Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[ace1914]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

I don't see the bridge to nowhere being an issue with anyone but staunch liberals. From what I have read, she supported the idea of a bridge to the remote islands as a potential infrastructure improvement. Once things got going, it didn't equate to a good idea. Hence the line "about that bridge to nowhere, thanks, but no thanks". About the keeping the money part, tell us more about that. Did she pocket some cash? Did money go into a general fund? Did something happen outside of the norm?





This is not a community organizer. This is a major national not for profit charity.

Community Organizers are different. If interested, just google and read up on it. There is a lot of good info out there. Sure it is a lot of volunteer based work and generally trying to organize commuinities like neighborhoods, etc. to solve common problems versus individuals trying to solve problems independently.

So eager to prove me wrong, I see.

The soul of organizing is people. An organizer might be paid or work as a volunteer. The group could start as part of a master plan hatched in a smoke filled room or out of a 'spontaneous' community reaction to a crisis like a toxic waste dump. They might base their work on house by house prayer groups or cells of clandestine conspirators. The ultimate goal could be the preservation of Hopi language and culture or the overthrow of the real estate tax based system for financing public education. Organizers can differ on strategy, tactics, even on what seem to be base values. However, all organizers believe in people, in the ability of regular folks to guide their lives, to speak for themselves, to learn the world and how to make it better.

I think Red Cross falls into that "Google" definition.

Have you ever worked for a LOCAL chapter of the Red Cross..or a LOCAL chapter of Habitat for Humanities? The national organization is made of local community organizers that get the job done, regardless of its national status. There is no difference.

By the way, I didn't HAVE to look anything up. I've lived that life.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

I usually make it a point not to vote for socialists with Marxist leanings...and usually those tend to graze on the Democrat side of the yard.

CAT man the correct term for us is Pinkos!

[SFL Cat]

T'anks. Noted.

[SFL Cat]

Looks like Biden is throwing some crumbs to the kook left.

Obama might pursue criminal charges against Bush

[ace1914]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Looks like Biden is throwing some crumbs to the kook left.

Obama might pursue criminal charges against Bush

That's a fruitless campaign.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by ace1914

So eager to prove me wrong, I see.

The soul of organizing is people. An organizer might be paid or work as a volunteer. The group could start as part of a master plan hatched in a smoke filled room or out of a 'spontaneous' community reaction to a crisis like a toxic waste dump. They might base their work on house by house prayer groups or cells of clandestine conspirators. The ultimate goal could be the preservation of Hopi language and culture or the overthrow of the real estate tax based system for financing public education. Organizers can differ on strategy, tactics, even on what seem to be base values. However, all organizers believe in people, in the ability of regular folks to guide their lives, to speak for themselves, to learn the world and how to make it better.

Have you ever worked for a LOCAL chapter of the Red Cross..or a LOCAL chapter of Habitat for Humanities. The organization is made of local community organizers that get the job done, regardless of its national status. There is no difference.

Not trying to prove you wrong, it's just that an organization that is National is driving policy, etc. Of course National or local it can be charity, etc.

Maybe it would be more helpful to identify what Barrack Obama did specifically and what kind of commuinty group he worked with. He was not head of the United Way, Red Cross or Habitat. So putting that out there in the context of this thread is potentially misleading.

Actually in many cases community organizing is a way for people get some exposure and maybe move up to city government, etc. See if I phrase it that way, it makes it look like Palin's Mayor job is far superior to the entry level community organizer.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Guess we'll find out in November. I think she will have a big appeal in small towns across flyover country...and that's where Bush won the last election.

I wasn't sure after the Republicans telling everyone that small town america makes up the vast majority of people but that isn't treu at all according to the 2000 census. Urban is over 75%:
U.S. Population Living in Urban vs. Rural Areas - Census 2000 Population Statistics - Census Issues - Planning - HEP - FHWA

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Galaril

I wasn't sure after the Republicans telling everyone that small town america makes up the vast majority of people but that isn't treu at all according to the 2000 census. Urban is over 75%:
U.S. Population Living in Urban vs. Rural Areas - Census 2000 Population Statistics - Census Issues - Planning - HEP - FHWA

Problem with this is, they consider places like Knoxville, TN as urban. Its not.

