Handicapping Iowa...
 

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Chuck Gould wrote:
I admire John McCain for standing up for fellow veteran and fellow
senator John Kerry when Kerry was being smeared and slandered by the
Swift Boaters in '04. McCain knew that the chrages were a combination
of distortion and unbridled BS, and wasn't afraid to say so. To me,
that indicates a preference for truth above partisan politics. That
stand, and some similar over the years, is probably what will cost
McCain any chance to win the R nomination. A candidate needs to appeal
to the party fanatics during the primaries, and then switch gears and
appeal to the center after the conventions. The R party fanatics don't
like McCain all that much- but he would appeal to most of the folks in
the middle. At least IMO.
I don't believe McCain has what it takes to appeal to the simpie
fundies, and they are the ones that control most of the GOP. But I would
like to see him win because it might help restore a little honor and
integrity to the GOP, a party nearly destroyed by the Bush "divide with
fear and conquer" tactics of the last seven years.

I think the GOP nominee will be Huckabee. If it is, I believe he'll be
drowned in the general election, and that will be good for the
Republican Party, because it will be able to use that loss as an excuse
to distance itself from the screwball "religious" voters.



Fortunately, some big time Christian sects have already distanced
themselves from the Republicans for various reasons, mostly involving
ethics. 2007 was a great year for hot gay Republican sex along with
hypocrisy about the subject. That should help drive a wedge between the
party and the sects.



Who are the fundies going to vote for? Republicans, of course.


Well, Huckabee is famous for not reporting gifts received while in office.
If he's the Republican candidate, maybe his dishonesty will be enough to
sway BTCs to vote for Obama.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:24:17 -0500, HK wrote:


Voting for Bloomberg is like voting for Ralph Nader. It simply helps
elect a Republican. Bloomberg cannot win.

I'm not saying he would win, but he could win. He has the money, fully a
third of the electorate identify themselves as independent, and if he
could bring in some of the 30-40% of the apathetic, that don't vote, he
could win. Personally, I suspect that much of the apathy is caused by a
general disgust with what the Democrats and Republicans are offering.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Chuck Gould wrote:
I admire John McCain for standing up for fellow veteran and fellow
senator John Kerry when Kerry was being smeared and slandered by the
Swift Boaters in '04. McCain knew that the chrages were a combination
of distortion and unbridled BS, and wasn't afraid to say so. To me,
that indicates a preference for truth above partisan politics. That
stand, and some similar over the years, is probably what will cost
McCain any chance to win the R nomination. A candidate needs to appeal
to the party fanatics during the primaries, and then switch gears and
appeal to the center after the conventions. The R party fanatics don't
like McCain all that much- but he would appeal to most of the folks in
the middle. At least IMO.
I don't believe McCain has what it takes to appeal to the simpie
fundies, and they are the ones that control most of the GOP. But I would
like to see him win because it might help restore a little honor and
integrity to the GOP, a party nearly destroyed by the Bush "divide with
fear and conquer" tactics of the last seven years.

I think the GOP nominee will be Huckabee. If it is, I believe he'll be
drowned in the general election, and that will be good for the
Republican Party, because it will be able to use that loss as an excuse
to distance itself from the screwball "religious" voters.


Fortunately, some big time Christian sects have already distanced
themselves from the Republicans for various reasons, mostly involving
ethics. 2007 was a great year for hot gay Republican sex along with
hypocrisy about the subject. That should help drive a wedge between the
party and the sects.


Who are the fundies going to vote for? Republicans, of course.


Well, Huckabee is famous for not reporting gifts received while in office.
If he's the Republican candidate, maybe his dishonesty will be enough to
sway BTCs to vote for Obama.



Oh, please.

--
George W. Bush - the 43rd Best President Ever!

