
Senator Lieberman again says (on CNN) that Hamas supports
Senator Obama for President and so people should vote for John McCain for President.
Wolf points out that Obama doesn't support Hamas or it's views. Lieberman agree's but then goes on to link Obama with Hamas.
If Senator Reid doesn't kick Leiberman's ass out of every chairmanship and committee he currently occupies, I will be very very unhappy.
Lieberman has for all practical purposes declared war on teh Democratic Party.
Where's the problem?
You actually have that backwards. Lieberman links Hamas to Obama, not the other way around. And it is a fair question to ask what is it about Obama that Hamas prefers, right? This is exactly the same question one has with respect to William Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist, and his support of Obama, right?
I don't know what it is about Obama that the terrorists like so much, especially given that his pastor of 20 years and his own wife hate America so much, but I don't want to find out after he is in the White House. Do you?
Or are you claiming that Hamas didn't endorse Obama and THAT is a lie?
UPDATE:
Audio link of the Hamas endorsement available here
.
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
So
It appears that you are of the opinion that we should take into account what the rest of the world thinks when choosing our president? Wouldn't have guessed that of you.
__________________________We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
Why should this surprise you?
I have consistently taken the position that we should take the actions and opinions of our sworn enemies into account. This is nothing new, really, is it?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
And what of our allies?
So if our allies prefer say, Obama as well, how much will that play into your decision.
__________________________http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186
So, if Kim Jong Il endorses McCain
we should take him seriously and wonder whether McCain is going to sell out South Korea?
Or should we just write him off as an idiot who's been hitting the Hennessey VSOP pretty hard?
I'd vote for the latter.
__________________________qui tacet consentire
Yeah I don't think we should particulary pay attention to
endorsements by enemies, it might be reverse psychology, reverse reverse... Now if we get private information that an enemy really perfers another candidate and it isn't a public statement than that might be cause for concern .
An interesting interview
to read here
.
The whole interview with Obama, done by Jeffery Goldberg, is fascinating, and shows a willingness to talk openly and directly to complex issues, dealing with Israel, Palestine and history and how to move it forward.
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
GoRight goes for the trifecta...and wins!
OK....let's all understand that you aren't the target audience Lieberman is trying to reach. You've swilled the Kool-Aide and are already a happy zombie to the cause, as exemplified by your response.
Here's the problems:
1) When Lieberman proclaimed that Hamas supports Obama, he is setting up a linkage between the image and deeds of Hamas to the image and future deeds of Obama, even though he agreed that Obama doesn't support Hamas in any of his views, then he goes on to again reinforce the false link between Hamas and Obama. It's the false linkage between the two that I see as showing that Lieberman is a dirtbag.
2) William Ayers
, domestic terrorist. William Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground. He was caught, trialed and sentanced for his deeds during those years. He served his time and has since become a success story of prison reform. He earned Post graduate degrees and has been a productive member of society teaching at the University of Illinois, Chicago. You are pulling a Lieberman. You are trying to link Obama with someone who you claim as domestic terrorist. How many of Mr. Ayers thousands of students do you also feel can not contribute to society because they have had contact with him?
3) The Reverand Wright.
Buddy...if you were half the American he is this country would be in much better shape. He left college and joined the United States Marine Corps and became part of the 2nd Marine Division attaining the rank of private first class. In 1963, after two years of service, Wright joined the United States Navy and entered the Corpsman School at the Great Lakes Naval Training Center in which capacity he served in the National Naval Medical Center until his discharge in 1967. He went on to get a Bachelors & Masters & Doctoral Degree. You've never been a US Marine, have you? I suspect that you never got a Masters or a Doctoral degree either, is that true?
None the less, you once again try to link Osama to Reverand Wright in order to cast disparagement upon Senator Obama. Once again, it's exactly what Senator Lieberman is trying to do, to slime him by attributing the characteristics of people he doesn't agree with as if they were his own.
I don't like it on Lieberman when he uses this dishonest line of slander. It doesn't look any better on you.
There's nothing false about it ...
I provided the audio link above.
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I have
heard rumors that he practices vodoo using cats whiskers.
He also sometimes smiles when eating, which is highly suspicious.
What is he really trying to hide?
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
I know what Obama is hiding.
Secret Muslim!
Secret Muslim!
Secret Muslim!
Say that into a mirror three times and one of Obama's secret friends
will come and get you.
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
I provided an audio link ...
to substantiate the claim that Hamas has, in fact, indicated that they prefer Obama to win.
Do you have anything to substantiate you claim of voodoo practices?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
He's black
isn't that enough. And his father was African!!! Vodoo territory of his father's tribe, as a Harvard grad. Scary stuff.
