George-Boy

would not have anything to stroke if Cheney was not there.

Many people on this board have a well honed arsenal tucked behind their keyboard and those weapons tend to be darts, poison arrows, long range sniping rifles, razor wire, nooses, the occassional hand grenade, and (my favorite) really tickly feathers.

Shotguns loaded with cut-and paste rock salt, radioactive toxic waste, semi-automatic spam, roadside trolls, flamethrowers, and nuclear weapons are frowned upon as unsportsman conduct.

I say that for your general edification since I felt like offering you a reply, but as your post didn't appear to have much to do with my original post, I could not tell what you were aiming at when you pulled the trigger. In general you might want to consider increasing the armor plating on your foot if you don't want to learn how to aim that damn thing.

could claim to want to do good for the country, and yet decline an offer of the VP position on the ticket.

The question remains of whether or not the nominee can claim to want to do good for the country, and yet decline to offer the the VP position to the other. I honestly don't think so. It seems like a done deal to me.

run75441 wrote the following post at 03/26/2008 7:43 AM:

Jack:

by such an accusation.

Liar, bigot, selfishness, greed, and lust. Is that the best you can do? Surely there must be more appropo and slandering words you can use?

I am gonna ignore this post of yours because it lacks imagination. Get on your computer and use MS Word. Practice sliding in a few words that may demonize us more than what you have here. Come on Jack, I know you have it in you.

I will be back in a bit to check on your progress.

I didn't want anyone to think badly of me so I toned it down a bit.

Jack

Hah, this from a man who couldn't extract urine from cowboy footwear.

Jack

Zoo-Boy is an idiot. He is here for my amusement and not much else.

I can write serious dialogue, examine the issues and on occasion show empathy for the other position, and engage in calm, reasoned rhetoric....but that just isn't any fun and it tends to not piss anyone off.

Jack

The only Democrats I know are the ones on this board.

I don't associate with them in real life for fear that someone will think I'm a Democrat too.

Jack

my rationale goes like this: since Bill Clinton plays the sax then Hillary probably plays a jazz instrument herself. I'm thinking the vibraphone. I'm not sure why. It just resonates with me.

Obama has to play the piano. It's got black keys and white keys, one hand's got to be working the bass while the other one's always gettin' into treble. It's got a sustain pedal and a damper pedal, but I'm not sure he knows how to use those yet.

what you mean by 'done deal'.

I can imagine that everybody has decided to play ball. I can also imagine that the remainder of the primaries will be required to determine who scratches whose back when and how long and sharp the back-scratcher can be before it's considered a knife.

Details.

ok I'll trade my aquaggaswack for some of that keyboard ammo.

I like the musical instrument analogy. If I were to go with bands, I would say Bill is more moody blues, Hillary would be classical, and Obama would be elevator music. McCain Big band all the way.

Excellent post ducadmo.

I liked hearing about your second fiddle experience and the way you dealt with it. I also like the way you used it as a metaphor to segue into the political insanity that is abound.

Although I can't say I agree Hillary would be a good choice as VP I see why you wrote what you wrote. I hope if Obama gets the nomination he finds someone I can respect more than her to run by his side.

BUT, if she ends up running for Prez I will vote for her and remain loyal to the Democratic Party.

~ Galatea

*~*~*~* (((( Barack Obama 2008 )))) ~*~*~*~*

Recently, I heard the argument that Hillary would make a great VP for McCain. They are good friends.

There is something more important than loyalty to a party it is loyalty to the nation within who's arms holds you.

Hillary 08

"I think of Cheerleading as a way of expressing the inner me. I love Cheerleading it is an awesome sport. It brings me up when I am down. I have trust in all my squad mates but I would like to see more guys out there go for the sport. Remember to always smile and give it your all. I love competing and watching those boys shake their bon bons! If cheerleading were any easier they would call it football!!"; author "Christa, FL, USA"

However you may not enjoy improvised cadenzas, this link just below, ought to make you happier than beans. This is a juxtaposition of the musical ABA thematic effort as found in your top post.

Ishmael Reed

And of course, Second Fiddlers never play The Cadenzas. Cadenzas, whether improvised or not, are always left to the virtuosic artist(s) who want to capture the heart and spirit of the listener / reader / mesmerized by all the glitter and glamour of a World Gone Wrong, not Wright !!

===================

A Letter to Mom on Obama

By CAT WOODS

Hi Mom,

I checked out Obama's speech. I thought it was well-written and well-presented, bringing up to White America some considerations they need to keep in mind, and handling the attacks on him and his pastor very well.

Now, I'm not saying this next part facetiously or sarcastically. This is a sincere question to which I am curious to know your answer: What is "amazing" about it?

I've received half a dozen emails so far referring to this speech as amazing. The guy I sat next to on the plane the other day was insistent that I needed to listen to it, and that if I would only listen to it, I would understand why Obama was so radical and important and crucial to America's future.

