Boots and Sabers - The blogging will continue until morale improves...

Election Results Live Blog | Home | Germantown Rejects School Referenda

Tuesday, November 04, 2008

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama

That is all…

(110) Comments

Posted by Owen at 2230 hrs

Politics + Politics - General
Tags: politics

It’s over - McCain lost Ohio and PA - Obama will certainly get CA, WA, and OR - that puts him over the top.

So - who’s going to take public financing again?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2008 at 2236 hrs

PLEASE lord Obama, give Doyle a cabinet position.
Posted by Fuzz on November 04, 2008 at 2251 hrs

I think I am going to be sick. Do you think if I called in sick to work tomorrow they would believe me? I am one of the very few conservative teachers at my school. Help me not to lose it on the rude liberals that rub it in my face tomorrow at work.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2008 at 2259 hrs

He can go to hell. Not my president, not my country. You can have it.
Posted by Peter on November 04, 2008 at 2333 hrs

A tipping point in our history. The day our country tipped away from freedom and went on the downhill road to socialism. Maybe it will be a good thing.

Obama’s policies are going to mire our country in an economic mess if he gets them established. And we know that big government bureaucracy once established doesn’t go away.

Oh well… Freedoms been taking hits for years… This is just more of the same.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2008 at 2344 hrs

Do you think if I called in sick to work tomorrow they would believe me?

If you work in the City of Milwaukee it looks like they’ll have to pay you too.

Geez… You guys are becoming the San Francisco of the Midwest.
Posted by David on November 04, 2008 at 2350 hrs

This is about as classy as I could expect it to be around here.

McCain’s speech, at least the first 10 minutes or so, was the best I have ever seen in my life. It’s unfortunate it was ruined by human refuse who decided they should make asses of themselves by booing and shouting.

As for the likes of Peter and Jodi, you’re typical. I bet you’ve at one point or another complained about liberals and their Bush Derangement Syndrome, and an hour after Obama’s election you’re already exhibiting the symptoms of the same disease. Your candidate asked you to help us come together behind our new President, but just like a dipshit DUer or KOSer in 2000 or 2004 you’d rather wander off into the wilderness. I look forward to four to eight years of your shouting at the rain, it will be pure entertainment.

He is going to be our President, and yours, whether you like it or not. Like a DUer in 2000, you need to man (or woman) up and accept it. You should hope for his success, because if he succeeds it means we’ll succeed.

You have a choice. You can either accept that your ideology and your message have been rejected, accept your ass-whipping, accept that we’re all Americans and work together to make this work, hope for our new President’s success because it would mean our shared success; or, more likely, you can cling to your ideology, blame the American people for being brainwashed like an elitist, and let Obama Derangement Syndrome take over.

Choice is yours. Deal with it.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2008 at 2355 hrs

Only 1463 days till we can vote him out of office….
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 04, 2008 at 2355 hrs

Don’t blame me; I voted for Nader
Posted by David on November 05, 2008 at 0001 hrs

ATV,

Did you abandon your ideology when Bush won? Reagan? I thought not. Get over yourself.
Posted by Owen on November 05, 2008 at 0001 hrs

You can go to hell as far as I am concerned. He is not my president. And you can take this country and shove it where the sun don’t shine. Screw you. You are not my fellow countryman as far as I am concerned. I want nothing to do with your damn country.
Posted by Peter on November 05, 2008 at 0010 hrs

I don’t hope for his success. In fact, I seriously hope this country gets attacked by terrorists over and over again and every possible bad thing that can happen does happen ... to people like you.