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
I heard he has black children
And that he had them with a married black woman.
Somebody call Karl Rove so he can spread this throughout South Carolina.
__________________________qui tacet consentire
Check Roll Call
GR has a master's degree in CS from Stanford.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
I am trying to judge Obama on the content of his character ...
not the color of his skin.
Since he has no direct record of any substance we have to rely on secondary indicators such as the character of his key supporters and associates. When I do so, these are the types of people who seem to keep cropping up.
I'm not saying that it means anything. I simply report the facts, you decide what they mean.
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
His key supporters.....
like the voters, the grassroots activists, economists, or superdelegates?
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
The Jeffords Provision
There seems to be a factual error going around regarding Lieberman's staying on as a Democrat. People often say that Reid has to tolerate him because if Lieberman pulled a Jeffords and switched parties, that the Republicans would have a 51-50 majority (with Cheney being the tiebreaking vote). That would enable them to chair all committees with their new majority; this is not true.
Due to the fact that Congress is sworn in on Jan. 3 there exist a few weeks when the old President and VP are still in power. In that 2001 session, the Democrats and Republicans were equally split with Al Gore being the tiebreaking vote. VP-elect Cheney was going to change that split on Jan. 20.
The Democrats and Republicans came to an agreement that because of the circumstances, any change in party would mean a change in majority for purposes of chairmanships and leadership status (majority/minority leader). Because Jeffords changed, the majority changed. In any other year, it wouldn't have made a difference.
There was no such agreement this time. Reid can kick Lieberman out of the caucus and still enjoy the 50-51 "majority" he'd have until the end of the year. Why he hasn't done so, I have no clue.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
Do you have anything to back this up ...
not that I have any reason to disbelieve you but this sounds a little fishy to me.
The rules don't seem to coincide with it so I want to find the discrepency...
http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/rule24.php
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Rule 24 is right
I direct you to S. Res 8
of the 107th Congress.
You'll notice the specific provisions here regarding the unusual case I described above. Pay special attention to Sec. 2.
Rule 24 would have given majority control to the Democrats in the Senate of the 107th Congress until the 108th Congress. They'd have just appointed their chairmen and members of committees and that'd have been that. Any change in the chairmen/ranking members after Cheney became VP could (and would have) been filibustered by the now minority Democrats.
Clause 4 is interesting enough, because it would seem to cut against my argument. I can't remember where I read it; if I could, I'd gladly provide a link. The clause would seem to indicate that if Lieberman was ousted and decided to recaucus with the Republicans, then only Lieberman's chairmanship could be voted upon. One would assume that a Republican would win the chairmanship due to the new 51-50 "working majority". So one committee would have a Republican chairman in an otherwise Democrat-led Senate.
Come the 111th Congress, I don't think Lieberman is going to get appointed to any committees unless he caucuses as a Republican. He'd be far and away the most liberal Republican in recent memory, but he's essentially one on all the issues that matter. I have no doubt in my mind that Connecticut voters would recall him if at all possible.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
Your link seems to be broken ...
I get:
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
GRR GPO
The GPO sites (and THOMAS) use some sort of caching algorithm rather than static pages. I'll post the text below:
Mr. DASCHLE (for himself and Mr. LOTT) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to
RESOLUTION
Relative to Senate procedure in the 107th Congress.
Resolved, That notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXV, or any other provision of the Standing Rules or Standing Orders of the Senate, the committees of the Senate, including Joint and Special Committees, for the 107th Congress shall be composed equally of members of both parties, to be appointed at a later time by the two Leaders; that the budgets and office space for such committees, and all other subgroups, shall likewise be equal, with up to an additional 10 percent to be allocated for administrative expenses to be determined by the Rules Committee, with the total administrative expenses allocation for all committees not to exceed historic levels; and that the Chairman of a full committee may discharge a subcommittee of any Legislative or Executive Calendar item which has not been reported because of a tie vote and place it on the full committee's agenda.
SEC. 2. Provided, That such committee ratios shall remain in effect for the remainder of the 107th Congress, except that if at any time during the 107th Congress either party attains a majority of the whole number of Senators, then each committee ratio shall be adjusted to reflect the ratio of the parties in the Senate, and the provisions of this resolution shall have no further effect, except that the members appointed by the two Leaders, pursuant to this resolution, shall no longer be members of the committees, and the committee chairmanships shall be held by the party which has attained a majority of the whole number of Senators.