[ace1914]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Not trying to prove you wrong, it's just that an organization that is National is driving policy, etc. Of course National or local it can be charity, etc.

Maybe it would be more helpful to identify what Barrack Obama did specifically and what kind of commuinty group he worked with. He was not head of the United Way, Red Cross or Habitat. So putting that out there in the context of this thread is potentially misleading.

Actually in many cases community organizing is a way for people get some exposure and maybe move up to city government, etc. See if I phrase it that way, it makes it look like Palin's Mayor job is far superior to the entry level community organizer.

Palin: PTA, to City Council, mayor, governor in Alaska.

Community organizer, to State Senate to US Senate in Chicago.

I'd argue the paths are very similar.

By the way here's the organization, you could've googled the info, the information's there.

Developing Communities Project (DCP) - Welcome

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Problem with this is, they consider places like Knoxville, TN as urban. Its not.

Yes, good point

[ace1914]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Problem with this is, they consider places like Knoxville, TN as urban. Its not.

Its a city with more than 500,000 people in the metro area. That's pretty darn urban by definition.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by ace1914

Palin: PTA, to City Council, mayor, governor in Alaska.

Community organizer, to State Senate to US Senate in Chicago.

I'd argue the paths are very similar.

By the way here's the organization, you could've googled the info, the information's there.

Developing Communities Project (DCP) - Welcome

After reviewing the site, it looks like they have some noble projects. I also understand why they are not playing up any detail.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Galaril

How the fuck did people in Massachusetts elect this asshole in the first place?

No idea, I didn't vote for him, in my mind he was a Republican version of Al Gore.

[SirFozzie]

I didn't vote for him, because he came off as a snake-oil salesman.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

About the keeping the money part, tell us more about that. Did she pocket some cash? Did money go into a general fund? Did something happen outside of the norm?

IIRC, it went into Alaska's general fund.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by ace1914

Its a city with more than 500,000 people in the metro area. That's pretty darn urban by definition.

Have you been to Knoxville?

Hell, most of the Atlanta metro area is something that stretches what I think of when I think of the word "urban". Then again, being from Jersey, I'm used to thinking of urban as NYC and Philly.

[ace1914]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Have you been to Knoxville?

Hell, most of the Atlanta metro area is something that stretches what I think of when I think of the word "urban". Then again, being from Jersey, I'm used to thinking of urban as NYC and Philly.

I think any city with more than 250,000 people in the city itself and more than 500,000 in its metro area should be considered urban. Once you get that many people in one small area, you are going to have "city" problems(traffic congestion, etc.). That's what makes it urban.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

So you're saying as an organizer, Obama wrote grant proposals and made phone calls and collected donations, correct?

I have no idea, im saying that some community organizers do stuff like that. No clue what Obama did but I dont think the speeches last night demarked out whom from whom in regards to which community organizers they were mocking.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

IIRC, it went into Alaska's general fund.

I found an article on CNN that talked about it. When Congress stripped the earmark, all it did was remove the requirement the funds be spent on the bridge but Alaska still got the cash, something like 233 million. Kind of a screwed up process isn't it?

It looks like the congressmen in Alaska were pissed that she nixed the process, since they were "working" for it for so long. The CNN article indicated she nixed it mostly because it was 300 million short of funding, ultimately saying they needed to reach a more fiscally responsible solution.

I don't think this makes her look bad at all, in the end she killed the deal. But I probably would not have put it in the speech either. Selling the jet on e-bay was enough to make her point and a much clearer example.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by ace1914

Palin: PTA, to City Council, mayor, governor in Alaska.

Community organizer, to State Senate to US Senate in Chicago.

I'd argue the paths are very similar.

Yeah, except I'm going to go with State Senator of 5th largest state (12M) from 2nd largest Metro area >>>> Mayor of small town

SI

[Flasch186]

These next 2 days are going to be very intriguing in regards to political strategy (RNC Convention, Obama on Fox [which I still think is not very nice]) and I think the past 10 days will be looked at as the true lynchpin in regards to both campaigns going as negative as the campaigns past. It's a shame in my view and neither side will be more negative than the other but I think we'll see that going forward.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I think it's pretty brilliant to tell you the truth, and I'd bet that Obama's camp offered it as a one-night-only opportunity to Fox News.

