On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 09:52:09 -0500, hkrause
wrote:

Sometime in the next year or two, my wife and I will be going to Kenya
as touristas and to visit a classmate of hers who is Kenyan. I'm sure
both of us will be encouraged to try on various "tribal" regalia.
I wouldn't mind being a local chieftain for a half hour or so.

I'm sure we all look forward to seeing the pictures.

hkrause wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 25, 5:34 am, hkrause wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:54�am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html
The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? �Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.
Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.
A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.
Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)
Much ado here about nothing. Lots of visitors to foreign cultures try on
local costumes and clothing. What would you conclude from the photo,
that Obama visited Africa and tried on a tribal elder's clothing? Big
whoop. It's not like he put on a pilot's jumpsuit, landed on an aircraft
carrier and walked out in front of a sign saying "mission
accomplished."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I entirely agree; it's the *misuse* of this photo by the Clinton
campaign that's the issue. If the chief of some tribe down in the
South Pacific were invited to the White House to meet the POTUS, odds
are that he would show up wearing a suit instead of a loincloth. Yes,
it is very customary to dress in the formal attire of a host country
before meeting with the head of state.

I'm sure that if we dug deeply enough into the archives we could find
photos of Nixon quite literally bowing to some dignitaries in
Communist China during his initial visit there. Out of context, it
would be really scandalous.




In the case of the photo in question (and I don't believe that the
Clintons released it, either, despite what the Republican Drudge guy

Is that from the HRC campaign talking points memo for Monday?

says), anyone who sees more in Obama wearing that costume than just a
visitor trying out a local custom doesn't deserve a vote.

Agreed.

Sometime in the next year or two, my wife and I will be going to Kenya
as touristas and to visit a classmate of hers who is Kenyan. I'm sure
both of us will be encouraged to try on various "tribal" regalia.
I wouldn't mind being a local chieftain for a half hour or so.

See if they can offer you a permanent position.

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 08:34:58 -0500, hkrause wrote:

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:54?am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html

The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? ?Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.

Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.

A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.

Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)



Much ado here about nothing. Lots of visitors to foreign cultures try on
local costumes and clothing. What would you conclude from the photo,
that Obama visited Africa and tried on a tribal elder's clothing? Big
whoop. It's not like he put on a pilot's jumpsuit, landed on an aircraft
carrier and walked out in front of a sign saying "mission accomplished."

Whooooossshhh!

F-18 time.
--
John H

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 08:24:56 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 25, 7:54?am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html

The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? ?Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.

Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.

A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.

LOL!!

You know - that's exactly what I thought when I saw that.

Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)

He strikes me as sincere, but...

I'm not at all sure he's not just an empty suit with a good speil.
Hope, change and what not are all well and good, but after looking
through his campaign site and his ideas and proposals, it would seem
to me that he might just be another McGovern only with a more
messianic following.

Or worse, another Dukakis. He is good friends with Duval Patrick which
also bothers me quite a bit as Patrick is as tone deaf as any Democrat
could possibly be - Kuchinich type.

We'll see.

On Feb 25, 2:58�pm, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 08:24:56 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:54?am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html

The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? ?Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.

Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.

A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.

LOL!!

You know - that's exactly what I thought when I saw that.

Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)

He strikes me as sincere, but...

I'm not at all sure he's not just an empty suit with a good speil.
Hope, change and what not are all well and good, but after looking
through his campaign site and his ideas and proposals, it would seem
to me that he might just be another McGovern only with a more
messianic following.

Or worse, another Dukakis. He is good friends with Duval Patrick which
also bothers me quite a bit as Patrick is as tone deaf as any Democrat
could possibly be - Kuchinich type.

We'll see.

The rough guesstimate of an undecided independent:

McCain: Most "presidential" of the batch, has an encouraging history
of not automatically toeing the party line. Represents "politics as
usual", but with a guy at the helm a bit more independent than the
current prez and less susceptible to being manipulated by his
advisors.