SEC. 3. Pursuant to the provisions and exceptions listed above, the following additional Standing Orders shall be in effect for the 107th Congress:
(1) If a committee has not reported out a legislative item or nomination because of a tie vote, then, after notice of such tie vote has been transmitted to the Senate by that committee and printed in the Record, the Majority Leader or the Minority Leader may, only after consultation with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the committee, make a motion to discharge such legislative item or nomination, and time for debate on such motion shall be limited to 4 hours, to be equally divided between the two Leaders, with no other motions, points of order, or amendments in order: Provided, That following the use or yielding back of time, a vote occur on the motion to discharge, without any intervening action, motion, or debate, and if agreed to it be placed immediately on the Calendar of Business (in the case of legislation) or the Executive Calendar (in the case of a nomination).
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of rule XXII, to insure that any cloture motion shall be offered for the purpose of bringing to a close debate, in no case shall it be in order for any cloture motion to be made on an amendable item during its first 12 hours of Senate debate: Provided, That all other provisions of rule XXII remain in status quo.
(3) Both Leaders shall seek to attain an equal balance of the interests of the two parties when scheduling and debating legislative and executive business generally, and in keeping with the present Senate precedents, a motion to proceed to any Legislative or Executive Calendar item shall continue to be considered the prerogative of the Majority Leader, although the Senate Rules do not prohibit the right of the Democratic Leader, or any other Senator, to move to proceed to any item.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
I could string you along a little longer ...
by objecting that you might have tampered with the language above and therefore this isn't a valid/satisfactory reference ... but in the interests of time (and because I trust you here, of course) let us simply proceed based on the text you have provided. :)
Section 2 above was only written because of the extraordinary circumstance that the two parties were tied seat-wise. So they needed a special agreement to cover how things would work unless and until one or the other attained a majority in which case the Senate would revert back to the original tradition and rules.
I see nothing in either Rule 24 or the text above the prevents the Senate chairmanships from switching mid-congress, quite the contrary as any member can demand a vote on the committee appointments.
You have made an argument that any switch in party composition would be filibustered. I would have to look to see if that was permissible under the rules, but even if it is I don't think it would be a slam dunk that the Democrats would use it. Much political hay could be made of such a move in addition to the fact that any Senator can call for a vote for any committee chairmanships and appointments:
This places no restrictions on when such a demand can be made, although I agree that it is most likely assumed to be made at the time of the original appointments.
Regardless, they (the Senators) seem to take this aspect of running the Senate very seriously and I doubt a Majority Party would simply roll over and allow such a fiasco to continue unchallenged.
Is this your own theory of how things would work or is there some more direct authority that you are relying on?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I recall a direct authority
I can recall a story that detailed precedents where Democrats started in the majority, but via special elections and party defections, etc. they became the minority. They still retained "majority status" though.
I distinctly recall reading a piece with citations, but I can't recall where it was.
Needless to say, Lieberman won't be chairing any committees after Jan 3, 2009.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
Can Libertarians get any respect?
So Bob Barr is running for president. He looks an awfully like John McCain
, if you ask me. I wonder if these reporter guys have something against going into images.google.com, and typing in "Bob Barr" and picking an image?
__________________________http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186
Bob Barr was always consistent.
He was a thorn in my side during the Newt/DeLay years. Since leaving Congress I've appreciated the candor he has had the opportunity to finally use.
I think that a Libertarian Party is a possibility, but I would expect that it would vote within the Republican block. Probably along the lines of Sanders (VT) old alliance with the Democrats.
He's kind of a "LINO"
hehehe.
He's OK I suppose but he's definitely on the rigtward, traditionalist conservative end of the spectrum. Not my preferred candidate to carry the label....for whatever it matters.
:(
LP News
He's a neo-federalist really (I coined that term just now, so when it becomes popular I own rights to it!). I don't think he's much of a Libertarian at all.
He plays to the conservative, "Republican spillover" section of the Libertarian Party. I'll be taking a pass if he's the nominee.
There are a few major players:
Bob Barr (conservative wing)
Mary Ruwart (anarchist wing; she doesn't even believe in age of consent laws or government-run courts)
Wayne Allyn Root (conservative wing)
Steve Cubby (marijuana wing) :-)
Mike Gravel (liberal/moderate wing)
None of them do anything for me, although I could vote for Crazy Grandpa Mike in a pinch.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
I find Root and Cubby to be closest to the mainstream
libertarian view.
Not that I know much about him, but I a little surprised you see him as "conservative wing". But hey, he could be. I just don't know much about him in that sense.
Could be
Root was for staying in Iraq until a few months ago; I'd also agree with Cubby being mainstream. I could vote for Cubby as well.