If I had the money, I’d put a bounty on his melon. Seriously.
Posted by Peter on November 05, 2008 at 0012 hrs

I haven’t missed a vote since I was 18 yrs. old. I missed voting because I was taking care of trauma patients all day and night long. Even though I couldn’t vote tonight, I began to think of all of the people who did vote. My view may be tainted by my work philosophy, but many who voted tonight don’t work, don’t pay taxes and collect a gov’t check in one form or another and are deciding the future of our country. When those people outnumber us who work, our country is going to fail. Be wary of something that sounds to good to be true. I think this is a slippery slope that will lead to our undoing. Whomever is left at the end of this party, turn off the lights. We are in for a terrible ride. I vote republican because not everyone can be on welfare. Wake me up when this nightmare is over. God Bless and Keep the Faith
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0024 hrs

As a conservative I am extremely happy tonight on many fronts. Lets start locally.
1) Milwaukee sick leave passes. Thank you Milwaukee for sending business to Washington County. Industry will be leaving in droves and will probably end up here. Washington County is fiscally responsible, has school districts that actually educate children and sane taxes. I know of a great industrial park in Germantown that is waiting for good businesses. This will loweer my taxes.
2) Assembly. I got rid of Sue Jeskewitz(RINO) and got a representative that I hope is fiscally conservative and will step up to represent me.
3) Senate: While it appears that Alberta Darling (Rino) has lost, who cares, she was pretty worthless as a senator anyway. She spent money like a drunk sailor and never did anything to control spending in Madison. While Wassermann is an ultra rich liberal, his plans are not to stay in Madison for to long anyway. His aspirations are on the national level. He really cannot be any worse than Alberta. Once the Dems loose power in madison he will be gone.
4) Govenor: With Obama at the helm Jim Doyle will be running for Washington and that dim bulb Lt. Govenor will inherit a $5B deficit and no clue what to do. Can you say Govenor Scott Walker in the next election.
5) Washington. The Dems will over reach with their glee for power and as soon as they dont deliver on all the promises, taxes go through the roof, utility bills skyrocket and the baby boomers have to go to a medicare hospital and cant afford their starbucks they will turn on these 60’s liberal rejects in no time. can you say Paul Ryan for President?
Watch and see.

So, in conclusion, every once in a while it takes a cold dose of reality to see just how good conservatives can be. mark my words.

When given lemons…
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0029 hrs

I’m going to need to stock up on whiskey aren’t I?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0045 hrs

All I can say to the Obama supporters is: Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it.

For the rest of us, hunker down, be prepared.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0103 hrs

I’m going to need to stock up on whiskey aren’t I?

Captain counts right?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0104 hrs

Captain counts right?

Is it made in Tennessee?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0108 hrs

No clue. All I’m going to do is watch T & B on Wedding Crashers to try and lift my mood up. Hopefully one or the other will give me a smile. I’m doubting it though.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0113 hrs

I don’t hope for his success. In fact, I seriously hope this country gets attacked by terrorists over and over again and every possible bad thing that can happen does happen ... to people like you.

If I had the money, I’d put a bounty on his melon. Seriously.

wow. classy. wishing death to Americans and threatening the life of the president elect. and it’s only been 2 hours or so.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0116 hrs

I still have many questions—What about Obama’s birth certificate—is he even really eligible to be President—why not produce it if it is valid? Why would reports say his Obama’s Grandmother said he was born in Kenya—Check out this YouTube: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4FqVRWgrNw&eurl;=http: //blog.barofintegrity.us/2008/11/01/barack-nate-dhalani.aspx ?ref=rss?)

The US Constitution requires the President to be a natural born citizen--let us remember, he should not even have run if he does not qualify by birth!.

I want every single vote that is in question be validated and every single person who who fraudulently voted to sway this election prosecuted.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0137 hrs

Well folks. It is getting worse. We lost two republican seats up here in the Chippewa Valley. Terry Moulton (Mouldy) lost to a screeching liberal housewife with no experience. And turncoat Jeff Wood beat Don Moga. Jeff Wood was a republican but at the last second went independant. Jeff said he will align with the Dems and they said he would get leadership positions with the Dems.

So by my calculations, that puts the assembly in the hands of the socialists.

And Norm Coleman lost to wack job Al Franken in a MN senate race. So the Dems have their 60 in the US Senate.

This really sucks
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0138 hrs

I want to wait for a clear mind to blog for tomorrow. I’m way too mad to say anything further. To say I’m mad would be an understatement. FURIOUS would be better. I’m going to put it to bed.