If you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin', you know that by now

That has already been all but confirmed by O'Reilly himself. On yesterday's radio show, he said that he was pretty sure if he didn't take this opportunity, that he wouldn't get another chance. It's going to be far from a cakewalk for Obama, so I don't think it's all bad news for the Republicans.

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Well now it seems a couple of the talking heads got caught on an open mike and were expressing their true (because the cameras were off) feelings on the Palin selection:

Noonan, Murphy trash Palin on hot mic: 'It's over' - Yahoo! News

Arles, Im not painting it one way or the other.

Certainly some interesting developments on this one. Evidently, someone in the backroom of MSNBC secretly leaked an edited version of this conversation that inaccurately portrayed the comments. This will likely only further fuel the fire over the blatent bias being displayed by the major networks in recent weeks.

Declarations - WSJ.com

Originally Posted by Cringer

Also, just to let out some personal venom....I have the assumption this woman has had very little to do with the care of that baby, and it will be even less if she becomes VP. Makes for a good photo to have it around on the campaign though.

To be frank, this is a load of shit. The liberal side has floated this balloon and they'd be wise to stop quickly. There's a lot of working women who would create some heavy backlash over this kind of thinking by either party's supporters. Anyone bitching about Obama rarely seeing his children for the past 19 months? Perhaps Biden should take a job closer to home spending time with his real family rather than his Amtrak family? FWIW, I find both of the above comments about Obama and Biden to be without merit, much like the Palin family critiques are without merit. I'm a dad that takes care of their child the majority of the time while mom works. She appears to be doing just fine.

Overall, Palin was very impressive in her first outing. You may not like the message, but the delivery was spot-on and that kind of speech will put the Republican base into a tizzy. We'll see in the coming weeks what it does for the female and independent vote along with how she performs on the campaign trail. That speech and its delivery was better than Obama's and Biden's and I'm almost positive it will be better than McCain's speech. He doesn't have a chance to better that kind of a showing.

[Flasch186]

1. good for Fox. I think it too opportunistic for Obama and he shouldnt do it or have done it.

2. hmmm, ok. convenient that so far that's the edited moment of the year. I guess it's possible, anything is but liberal media bias I just dont buy...never will. Where the story or dirt is the vultures go (just like Fox putting on Obama).

3. We agree about Palin's speech although you'll be hardpressed to find anyone neutral to say it was "better" than Obama's but whatever, coulda been equal too but it's subjective anyways.

[miked]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Have you been to Knoxville?

Hell, most of the Atlanta metro area is something that stretches what I think of when I think of the word "urban". Then again, being from Jersey, I'm used to thinking of urban as NYC and Philly.

Wow, what are the odds. Two people from NJ living in Atlanta. Unheard of down here

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I guess it's possible, anything is but liberal media bias I just dont buy...never will.

So is FoxNews a bias network?

[flere-imsaho]

In light of Giuliani's speech from last night, let's revisit Giuliani from a year ago:

In the course of answering, Giuliani distinguished his views from those of Sen. John McCain on the ground that McCain "has never run a city, never run a state, never run a government. He has never been responsible as a mayor for the safety and security of millions of people, and he has never run a law enforcement agency, which I have done."

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

That depends on how they report on Palin's pastor issue.

Of course, of course.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

So is FoxNews a bias network?

Yes. There are biased networks, radio stations and papers and internet sites but I believe that the both sides quantity balances out. So to say,

"Liberal media bias" is to insinuate that the scales are tipped one way or the other and I just dont believe that. I believe there are neutral places, lefty places, righty places and places tot he extremes...

now just to update the things that tick me off portion of this thread:

Palin said she knew nothing of the pressure to fire the trooper in troopergate but now there are emails from her personal account in such regard. I definitely want this to run its course and the truth to come out but it ticks me off when someone lies, either side.

I do not think Obama should go on the air, except in ads, during the RNC. The RNC didnt do it and he should not do it.

A pastor issue on either side is exactly the same and to be ignored in my view until it cant be anymore. Now if someone says something themselves that's different (Im not really happy about mixing religion and politics so I dont like the 'Iraq mission from god' stuff but Palin's not the only person to say or believe that and if you believe it I'd rather you say it than hide it....that general did).