My commentary on the wings each represents is an unscientific amalgamation of the general opinion at Third Party Watch, which I no longer read because of the massive amounts of spam and general hostility there.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
Obama wants to be President of the 57 states?
I mean you can overlook some things but he doesn't even know how many states there are? (Shakes Head) How can anyone take him seriously after this? Is this Obama's Dan "potatoe" Quayle moment?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Maybe it's because in his mind he's already added
Palestine, Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Libya, Iraq and Jordan to the US as states.
Man, just imagine what those Obama is a secret Muslim rumors will be then!
Does this mean the price of gas will
go down?
$3.65 where I live. It's not fun. I swear every time I drive past the corner gas station the price of gas goes up a dime!
Maybe he could add the African continent so we get some of that good sweet crude from Nigeria at a discount. :)
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
Speaking of...where's that Gas Tax Rebate?
Since last Tuesday's primaries its been pretty quiet. It should be introduced on the floor by now, right? Because after all, shouldn't blue-collar, hard-working, middle-class, real (hope I got all my pander words) everyday Americans get an additional $2-$3/wk from our government to get by? don't they care about the middle-blue-working-collar class anymore?
__________________________http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678
Brawl: 2277-7051-2186
Yeah!
I can tolerate about $3.29 per gallon. But sheesh, if this keeps up, if you drive 20 miles one way to work, you are looking about 8 bucks just to get to frickin' work.
It's nuts. The price of gas.
I don't see how the lower middle class can withstand the onslaught, because prices of everything else will have to go up to compensate for the price of gas. Every week I make a few bucks less, because of gas. If it keeps going like this, beans are gonna be on the menu every night. (fortunately, I love beans)
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
Time to live where you work
The lower middle class has coped by putting essentials on their credit card.
Luckily for me, I live in the largest city within about a 40mile radius. Right now, I live a 5 minute walk (.4 mi) from my employer. I'm trying to secure better employment at either a 10 minute walk (.7 mi) or a 5 minute drive (3 mi). I have a small (but expensive) grocery store that is literally right across the street from me as well. In the last 2 months I've only spent about $70 on gas.
Wherever I live later on in life, I'm going to be sure it's going to be well served by mass transit. Riding my bike to the bus stop and taking the bus to Wright State was, oddly enough, one of my favorite parts of the day. Exercise is the best cure for depression.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
Good for you!
I drive much less than I did last year, and I thought I was cutting back on driving then!
The good citizens where I live voted for a light rail system, that will being coming to my neighborhood soon. About a mile away though!
I totally agree about the exercise. It kicks in the endorphins which give you a mental boost!
They have all kinds of fees on air fairs now also. Fuel surcharges, baggage charges, (lavatory charges, if you don't use the toitee you save $10). So an advertised fare doubles with the add ons. And changing reservations tacks on yet another fee of over a hundred bucks. I guess the skies will be less crowded, unless you count the jet setters who own their own planes!
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
It was introduced a month ago
THOMAS
, says so.
Oddly, HRC hasn't signed on as a sponsor.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
OMG, it gets worse ...
The Organization of the Islamic Conference
is a permanent delegation to the United Nations which groups 57 states "to promote solidarity among all Islamic member states."
Kind of makes you go hmmm. Was this just a slip of the tongue for Obama or a Freudian slip of the tongue? Just which "states" has he been visiting?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
OMG
It's like the twilight zone. Who knew!
My question is do you think he is responsible for any cat deaths. That would be highly significant.
I heard he also was a part of the Charles Manson cult. Have you got anything on that front?
Wasn't he also in on the Oklahoma City bombing. Get your guys on his fertilizer receipts.
I also heard a rumor that the fuel he uses to jet around the country is purchased from terrorists.
Get the word out NOW! This is horrible. He is supporting terrorists on a daily basis by buying ....*fuel*...... Shocking!
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.
This only makes *you* go hmmmmm...
...it makes me go yawwwwnnnn...
Do you purport to speak for every other person on the planet?
except for me, obviously?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
No, but just on my observations of this blog...
...only you and you alone have felt compelled to hmmmmm over this non-issue.
So it is your contention that his reference to 57 states ...
when there are 57 states in that Islamic organization is just a weird coincidence and that he happened to pick 57 just randomly out of the air?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
It doesn't even rise to the level of coincidence
It sounds like he meant "47", not "57"-- every state except Alaska, Hawaii, and one other state = 47 states. He didn't pull 57 out of thin air. There's fifty states, that's where he got the fifty part from, talking about all but three of the 50 states.
Seriously-- is this the best material you got on Obama?
No, not at all ...
but it seems to be the type of material that interests your political compatriates that created the list YOU relied upon ...