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Chuck Gould wrote:
I admire John McCain for standing up for fellow veteran and fellow
senator John Kerry when Kerry was being smeared and slandered by the
Swift Boaters in '04. McCain knew that the chrages were a combination
of distortion and unbridled BS, and wasn't afraid to say so. To me,
that indicates a preference for truth above partisan politics. That
stand, and some similar over the years, is probably what will cost
McCain any chance to win the R nomination. A candidate needs to
appeal
to the party fanatics during the primaries, and then switch gears and
appeal to the center after the conventions. The R party fanatics
don't
like McCain all that much- but he would appeal to most of the folks
in
the middle. At least IMO.
I don't believe McCain has what it takes to appeal to the simpie
fundies, and they are the ones that control most of the GOP. But I
would like to see him win because it might help restore a little honor
and integrity to the GOP, a party nearly destroyed by the Bush "divide
with fear and conquer" tactics of the last seven years.

I think the GOP nominee will be Huckabee. If it is, I believe he'll be
drowned in the general election, and that will be good for the
Republican Party, because it will be able to use that loss as an
excuse to distance itself from the screwball "religious" voters.


Fortunately, some big time Christian sects have already distanced
themselves from the Republicans for various reasons, mostly involving
ethics. 2007 was a great year for hot gay Republican sex along with
hypocrisy about the subject. That should help drive a wedge between the
party and the sects.


Who are the fundies going to vote for? Republicans, of course.


Well, Huckabee is famous for not reporting gifts received while in
office. If he's the Republican candidate, maybe his dishonesty will be
enough to sway BTCs to vote for Obama.

Oh, please.


Hey...ya never know. The same idiots voted for Bush. Anything could happen.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


His military service is also valuable, but not in a way that's obvious.
Success in politics (and other areas of life in general) often depends on
getting certain people to shut the **** up already and stop making noise,
so actual messages can be heard. There's a contingent of voters
(unfortunately) who believe that you cannot formulate foreign policy
unless you've served in the military. McCain's history silences those
idiots, at least on THAT subject.


I am not sure I understand the last two sentences of your post, but I *do*
believe that a military combat veteran is less likely to rush to war than
someone without combat experience.

Eisboch

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


His military service is also valuable, but not in a way that's obvious.
Success in politics (and other areas of life in general) often depends on
getting certain people to shut the **** up already and stop making noise,
so actual messages can be heard. There's a contingent of voters
(unfortunately) who believe that you cannot formulate foreign policy
unless you've served in the military. McCain's history silences those
idiots, at least on THAT subject.


I am not sure I understand the last two sentences of your post, but I *do*
believe that a military combat veteran is less likely to rush to war than
someone without combat experience.

Eisboch



Perhaps, but formulating foreign policy has nothing whatsoever to do with
military experience.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

Handicapping Iowa...
 

Handicapping Iowa...
 

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:24:17 -0500, HK wrote:


Voting for Bloomberg is like voting for Ralph Nader. It simply helps
elect a Republican. Bloomberg cannot win.

I'm not saying he would win, but he could win. He has the money, fully a
third of the electorate identify themselves as independent, and if he
could bring in some of the 30-40% of the apathetic, that don't vote, he
could win. Personally, I suspect that much of the apathy is caused by a
general disgust with what the Democrats and Republicans are offering.


Yup... we're only about a tenth of your size but usually have 5 or more
choices.
Some of them can be silly. but are a good protest vote.
Most don't run a candidate in every federal riding... tending to be a
localized thing.
http://www.altstuff.com/federal.htm

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:


Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.


Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:


Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.


Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch



I notice that none of them ever mention the idea of invading the correct
country and placing it under new management.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

Handicapping Iowa...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.


Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch


No, she never believed that.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Neither Bill nor Hillary would have believed that they could have deposed
Saddam and be greeted in Iraq with flowers.

Not now of course. I don't know about Bill, but Hillary *did* until she
didn't.

Eisboch



I notice that none of them ever mention the idea of invading the correct
country and placing it under new management.




