This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:46:45 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

That's why I say that McCain is "the most presidential of the
batch"- even though I despise many of his political positions and he
would certainly despise many of mine.

Well, I'm not too proud to admit it - I'm firmly in the McCain camp.

I have my reasons which, oddly, have nothing to do with his politics
and has more to do with him as a person.

Long story - might tell it sometime.

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:21:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

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. :)

Tom, if Nader screws the Democrat pooch, then he's my man - regardless of
the folks in Winstead!
--
John H

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:03:51 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 25, 9:19?pm, wrote:
On Feb 25, 11:46?pm, Chuck Gould wrote:



Somehow Chuck is under the impression that he is a moderate
centerist... of course so do Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Kennedy,
Sharpton, Enfume....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

???????

Never have I claimed to be a moderate centrist. (Please don't get
caught smokin that stuff in public, you might have to start posting
from jail).

Yuk, yuk.... Anyway, it's sammy antics;) Your post started with the
words:

"The rough guesstimate of an undecided independent"

Forgive me if I thought you were refering to yourself.. And unless you
consider main stream democrat, independant, you must have been talking
about someone else, my bad, good night...;)


I thought you were brighter than that. In fact, I'm sure you are, and
by a fair margin. You have simply failed to examine all of the
possibilities.

Ask yourself:

1. Can one be undecided without being a "moderate centrist"?

(or, if that's not decipherable change the question to; "Is every
undecided person a moderate centrist?")

Then, ask yourself:

2. Can one be politically independent without being a centrist? Is
everybody who is not a Democrat or a Republican a centrist?

In a binary vision of the world where everything is black or white,
right or wrong, Democrat or Republican, I guess it would be hard to
visualize a person who was undecided who wasn't "stuck between" the
two parties. If it helps, imagine a guy too far right to be a
Republican.
(Example: http://www.cfpa-wa.us/osprey-wa.htm)
If you see the world as divided into Democrats, Republicans, and
independents where would you place the Christian Falange Party of
Washington State? If they are not Democrats or Republicans, then by
your theory they must be centrists?

Politically independent simply means not aligned with or a member of a
political party. Has nothing to do with being a centrist.

I repeat- never have I claimed to be a moderate or a centrist. I leave
the lying in this group to others.


Sooner or later, Chuck.


--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:05:27 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:21:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

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. :)

Tom, if Nader screws the Democrat pooch, then he's my man - regardless of
the folks in Winstead!

Hey - I'm just sayin'... :)

Nader isn't going to have any imact on this election except for taking
out the fringe element and there is always that .00001% who will vote
for the fringe candidate.

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

On Feb 26, 8:21*am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:05:27 -0500, John H.





wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:21:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

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. *:)

Tom, if Nader screws the Democrat pooch, then he's my man - regardless of
the folks in Winstead!

Hey - I'm just sayin'... *:)

Nader isn't going to have any imact on this election except for taking
out the fringe element and there is always that .00001% who will vote
for the fringe candidate.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You don't consider the most liberal, and third most liberal in
congress, fringe candidates?? I think nearly half the country will
vote for a fringe candidate this time around...

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:46:45 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

That's why I say that McCain is "the most presidential of the
batch"- even though I despise many of his political positions and he
would certainly despise many of mine.

Well, I'm not too proud to admit it - I'm firmly in the McCain camp.

I have my reasons which, oddly, have nothing to do with his politics
and has more to do with him as a person.

Long story - might tell it sometime.

Anything to do with South East Asia?

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

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.

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

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.

This is just too delicious not to comment...
 

hkrause wrote:
Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:


I'm not at all sure he's not just an empty suit with a good speil.


You mean, as opposed to Bush, an empty suit who is also embarrassingly
inarticulate? :)

Public speaking is not an identifier of character and integrity and vision.