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
So does this mean you think it WASN'T a coincidence?
Can I quote you on that? :)
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
This troubles you greatly, but you voted for Bush twice...
...it bafffles the mind...
Thanks, this is another good example along the lines ...
of the Dan Quayle reference. Here we have a compiled list of every malapropism or misspoken statement ever uttered by President Bush like they were the most serious and significant indicator of his fitness for office.
Yet these same people, just like you apparently, aren't even the least interested that Obama doesn't know how many states there are?
Hmmmm.
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I've never said nor implied...
...that Bush's malaprops are "the most serious and significant indicator of his [lack of] fitness for office". I've also never to my recollection stooped to highlighting or posting a video of a Bush malaprop and pretending that it had some enduring significance, like you have done just now.
I link to the list merely to remind you that if we are to believe that every misstatement legitimately betrays a lack of knowledge, and that from this Obama video we can conclude that Obama truly doesn't know how many states there are, we would also have to believe, for instance, that Bush does not know that John Howard was the prime minister of Australia, and that he does not know that the Revolutionary War was over two centuries ago, not two decades ago.
Sure you did ...
Right here:
This troubles you greatly, but you voted for Bush twice...
by posting an unqualified reference to that list you adopted it and everything it stood for. And I maintain that the list you relied upon in YOUR post has, in effect, taken exactly that position otherwise it wouldn't exist.
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
BS
I linked the list only to point out your inconsistency with regard to being troubled by malaprops. The fact that I linked to the list implies nothing about my opinion of this list or the significance thereof.
How is my originally stated position above ...
inconsistent with the position taken by the list that YOU relied upon? It isn't.
Your list seeks to use verbal gaffes and malapropisms to discredit a person's fitness to hold the Presidential office as does my original statement. Now you are saying that your use of the list was to show how I was being inconsistent? Especially when I had never commented on the content of the list to which you refer?
Sorry, skymutt, but on the issue of being a hypocrite with respect to the importance of Presidential Verbal Gaffes and Malapropisms I think it is clear that you take the prize. :)
How would you feel about a stutterer running for President?
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
You read way more into the list than is there
I've seen similar lists of statements by Casey Stengel and Yogi Berra. The lists were not meant as reflections of their abilities in their field of endeavor. The list were just lists of malaprops, just like this one. This list takes no position as far as Bush's fitness for office, despite your repeated and shrill protests that it somehow does. It's not the list compiler's fault that Bush also happens to be a hopeless incompetent, a fact that has little if anything to do with his thick tongue. The fact that you read so much into the list is merely a combination of two things: 1.) projection on your part (i.e. if you personally were to compile such a list of malaprops for, say, Obama, your intent would be to impugn the man's fitness for office rather than to just have a laugh at some of the funny things he accidentally said) and 2.) sensitivity on your part over the utterly failed President you voted for twice.
So you like to make fun of people with speech problems?
What is it that drives you to seek these types of things out?
Nope, it is clear to all that the purpose of these lists is to denigrate the speaker, especially with respect to George W. Bush and his father before him. See Bushism
in wikipedia:
So, caricaturing him and suggesting he doesn't understand the words that he is using doesn't address his fitness for office? I think you'll have a hard time of convincing anyone that the dozens of books and the contrived poem referenced above are not meant to denigrate him. They are.
So when I point out Obama's verbal gafe and make a big deal of it, I am just playing the same game as those who make up the lists like the one you referenced. How is that being inconsistent? Playing along is the very definition of being consistent ...
__________________________Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Seldom is our children learning
When Obama averages 2.1 gaffes and what not per 5 minutes of speaking, then start talking...
"Its pronounced nucular."
Homer J. Simpson.
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Double post...
and triple post!
Go for four!
I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
Jonah Goldberg asks for our help:
"About a month ago, I called Ramesh in a panic because I’d forgotten that I was slated to do a Close-Up Foundation interview on the Bush legacy and I hadn’t thought too much about it.
Fortunately, not only did Ramesh have some great thoughts, but I was wrong about the date — by a month (I’d entered it into my PDA wrong). Anyway, I’m doing the interview this Thursday and while I have my thoughts far better organized, I thought it’d be interesting to know what NRO readers think Bush’s legacy will be. Please send thoughts — hopefully constructive — to JonahResearch@AOL.com."
It's helpful to actually take that link to see what Sadlyno! is going to send Jonah. I recommend we all help in our own personal ways too.
Let the predictions begin....
here we go.
Hat tip to my fellow traveler Logan at Freedom Democrats
for a nice link to some November predictions.
The first of many I would guess.
But I think it's pretty good for a rudimentary start.