It's too late for that now.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:22:53 -0500, HK wrote:

About the only way Hillary can win is if a 3d party sucks away 15-20%
of the vote since over half of the people say they would vote for
anyone but her.
Oh, I dunno about that. I think Hillary can beat the hell out of *any*
of the GOP possibles, with the exception of McCain. The Republican
recruiter for this year's nomination must have looked for losers, first,
second, and third. One is worse than the other.

She is still bumping up against that 51-52% negative. Some of it is
her position on the war, some is just Clinton fatigue and there are
those who don't want the bush/clinton/bush/clinton dynasty to
continue. I do believe the same people control both families.



Oh, that will "equalize" as soon as the GOP nominee is determined,
especially if he is a religious nutcase like Huck, a flipper like Romney,
or a crook like Guiliani.


By the way, here's a site where you can listen to the candidates' lie about
their views on guns.

http://www.nravalues.org/

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"DownTime" wrote in message
. ..
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)

Your bookie is taking action on the primaries? That is sad. I'm assuming
even the bookies are also it hard by the current real estate slump.

Bookies make money no matter what. They set the line so all candidates /
games get the same amount of money bet on each side. They take the vig. the
difference in what is bet and what is paid out.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:04:02 -0800, Chuck Gould wrote:


That reduces me to voting for personal character. I'm absolutely opposed
to his politics, (fortuntately we're going to elect a POTUS, not a
dictator), but from the perspective of character and personal integrity
John McCain is definitely a front runner. Yeah, we would have to
overlook some past mistakes, but the only guy without a skeleton or two
in the closet is a guy who never accomplished anything.

For me, the two most important attributes in a Presidential candidate are
competence and honor, then, down the list, politics. Frankly, I'm not
sure which, competence or honor, is most important for me, but since it's
rare a candidate has either, I usually just end up going for the
candidate that comes closest to my politics. I keep thinking, 300
million people, and this is the best we can do?

Perhaps, Mike Bloomberg will run. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.
While I think he might make a good President, I'd vote for him because it
would send a strong message to *both* Republicans and Democrats, that we
don't need them anymore. I felt the same way about that chicken-****,
candidate one day, not the next, Ross Perot.



Voting for Bloomberg is like voting for Ralph Nader. It simply helps elect
a Republican. Bloomberg cannot win.




Or Ross Perot, which gave us Clinton.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"DownTime" wrote in message
. ..
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)

Your bookie is taking action on the primaries? That is sad. I'm assuming
even the bookies are also it hard by the current real estate slump.

Bookies make money no matter what. They set the line so all candidates /
games get the same amount of money bet on each side. They take the vig.
the difference in what is bet and what is paid out.


They "hope" the same amount of money is bet on both sides. A bookie can
loose his patooie if all the money goes to one side and that side wins.
Most times when bookies find themselves one-sided on a particular wager they
attempt to lay off the excess from the over weighted side,

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"DownTime" wrote in message
. ..
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)

Your bookie is taking action on the primaries? That is sad. I'm assuming
even the bookies are also it hard by the current real estate slump.

Bookies make money no matter what. They set the line so all candidates /
games get the same amount of money bet on each side. They take the vig.
the difference in what is bet and what is paid out.


They "hope" the same amount of money is bet on both sides. A bookie can
loose his patooie if all the money goes to one side and that side wins.
Most times when bookies find themselves one-sided on a particular wager
they attempt to lay off the excess from the over weighted side,


That is what the line is for. Start getting too much money one way, they
change the line.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and
there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class, and I
agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on the
torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have gone to
jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked then and is
crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever do good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?

Handicapping Iowa...
 

Handicapping Iowa...
 

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and
there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points
over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich
will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class, and
I agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on the
torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have gone to
jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked then and is
crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever do
good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee? Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also been
colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about his
integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use of a
nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction of
state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And what
was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations? Rather
than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state ethics
commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down."




--
George W. Bush - the 43rd Best President Ever!