I can honestly say it was a good speech; I can also honestly say that he did not say anything that I found radical or adequate to rescuing America's future.

(1) Obama included statements condemning the effect of corporate lobbyists on Congress -- without acknowledging that his own voting record is one of kowtowing to the corporate agenda or that he himself has accepted millions of dollars from corporate PACs and registered corporate lobbyists.

(2) He mentioned that the founding fathers failed to stop slavery; he did not mention that the founding fathers institutionalized slavery in the Constitution in order to achieve a union in the first place. (Those bits about suppressing insurrections were put in there to lure the slavery-dependent South into the nascent nation by promising to put down revolts by slaves.)

(3) Obama apologizing for his corporate-controlled voting record and vowing to amend his ways and forego contributions from corporate PACs and lobbyists would have been radical.

(4) Confronting, instead of flattering, the self-deceits of the passive American public would have been radical.

What he did do was politely divert unfair criticism.

Well done and good job.

But there is nothing to bowl me over into thinking that I would vote for a candidate who failed to defend the precious amendments to that Constitution known as the Bill of Rights.

All of these candidates -- Obama, Clinton, McCain -- took a vow to defend the Constitution when they took office.

I take that to mean the Bill of Rights, not the institution of slavery. I don't know (and don't care) how they rationalize it;

I do know that they all not only failed to defend the Bill of Rights; they outright capitulated and VOTED IN FAVOR of re-authorizing the Patriot Act in 2006.

I will not vote for anyone who betrayed the most basic trust of public office, nor do I understand anyone else doing so.

If you do not draw a line at defending the Bill of Rights, you have no line and will accept outright dictatorship.

No reason to bother with this pretense of "democracy" in that case.

One thing I do find "amazing" -- in a more sinister way -- is that Americans can be so surprised that a few statements by a person's friend or associate can not *rationally* be used to condemn that person. Due to the travesty of U.S. journalism typified by FOX News, "guilt by association" and guilt by exaggeration and distortion are so prevalent in U.S. culture that a statement like Obama's is seen as something incredible and unexpected.

Let's establish something, shall we: a person can be judged by their own statements, not those of their associates; everyone can make mistakes or say something foolish or exaggerated once in a while; and the tactics of smearing people this way belong to dishonest people with too much influence over the media, not smart people, ethical people or people sincerely working to improve our world.

I'd honestly be curious for anyone to point to one thing Obama said in his speech that should be in any way earth-shaking to anyone with a 4th grade education.

• The idea that slavery has consequences for current race relations in this country should be obvious to any thinking person.
• The idea that post-traumatic stress from racial bigotry and institutionalized discrimination should be taken into account when considering angry statements from African Americans should be commonplace.
• The idea that one can not be condemned for associating with someone who is less than perfectly careful in their speech should be something learned by the 5th grade.

If these are not the case, then yes, something is definitely wrong with this country.

But I'm not convinced that Obama can cure the deeper ill just because he's smart enough to notice those three things.

I want more than that, and I believe this country needs a lot more than that.

The Democratic Party has ever played bait and switch with progressive voters, and Obama is no exception.

Kerry was an exception only in that he didn't even pretend to oppose the war, yet anti-war activists still voted for him in droves, thereby erasing their own voice against the war.

Obama voted to continue funding the Iraq war, without the condition of withdrawal.

The cost is half a trillion dollars and counting -- to unjustly invade another country against the will of its populace and our own, all to put oil profits in the hands of a few corporations.

The only truly amazing thing is that most of the 70% of the American people who oppose this intend to go to the polls and vote for people who voted in favor of it.

I myself support and will vote for someone who has spent the better part of 50 years actually fighting the ills he mentions in his speeches.

I believe that is the road to achieving a longer term solution to a much longer term problem.

Cat Woods has been a member of the National Committee of the Green Party and is currently at work on the presidential campaign of Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez.

Cat Woods

RainMan:

Zoo-Boy is an idiot. He is here for my amusement and not much else.

I can write serious dialogue, examine the issues and on occasion show empathy for the other position, and engage in calm, reasoned rhetoric....but that just isn't any fun and it tends to not piss anyone off.

Jack

I know that,JD. and most all the long time posters know it about you too.thx for that. ;-)

ducadmo:

When I was in Taiwan, I got to know the lead guy for my company's competitor pretty well. During the day, we saw each other constantly, we talked shit about each other, spied on each other, tried to recruit each others technicians, just about everything we could legally do to each other and in Taiwan - that's a lot.

Then at night, we'd go out drinking, talk shit about our own companies, and made sure each other got home safely. that little world was too small to have real enemies. Politics is a nasty business, but no politician gets very far burning bridges they spent a long time building.

It's the people who don't have anything invested except their heart that get all bent out of shape and in politics a heart is an extravagant and purely optional commodity.

I don't doubt that at all.

It's a like that: politics. And it's a fascinating game I love to observe.

I appreciate your reply. And you derserved both the 5 uprates and the check! Congrats and Good discussion.