Palin is out of her league compared to Biden.

She will get crushed in the debate.

She should drop out now before futrther crippling McCain's bid for the
presidency.

Watch the debate and see.

"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
Palin is out of her league compared to Biden.

She will get crushed in the debate.

She should drop out now before futrther crippling McCain's bid for the
presidency.

Watch the debate and see.


All Gov. Sarah Palin has to do is wear a sexy little librarian costume that
shows some thigh and cleavage. She's a good friend of mine and she modeled
what she's planning to wear for the debate.

Here she is:
http://librarianavengers.org/wp-cont...libcostume.jpg

Nobody will even hear what she says if she should happen to make a big
mistake. She'll have every red-blooded man in America voting for her and
most of the women.

Wilbur Hubbard

Dave wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:49:17 -0600, "Charles Momsen"
said:

Watch the debate and see.

Do you suppose they'll tell viewers that the moderator has a direct economic
interest in Obama's winning?


You been hangin' out with Larry Dave? Is the moderator a Freemason?

Actually I think we all have a direct economic interest in Obama winning.

Cheers
Marty

Dave wrote:
On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:10:05 -0400, Marty said:

Do you suppose they'll tell viewers that the moderator has a direct economic
interest in Obama's winning?

You been hangin' out with Larry Dave? Is the moderator a Freemason?

She's releasing a book featuring Obama, with release scheduled for
inauguration day. Ya think she might sell a few more books if Obama is
elected than if he's an also-ran? Do ya, huh?


Sure, and you think a honest 'merican journalist would let a little
thing like that get in the way of her integrity? Pshaww.


Cheers
Marty

Dave wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:49:17 -0600, "Charles Momsen"
said:


Watch the debate and see.


Do you suppose they'll tell viewers that the moderator has a direct economic
interest in Obama's winning?


You mean her book that's been on Amazon and the Random House website for
some time? And that was discussed with Howard Kurtz several weeks ago in
the Washington Post? - The one that was ignored by MacCain's staff until
they realized John has been sliding on down in the polls? - Actually,
anyone who has ever watched Ifil couldn't help but recognize her bias
for Obama.

But I agree that she wasn't a good choice. - Not because she will be
unfair to Sarah, but because she may be unfair to Biden. She may think
she has to lean over backwards to avoid any appearance of being too hard
on poor little Sarah, in an effort to show that she has run a fair and
balanced event. Instead, we need a moderator that won't take any crap
from either of the candidates.

Jim

"Marty" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:49:17 -0600, "Charles Momsen"

said:

Watch the debate and see.

Do you suppose they'll tell viewers that the moderator has a direct
economic
interest in Obama's winning?


You been hangin' out with Larry Dave? Is the moderator a Freemason?

Actually I think we all have a direct economic interest in Obama winning.

Cheers
Marty


Marty, you have to remember that Dave believes it's impossible to ask
intelligent questions if one has a financial stake in the game. He also
believes that it's much more important to attack the moderator before the
debate before actually hearing the questions and the answers than it is to
suspend judgement, skeptical though it may be. He forgets, apparently, that
both candidates agreed to the conditions of the debate. Of course, Palin can
always decline to attend. Or, perhaps McCain should suspend his campaign to
devote all his energy to fix the problem.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"JimC" wrote in message
...


Dave wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 11:49:17 -0600, "Charles Momsen"

said:


Watch the debate and see.


Do you suppose they'll tell viewers that the moderator has a direct
economic
interest in Obama's winning?


You mean her book that's been on Amazon and the Random House website for
some time? And that was discussed with Howard Kurtz several weeks ago in
the Washington Post? - The one that was ignored by MacCain's staff until
they realized John has been sliding on down in the polls? - Actually,
anyone who has ever watched Ifil couldn't help but recognize her bias for
Obama.

But I agree that she wasn't a good choice. - Not because she will be
unfair to Sarah, but because she may be unfair to Biden. She may think she
has to lean over backwards to avoid any appearance of being too hard on
poor little Sarah, in an effort to show that she has run a fair and
balanced event. Instead, we need a moderator that won't take any crap from
either of the candidates.

Jim


I heard and now believe that Biden can win the debate in the first minute.
He should apologize to her on behalf of all those people who attacked her
personally, her family, etc. I heard this suggestion on NPR, the center of
the great bastion of left-leaning journalists/communists, which includes
Disney/Viacom, News Corp., GE, etc. Oh wait! NPR gets its funding from
actual people!



--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 14:09:24 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Marty, you have to remember that Dave believes it's impossible to ask
intelligent questions if one has a financial stake in the game.

Nothing to do with "intelligent" questions. But of course the choice of
questions, the manner of posing them, the demeanor of the questioner, etc.
have no effect, right, Jon?

He also
believes that it's much more important to attack the moderator before the
debate before actually hearing the questions and the answers than it is to
suspend judgement, skeptical though it may be.

I believe it's helpful to be aware of the moderator's self-interested bias
in evaluating the process, and yes, that it's better to know of the bias
before, rather than after, the debate.

He forgets, apparently, that
both candidates agreed to the conditions of the debate.

Perhaps I missed it, but where was that condition about its being ok if
the
moderator stands to make a pile of money if one side wins, and not make
that
money if the other side wins? And about the moderator's taking that job
without telling anyone about her conflicting financial interest? If you're
betting on a horse race, would you like to know before placing your bet
that
the jockey riding the favorite has bet a bundle on the next ranked horse
to
win?

Dick Cheney was never biased toward Halliburton and never stood to profit at
the expense of America. Plus he was elected twice to the VP so there's no
conflict there either. Mr Cheney is a man of integrity.

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 14:09:24 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Marty, you have to remember that Dave believes it's impossible to ask
intelligent questions if one has a financial stake in the game.

Nothing to do with "intelligent" questions. But of course the choice of
questions, the manner of posing them, the demeanor of the questioner, etc.
have no effect, right, Jon?

He also
believes that it's much more important to attack the moderator before the
debate before actually hearing the questions and the answers than it is to
suspend judgement, skeptical though it may be.

I believe it's helpful to be aware of the moderator's self-interested bias
in evaluating the process, and yes, that it's better to know of the bias
before, rather than after, the debate.

He forgets, apparently, that
both candidates agreed to the conditions of the debate.

Perhaps I missed it, but where was that condition about its being ok if
the
moderator stands to make a pile of money if one side wins, and not make
that
money if the other side wins? And about the moderator's taking that job
without telling anyone about her conflicting financial interest? If you're
betting on a horse race, would you like to know before placing your bet
that
the jockey riding the favorite has bet a bundle on the next ranked horse
to
win?


So, what you're saying is that the McCain campaign doesn't approve of the
choice of moderator? News to them!

The book's been in the works in public for quite some time. The title was
known for quite some time. Ifill has a long history of integrity, which is
why she was chosen and why all approved her. Personally, I like the Swift
Boat timing of the attack. It speaks volumes about the right-wing.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 14:18:22 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

NPR gets its funding from
actual people!

Do you have figures for the percentage that come from individuals, how
much
from advertising (which the NPR folks like to call corporate support), how
much from the generally left-leaning foundations, and how much from
gummint
broadcasting bureaucracies? I recall hearing that the latter category is
about 10%.


Do your own research!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com