Handicapping Iowa...
 

HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and
there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points
over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich
will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class, and
I agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on the
torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have gone
to jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked then and
is crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever do
good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee? Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also been
colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about his
integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use of a
nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction of
state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And what
was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations? Rather
than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state ethics
commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down."






And of course Huckabee is a total numnutz on foreign policy issues.
In that, he's certainly following in Bush's footsteps.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:46:32 +0000, Canuck57 wrote:


Why McCain? I view him as having too many back room allegiances and
special interests to be any good. But then again, I can't vote -- just
curious on US politics. Kind of like Ron Paul myself.

True, McCain was one of the Keating Five. He admits to "poor judgement",
which it was, but it also seemed to be a wake-up call. Since that time,
he has been a lead voice in campaign finance reform, and from my vantage
point, a straight shooter. While I don't agree with many of his stands,
I think he is one of the few honorable men in Washington.

A refresher in McCain's involvement in the Keating scandal:


http://www.slate.com/id/1004633/

Why does slate.com want McCain as a the Republican nominee for
president? There is too much media involvement in rehabilitating
McCain's image.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..


Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


The same Huckabee who failed to report gifts received while in public
office, as required by the law? That Huckabee?

Handicapping Iowa...
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:54:14 -0000, wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:40:16 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


As a person, I like McCain - as a President I could find him acceptable
- Keating Five beside the point. I'm not exaclty sure how involved he
was in it other than doing what he was supposed to do with a constituent
who contributed to his political organization.

Considering that he was the only Republican involved, it does leave one
to wonder.
The Senate Ethics Committee Special Counsel recommended McCain and Glenn
be dropped from the investigation, but there is speculation that didn't
happen because he was the lone Republican.

Exactly.

Are you saying that two former Naval aviators, one who circled the earth
and the other who survived years as a POW, and both elected US Senators
were granted special dispensation for being too stupid to stay out of a
criminal enterprise?

Handicapping Iowa...
 

HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:

I admire John McCain for standing up for fellow veteran and fellow
senator John Kerry when Kerry was being smeared and slandered by the
Swift Boaters in '04. McCain knew that the chrages were a combination
of distortion and unbridled BS, and wasn't afraid to say so. To me,
that indicates a preference for truth above partisan politics. That
stand, and some similar over the years, is probably what will cost
McCain any chance to win the R nomination. A candidate needs to appeal
to the party fanatics during the primaries, and then switch gears and
appeal to the center after the conventions. The R party fanatics don't
like McCain all that much- but he would appeal to most of the folks in
the middle. At least IMO.

I don't believe McCain has what it takes to appeal to the simpie
fundies, and they are the ones that control most of the GOP. But I would
like to see him win because it might help restore a little honor and
integrity to the GOP, a party nearly destroyed by the Bush "divide with
fear and conquer" tactics of the last seven years.

What us "simple fundies" what is the second coming of Ronald Wilson Reagan.

I think the GOP nominee will be Huckabee. If it is, I believe he'll be
drowned in the general election, and that will be good for the
Republican Party, because it will be able to use that loss as an excuse
to distance itself from the screwball "religious" voters.

I guess Huckabee will be better than whatever the Democrat Party foists
off on the US as our next savior.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and
there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points
over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich
will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class, and
I agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on the
torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have gone
to jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked then and
is crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever do
good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee? Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also been
colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about his
integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use of a
nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction of
state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And what
was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations? Rather
than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state ethics
commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down."

Aren't you going to bring up Barak's little land deal in Chicago or
Hillary's involvement in Whitewater?

Handicapping Iowa...
 

HK wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and
there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four
points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden,
Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up
from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class,
and I agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on the
torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have gone
to jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked then
and is crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever do
good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee? Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also
been colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about
his integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use
of a nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction
of state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And
what was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations?
Rather than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state
ethics commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down."