Im sure there are a lot more but those are just riling me up this morning

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

So is FoxNews a bias network?

Folks, the word to use in a sentence like this is "biased", not "bias". For whatever reason, most people don't seem to realize that there should be an 'ed' on the end.

Edit: See? Flasch gets it right!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Yes. There are biased networks, radio stations and papers and internet sites but I believe that the both sides quantity balances out. So to say,

"Liberal media bias" is to insinuate that the scales are tipped one way or the other and I just dont believe that. I believe there are neutral places, lefty places, righty places and places tot he extremes...

I never insinuated anything. All I said was that the major networks contain a heavy dose of liberal bias. I don't think there's any question that is the case and apparantly you agree. I think FoxNews is just as biased, but it should be noted that they are the only big news network that leans right. CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS and their related cable affiliates are all leaning left, whether they admit it or not.

Edit: Corrected for Kodos.

[VPI97]

I read a nice little article in my Virginia Tech magazine this summer regarding different perceptions of media bias in this, and in past, elections. I thought it did a good job in explaining how viewpoints on the existence of media bias can be so widely varied among viewers.

Virginia Tech Magazine - Through the Looking Glass

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

it ticks me off when someone lies, either side.

In that case, for the sake of your blood pressure, you may want to stop paying attention to election coverage.

[Flasch186]

no shit and I agree with Ronnie Dobbs that way way way at the top of the priority list is ratings bias and, mix that with the though, "if it bleeds it leads" and you get the inklings of where their "liberal media bias" thoughts come from, on the right. The rights been charge for a long time and the media has been looking for juicy stuff to write so theyve been a 'challenge' to the authoritah. It wont matter, it's a pillar of the right wing platform to argue liberal media bias so there will be no change there as a david v. goliath story is good to rile up the masses.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

I think it's obvious that the media has a large ratings bias.

One problem I have with the thought of a widespread liberal media bias is the whole run-up to the Iraq War. I'm not sure many liberals were happy with the job the media was doing then.

Media bias is a tough thing to gauge as it mixes with our own internal bias. I often get the feeling that stories I see and read give the "democrats good, republicans bad" feeling, but I also know that reading something I agree with won't have as much of an impact as reading something I disagree with.

[chesapeake]

Palin needed to convince voters that she was more than a pretty face and she did that well. It was a well-written speech, well-delivered -- right down to the staged "lipstick" line. I thought it was ad-libbed, too, but apparently it was not.

It was not without mistakes, however. The "Bridge to Nowhere" stuff was a bald-faced lie. She supported the earmark and pushed Congress not to rescind it. Congress, however, did, and designated that it be spent on other Alaska projects. Only after that was done and the issue was dead did she state mild opposition to the bridge.

Some folks have said that going after her family is fair game because they came down to the stage. Not yet; every nominee brings the whole clan to the stage to wave. If Bristol campaigns for her or starts appearing a lot, then I suppose it would be fair to question that. Or if Palin continues to focus her rhetoric on how great her family and its values are, then the other side probably has to ask questions.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

Palin needed to convince voters that she was more than a pretty face and she did that well. It was a well-written speech, well-delivered -- right down to the staged "lipstick" line. I thought it was ad-libbed, too, but apparently it was not.

Link?

the only reason why I think we crossed the "alot" line a while ago with Bristol's appearances was the initial statement from the family that it was a private matter and the 'kids' should be left alone...

1. then they fly out the boyfriend
2. then they announce theyre going to get married soon
3. then he's called a fiancee
4. then they have her wearing the tightest maternity dress (my wife) had seen

I dont know, if it's private than they should treat it as if they want it to be private but I feel, just my opinion, that all of a sudden flying Levi out, calling him a fiancee, and trotting him out told me how they truly felt.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

So it appears we have Biden's first gaffe as mentioned earlier in the thread. These comments were in relation to pursuing criminal charges against Bush once the Obama ticket is elected...........

"If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued," Biden said during a campaign event in Deerfield Beach, Florida, according to ABC.

"[N]ot out of vengeance, not out of retribution," he added, "out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president -- no one is above the law."