Clinton: Old broad is as tough as nails (that's in her favor).
Probably represents the worst prospect for "politics as usual", with
policy being made in smoke-filled rooms and with a long list of
political favors to satisfy.

Obama: Best prospect for escaping the cycle of "poltics as usual", but
what does he offer except unusual politics? Many outsiders have been
ineffective in office.

Obama may have the highest IQ of the three, or may be about tied with
Clinton who is personally very bright. Even McCain appears much
smarter than the average person, so we can expect a substantial
improvement in that particular presidential quality regardless of the
outcome in November.

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:28:41 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 25, 2:58?pm, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 08:24:56 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:54?am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html

The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? ?Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.

Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.

A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.

LOL!!

You know - that's exactly what I thought when I saw that.

Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)

He strikes me as sincere, but...

I'm not at all sure he's not just an empty suit with a good speil.
Hope, change and what not are all well and good, but after looking
through his campaign site and his ideas and proposals, it would seem
to me that he might just be another McGovern only with a more
messianic following.

Or worse, another Dukakis. He is good friends with Duval Patrick which
also bothers me quite a bit as Patrick is as tone deaf as any Democrat
could possibly be - Kuchinich type.

We'll see.

The rough guesstimate of an undecided independent:

McCain: Most "presidential" of the batch, has an encouraging history
of not automatically toeing the party line. Represents "politics as
usual", but with a guy at the helm a bit more independent than the
current prez and less susceptible to being manipulated by his
advisors.

Clinton: Old broad is as tough as nails (that's in her favor).
Probably represents the worst prospect for "politics as usual", with
policy being made in smoke-filled rooms and with a long list of
political favors to satisfy.

Obama: Best prospect for escaping the cycle of "poltics as usual", but
what does he offer except unusual politics? Many outsiders have been
ineffective in office.

Obama may have the highest IQ of the three, or may be about tied with
Clinton who is personally very bright. Even McCain appears much
smarter than the average person, so we can expect a substantial
improvement in that particular presidential quality regardless of the
outcome in November.

Nader is my man!
--
John H

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 21:00:16 -0500, John H.
wrote:


Nader is my man!

Take a trip to Winstead, CT and ask about Ralph Nader.

Report back when you are finished.

If you leave alive and not dismembered by the irate citizens of their
fair city when rendering their opinions on Raplhie boy. :)

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 25, 2:58�pm, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 08:24:56 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:54?am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html
The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? ?Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.
Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.
A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.
LOL!!

You know - that's exactly what I thought when I saw that.

Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)
He strikes me as sincere, but...

I'm not at all sure he's not just an empty suit with a good speil.
Hope, change and what not are all well and good, but after looking
through his campaign site and his ideas and proposals, it would seem
to me that he might just be another McGovern only with a more
messianic following.

Or worse, another Dukakis. He is good friends with Duval Patrick which
also bothers me quite a bit as Patrick is as tone deaf as any Democrat
could possibly be - Kuchinich type.

We'll see.

The rough guesstimate of an undecided independent:

McCain: Most "presidential" of the batch, has an encouraging history
of not automatically toeing the party line. Represents "politics as
usual", but with a guy at the helm a bit more independent than the
current prez and less susceptible to being manipulated by his
advisors.

Clinton: Old broad is as tough as nails (that's in her favor).
Probably represents the worst prospect for "politics as usual", with
policy being made in smoke-filled rooms and with a long list of
political favors to satisfy.

Obama: Best prospect for escaping the cycle of "poltics as usual", but
what does he offer except unusual politics? Many outsiders have been
ineffective in office.

Obama may have the highest IQ of the three, or may be about tied with
Clinton who is personally very bright. Even McCain appears much
smarter than the average person, so we can expect a substantial
improvement in that particular presidential quality regardless of the
outcome in November.

Ask McCain for his college transcripts. He comes in third, a very
distant third.