And of course Huckabee is a total numnutz on foreign policy issues.
In that, he's certainly following in Bush's footsteps.

Hillary and Obama don't have foreign policy bona fides either.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"BAR" wrote in message
...

Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee? Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also been
colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about his
integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use of a
nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction of
state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And what
was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations? Rather
than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state ethics
commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down."

Aren't you going to bring up Barak's little land deal in Chicago or
Hillary's involvement in Whitewater?



Why should anyone mention them? You have no problem with those issues. You
just said so.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"DownTime" wrote in message
. ..
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)

Your bookie is taking action on the primaries? That is sad. I'm
assuming even the bookies are also it hard by the current real estate
slump.

Bookies make money no matter what. They set the line so all candidates
/ games get the same amount of money bet on each side. They take the
vig. the difference in what is bet and what is paid out.


They "hope" the same amount of money is bet on both sides. A bookie can
loose his patooie if all the money goes to one side and that side wins.
Most times when bookies find themselves one-sided on a particular wager
they attempt to lay off the excess from the over weighted side,


That is what the line is for. Start getting too much money one way, they
change the line.

That doesn't always work. There are instances where a lay-off is the only
answer. I knew several bookies in Chicago, in fact one bought a house of
mine, and am quite familiar with their procedures.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"DownTime" wrote in message
. ..
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)

Your bookie is taking action on the primaries? That is sad. I'm
assuming even the bookies are also it hard by the current real estate
slump.

Bookies make money no matter what. They set the line so all candidates
/ games get the same amount of money bet on each side. They take the
vig. the difference in what is bet and what is paid out.


They "hope" the same amount of money is bet on both sides. A bookie can
loose his patooie if all the money goes to one side and that side wins.
Most times when bookies find themselves one-sided on a particular wager
they attempt to lay off the excess from the over weighted side,


That is what the line is for. Start getting too much money one way, they
change the line.

That doesn't always work. There are instances where a lay-off is the only
answer. I knew several bookies in Chicago, in fact one bought a house of
mine, and am quite familiar with their procedures.


But is real reason for the line. And smaller bookies have to lay off bigger
bets as they do not have the activity and can end up with more one way than
the other way. Have not known any bookies for a lot of years now, but had
coworkers would used them a lot.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"DownTime" wrote in message
. ..
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and
there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)

Your bookie is taking action on the primaries? That is sad. I'm
assuming even the bookies are also it hard by the current real estate
slump.

Bookies make money no matter what. They set the line so all
candidates / games get the same amount of money bet on each side.
They take the vig. the difference in what is bet and what is paid out.


They "hope" the same amount of money is bet on both sides. A bookie
can loose his patooie if all the money goes to one side and that side
wins. Most times when bookies find themselves one-sided on a particular
wager they attempt to lay off the excess from the over weighted side,


That is what the line is for. Start getting too much money one way,
they change the line.

That doesn't always work. There are instances where a lay-off is the
only answer. I knew several bookies in Chicago, in fact one bought a
house of mine, and am quite familiar with their procedures.


But is real reason for the line. And smaller bookies have to lay off
bigger bets as they do not have the activity and can end up with more one
way than the other way. Have not known any bookies for a lot of years
now, but had coworkers would used them a lot.


Agreed. They wish for equal amounts on either side of a proposition. The
can live very nicely on the juice (vig).

Handicapping Iowa...
 

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:39:47 -0500, BAR wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:55:51 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


Until the NCAA basketball tournament comes around that is. :)

I'm not much of a basketball fan, but I think the NCAA tournament is the
most exciting sports event around.

It is usually full of accident's in the first couple of rounds. But, by
the time they get to the final four the Cinderella story teams have been
eliminated.

True, but every once in a while you get an Oral Roberts or BYU or
Gonzaga show up and run the table.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and
there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four
points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden,
Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up
from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class,
and I agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on the
torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have gone
to jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked then
and is crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever do
good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee? Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also
been colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about
his integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use
of a nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction
of state computer files on his way out of the governor’s office.” And
what was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics allegations?
Rather than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee sued the state
ethics commission twice and attempted to shut the ethics process down."