He has every right to say this, but why would you do this? The platform of change and unity from the Dem ticket goes right down the drain after a comment like this. If they want to do it, fine, but don't pretend that it's not a revenge/partisan situation. It's just as partisan as the Republican congressional attempt to oust Clinton from office.

Also, I hadn't seen the P-Diddy critique of Sarah Palin's selection mentioned in this thread. And I quote.............

John McCain Is Buggin’ The F%^k Out!

“Alaska, motherf**ker? What is the reality in Alaska? There’s not even no crack heads in Alaska. There’s not even no black people. There’s not even no like… crime? Like foreign policies. Y’all may be versed on foreign policies. Y’all need to get versed on black policies and yoof policies. We the future.”

1. When did it become a bad thing that there were no crackheads in a city or state?

2. The total percentage of the Alaskan population that is black is 4.7%. The total percentage of the population that is black of P-Diddy's current hometown (Alpine, New Jersey) is 1.5%. I think Mr. Diddy's stats about black people and where they live may be just a bit off.

Yet another situation where a celebrity would do more for the Democratic ticket by just shutting up instead of opening their mouth.

[DaddyTorgo]

why is that a gaffe for Biden MBBF?? Not sure I follow.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Also, I hadn't seen the P-Diddy critique of Sarah Palin's selection mentioned in this thread. And I quote.............

1. When did it become a bad thing that there were no crackheads in a city or state?

2. The total percentage of the Alaskan population that is black is 4.7%. The total percentage of the population that is black of P-Diddy's current hometown (Alpine, New Jersey) is 1.5%. I think Mr. Diddy's stats about black people and where they live may be just a bit off.

Yet another situation where a celebrity would do more for the Democratic ticket by just shutting up instead of opening their mouth.

You're right! That's why they call Alaska "America's mirror".

[gottimd]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

It was not without mistakes, however. The "Bridge to Nowhere" stuff was a bald-faced lie. She supported the earmark and pushed Congress not to rescind it. Congress, however, did, and designated that it be spent on other Alaska projects. Only after that was done and the issue was dead did she state mild opposition to the bridge.

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention - Yahoo! News

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

why is that a gaffe for Biden MBBF?? Not sure I follow.

You think it was a good idea to put that out there? I'm sure the liberal base will eat it up, but it certainly doesn't appear to jive with the unity platform that this ticket is pursuing at this point. On one hand, they preach unity while on the other hand, he all but guarantees that our leaders will spend a bunch of money on hearings and sessions that do nothing but keep our goverment from actually passing legislation. I didn't like it during the Clinton impeachment fiasco and I don't like it here.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

I found an article on CNN that talked about it. When Congress stripped the earmark, all it did was remove the requirement the funds be spent on the bridge but Alaska still got the cash, something like 233 million. Kind of a screwed up process isn't it?

It looks like the congressmen in Alaska were pissed that she nixed the process, since they were "working" for it for so long. The CNN article indicated she nixed it mostly because it was 300 million short of funding, ultimately saying they needed to reach a more fiscally responsible solution.

I don't think this makes her look bad at all, in the end she killed the deal. But I probably would not have put it in the speech either. Selling the jet on e-bay was enough to make her point and a much clearer example.

Earmark reform is just a lot of empty BS IMO. Getting rid of earmarks doesn't lower the overall expenditures, it just shifts the decision making from the legislative to the executive branch.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

You think it was a good idea to put that out there? I'm sure the liberal base will eat it up, but it certainly doesn't appear to jive with the unity platform that this ticket is pursuing at this point. On one hand, they preach unity while on the other hand, he all but guarantees that our leaders will spend a bunch of money on hearings and sessions that do nothing but keep our goverment from actually passing legislation. I didn't like it during the Clinton impeachment fiasco and I don't like it here.

idk - i don't necessarily follow it that far down the path. not sure he was committing to that

[flere-imsaho]

The Daily Show last night was on top form. First they juxtaposed GOP talking heads from a year ago (attacking Hillary Clinton on being a woman) and defending Palin during the last week (from attacks on her because she's a woman). A typical example was people a year ago saying Clinton was "whining" when she complained about the "boys" ganging up on her in the Democratic debates, and then the same people saying how disgraceful it was that anyone was attacking Palin now, and that they were doing so just because she was a woman.