On Feb 26, 7:08Â*am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 25, 2:58�pm, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 08:24:56 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:54?am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html
The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? ?Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.
Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.
A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.
LOL!!

You know - that's exactly what I thought when I saw that.

Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)
He strikes me as sincere, but...

I'm not at all sure he's not just an empty suit with a good speil.
Hope, change and what not are all well and good, but after looking
through his campaign site and his ideas and proposals, it would seem
to me that he might just be another McGovern only with a more
messianic following.

Or worse, another Dukakis. He is good friends with Duval Patrick which
also bothers me quite a bit as Patrick is as tone deaf as any Democrat
could possibly be - Kuchinich type.

We'll see.

The rough guesstimate of an undecided independent:

McCain: Most "presidential" of the batch, has an encouraging history
of not automatically toeing the party line. Represents "politics as
usual", but with a guy at the helm a bit more independent than the
current prez and less susceptible to being manipulated by his
advisors.

Clinton: Old broad is as tough as nails (that's in her favor).
Probably represents the worst prospect for "politics as usual", with
policy being made in smoke-filled rooms and with a long list of
political favors to satisfy.

Obama: Best prospect for escaping the cycle of "poltics as usual", but
what does he offer except unusual politics? Many outsiders have been
ineffective in office.

Obama may have the highest IQ of the three, or may be about tied with
Clinton who is personally very bright. Even McCain appears much
smarter than the average person, so we can expect a substantial
improvement in that particular presidential quality regardless of the
outcome in November.

Ask McCain for his college transcripts. He comes in third, a very
distant third.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

College transcripts don't represent intelligence, only the grades
earned in college. Some bright people goof off and party too much,
pulling in B's and C's. Some folks with only average capacity or so
might spend more time studying and preparing and get A's and B's.
After 4 years, the party with the most native intelligence is
unchanged, but the party with less native intelligence may have earned
a better education.

BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 25, 2:58�pm, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 08:24:56 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:54?am, Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8667.html
The Clintons - who 'da thunk it? ?Even Lee A****er would never stoop
this low.
Scorched earth baby - scorched earth.
A photo of Obama eating watermelon and/or fried chicken can't be far
behind.
LOL!!

You know - that's exactly what I thought when I saw that.

Just shows how desperate the Clinton's are becoming. Strike one for
the Clinton's: When things get tense and difficult, resort to panic
and
try to manipulate opinion rather than solve the problem. Score one for
Obama? Maybe so, let's see if he handles these racial and religious
slams like a statesman, or like a vengeful child in a boating NG. :-)
He strikes me as sincere, but...

I'm not at all sure he's not just an empty suit with a good speil.
Hope, change and what not are all well and good, but after looking
through his campaign site and his ideas and proposals, it would seem
to me that he might just be another McGovern only with a more
messianic following.

Or worse, another Dukakis. He is good friends with Duval Patrick which
also bothers me quite a bit as Patrick is as tone deaf as any Democrat
could possibly be - Kuchinich type.

We'll see.

The rough guesstimate of an undecided independent:

McCain: Most "presidential" of the batch, has an encouraging history
of not automatically toeing the party line. Represents "politics as
usual", but with a guy at the helm a bit more independent than the
current prez and less susceptible to being manipulated by his
advisors.

Clinton: Old broad is as tough as nails (that's in her favor).
Probably represents the worst prospect for "politics as usual", with
policy being made in smoke-filled rooms and with a long list of
political favors to satisfy.

Obama: Best prospect for escaping the cycle of "poltics as usual", but
what does he offer except unusual politics? Many outsiders have been
ineffective in office.

Obama may have the highest IQ of the three, or may be about tied with
Clinton who is personally very bright. Even McCain appears much
smarter than the average person, so we can expect a substantial
improvement in that particular presidential quality regardless of the
outcome in November.

Ask McCain for his college transcripts. He comes in third, a very
distant third.



It pleases me no end that no matter who wins, you'll be sooooo upset.