Aren't you going to bring up Barak's little land deal in Chicago or
Hillary's involvement in Whitewater?





You're the one who tried the present Huckleberry as "Mr. Moral." He ain't.

--
George W. Bush - the 43rd Best President Ever!

Handicapping Iowa...
 

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in
message ...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here
and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then
everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four
points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards -
say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden,
Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up
from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class,
and I agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on
the torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have gone
to jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked then
and is crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever
do good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee?
Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also
been colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about
his integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his
use of a nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his
destruction of state computer files on his way out of the governor’s
office.” And what was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics
allegations? Rather than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee
sued the state ethics commission twice and attempted to shut the
ethics process down."






And of course Huckabee is a total numnutz on foreign policy issues.
In that, he's certainly following in Bush's footsteps.

Hillary and Obama don't have foreign policy bona fides either.


Both of them and my favorite pet cat have more knowledge of foreign
policy than Huckleberry.


--
George W. Bush - the 43rd Best President Ever!

Handicapping Iowa...
 

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:59:50 -0500, BAR wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:54:14 -0000, wrote:

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:40:16 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


As a person, I like McCain - as a President I could find him acceptable
- Keating Five beside the point. I'm not exaclty sure how involved he
was in it other than doing what he was supposed to do with a constituent
who contributed to his political organization.

Considering that he was the only Republican involved, it does leave one
to wonder.
The Senate Ethics Committee Special Counsel recommended McCain and Glenn
be dropped from the investigation, but there is speculation that didn't
happen because he was the lone Republican.

Exactly.

Are you saying that two former Naval aviators, one who circled the earth
and the other who survived years as a POW, and both elected US Senators
were granted special dispensation for being too stupid to stay out of a
criminal enterprise?

Not at all.

Based on the evidence at the time, Glenn and McCain were very marginal
players with the Ethics Committee not exactly sure what it was that
they did wrong.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:50:13 -0500, BAR wrote:


http://www.slate.com/id/1004633/

Why does slate.com want McCain as a the Republican nominee for
president? There is too much media involvement in rehabilitating
McCain's image.

Oh come on, that article was written in 2000.

Handicapping Iowa...
 

HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in
message ...
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here
and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then
everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four
points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards
- say
within a point or two. Everybody else, Dodd, Biden,
Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show
up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. :)


Meanwhile, McCain's the only Republican candidate with a spine.


I agree that McCain is the only GOP candidate with any class,
and I agree he has a spine, but...

I was less than impressed when he caved earlier this year on
the torture issue.

McCain is a twit and always has been a twit. He should have
gone to jail with the rest of the Keating Five. He was crooked
then and is crooked now.

McCain has done more damage to this country then he could ever
do good.


Geez...you're such an *angry* little scheisskopf...

Not angry just determined to see McCain go down in flames again.



Who are you hoping to vote for? Mike Huckleberry?



Do you have a problem voting for a guy with ethics and morals?


Are you referring to Mike "Mr. Ethics Investigations" Huckabee?
Please.

"According to The Associated Press: “[Huckabee’s] career has also
been colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about
his integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his
use of a nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his
destruction of state computer files on his way out of the governor’s
office.” And what was Governor Huckabee’s response to these ethics
allegations? Rather than cooperating with investigators, Huckabee
sued the state ethics commission twice and attempted to shut the
ethics process down."






And of course Huckabee is a total numnutz on foreign policy issues.
In that, he's certainly following in Bush's footsteps.

Hillary and Obama don't have foreign policy bona fides either.


Both of them and my favorite pet cat have more knowledge of foreign
policy than Huckleberry.



If you combine your cat's with Barak's and Hillary's foriegn policy
experience I could agree to that.