Also good was comparing Bill O'Reilly's response to Jamie Spears' pregnancy to Bristol Palin's. Pretty much a word-for-word contradiction of himself. I'm sure he's not the only talking head to be doing a 180 this week.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

You think it was a good idea to put that out there? I'm sure the liberal base will eat it up, but it certainly doesn't appear to jive with the unity platform that this ticket is pursuing at this point. On one hand, they preach unity while on the other hand, he all but guarantees that our leaders will spend a bunch of money on hearings and sessions that do nothing but keep our goverment from actually passing legislation. I didn't like it during the Clinton impeachment fiasco and I don't like it here.

That seems way beyond what he said. Is it really the Republican platform that if you're high enough ranking you shouldn't be held accountable to the law?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

That seems way beyond what he said. Is it really the Republican platform that if you're high enough ranking you shouldn't be held accountable to the law?

If you think that any conviction will come of that, I've got some ice cubes in Arizona to sell you. It's a waste of time and little more than political grandstanding, much like the Clinton impeachment hearings. Putting up the straw man argument that I somehow implied that anyone is above the law is an excellent diversion, but doesn't address the topic at hand.

For those that want to read the full article.........

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...s2008.joebiden

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Link?

the only reason why I think we crossed the "alot" line a while ago with Bristol's appearances was the initial statement from the family that it was a private matter and the 'kids' should be left alone...

1. then they fly out the boyfriend
2. then they announce theyre going to get married soon
3. then he's called a fiancee
4. then they have her wearing the tightest maternity dress (my wife) had seen

I dont know, if it's private than they should treat it as if they want it to be private but I feel, just my opinion, that all of a sudden flying Levi out, calling him a fiancee, and trotting him out told me how they truly felt.

One of the talking heads last night said two things related to this: 1) male delegates were asked to give up their seats to female alternates to make it appear that there were more women there; 2) The hockey-mom, lipstick line was good but planned. I don't remember which one it was, and flipped between MSNBC, CNN and PBS pretty liberally (being a good liberal, and all). I'm pretty sure it wasn't PBS. So I apologize for not being able to specifically reference my source.

In fairness, if they could have kept Bristol's pregnancy hidden, I have no doubt they would have. But once it became public, they had to treat it as if it were all on the level. Every member of Biden's family was on the stage. Ditto Obama, such as it is. Bristol belonged on the stage with her mother. In my judgment, any fiance does, too, regardless of the presence of a shotgun. Either or both not appearing on the stage implies they are trying to sweep it all under the rug. An even worse story, in my opinion.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

If you think that any conviction will come of that, I've got some ice cubes in Arizona to sell you. It's a waste of time and little more than political grandstanding, much like the Clinton impeachment hearings. Putting up the straw man argument that I somehow implied that anyone is above the law is an excellent diversion, but doesn't address the topic at hand.

For those that want to read the full article.........

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...s2008.joebiden

Obama says this:

"[i]f crimes have been committed, they should be investigated," Obama told the Philadelphia Daily News. "You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve."

All they said was that if evidence of crimes being committed was discovered those responsible will be held accountable. They didn't call for hearings or investigations or a special prosecutor. Do you agree that if evidence of crimes is discovered that those responsible should be held accountable?

[Flasch186]

well I guess they couldve dropped the whole "private" charade and my brain would be able to put an equals sign after it...thats where Im having the discombobulation. You can't rewind the clock though so perhaps a pass is in order as youre right, all other families have been on stage too.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

A typical example was people a year ago saying Clinton was "whining" when she complained about the "boys" ganging up on her in the Democratic debates, and then the same people saying how disgraceful it was that anyone was attacking Palin now, and that they were doing so just because she was a woman.

Is this a fair comparison? I've been hearing a number of attacks on Palin that are only made because she is a woman...things like she can't take care of her kids if she is a VP, and she shouldn't be running with young children, and the mocking comment that "religious women should expect to be subservient to their husbands". All the while, Palin hasn't yet played the victim card (she doesn't have to with everyone else throwing it around for her). I don't remember Clinton's criticisms that caused her to claim victim. Were they equally as gender-focused?