If I can.

It’s not just for the election. It’s for the statements. I’ve been pretty quiet at this point.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0150 hrs

I want every single vote that is in question be validated and every single person who who fraudulently voted to sway this election prosecuted.

Good luck at least in Milwaukee County. The McCann clone Chisholm ran unopposed…so we will continue to have status quo.

Welcome to the United Socialist States of America.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0156 hrs

Like they would look into it.

Sorry for being ticked off, but I am. It isn’t going to happen.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0230 hrs

As Barack Obama won the election we toasted the moment with a bottle of champagne that had been bought for the 2004 Democratic ‘win’ that John Kerry failed to produce. As we all stood and clinked glasses to the ‘dawning of a new day in America’ we smiled, laughed, and some took off eyeglasses to wipe wet eyes.

“It is as if we can finally breathe again,” a 43-year-old college student and neighbor said, and then added that there is much work to be done to restore what has been destroyed due to war and economic mismanagement. But he was hopeful. We all are.

That hope for change was the core of the Obama movement that brought us to this point. It is not a small thing to witness the power of a dream, or the impact a dreamer can have on a nation. I dare say that Americans everywhere had a tingle when we watched our new President and his family march onto the stage in Chicago. Without words his image alone said that greatness is ours to have again.
Posted by Gregory on November 05, 2008 at 0314 hrs

I congratulate Obama for winning and McCain for being the good sport.
Posted by Glass Home Decor on November 05, 2008 at 0620 hrs

“You can go to hell as far as I am concerned. He is not my president. And you can take this country and shove it where the sun don’t shine.” “...I seriously hope this country gets attacked by terrorists over and over again and every possible bad thing that can happen does happen ... to people like you.”

Who the hell do you people think you are? Are you not American…not Christian? Apparantly not… why don’t you all GROW UP?

I am very proud of President-Elect Barack Obama and his campaign team. It has been a historical election he has done a great job to reach the top.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0748 hrs

Guess its time to stock up on ammo, magazines and build that rifle, before SHTF.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0759 hrs

Owen,

I’m not expecting you to give up your ideology, you’re too emotionally attached to do that.

I’m wondering if you’ll be respectful in your opposition, and support the idea of getting things done where there is agreement. You know, instead of doing what partisans do which is disagreeing to everything so that nothing can get done, just so someone from the opposing party can’t have a victory.

Peter,

Seriously, just go shoot yourself, if you’re serious. Or move to Somalia. Very limited government there. Lots of guns, so it should be a polite society.

On the other hand, if you’re a liberal troll mocking a right-winger, then bravo for your humor.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0802 hrs

Peter,

GO AWAY. I can only hope you are a troll pretending to be a republican.

Charlie Sykes has it best

Congratulations.

Conservatives are now the loyal opposition. Let’s hope that the new president will succeed, because his success will be America’s success. When he’s wrong, we ‘ll oppose him, but ultimately, we are Americans before we are members of any political movement…

If Republicans want to win anything back they will need to learn to be conservatives again.

The Republican party needs to come out for a constitutional amendment saying nothing can be added to a bill that is not directly related to the title of the bill. Keep beating that drum.

Under Republican leadership in congress pork has erupted. It’s not going to do them any good to complain that the Dems have not fixed the pork problem. It’s not their job to reduce pork.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0817 hrs

Peter, your comments are over the line. You don’t need to kiss Obama’s backside, but for crying out loud, have a little decency. If you must post that kind of filth, do it at your own place.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0822 hrs

ATV,

I’m not emotionally attached. It’s a political philosophy that comes out of my values and my thinking of the issues. To say that it is based on emotion is to discount it. Is your political philosophy just an emotional whim or is it based on your values and thoughts?

As for “getting things done,” I will certainly support Obama when he’s doing things I agree with - just like I have when Doyle does things that I agree with. I will not, however, abandon my convictions for the sake of “getting something done.” For you to suggest that we should is crass and shallow.
Posted by Owen on November 05, 2008 at 0823 hrs

I, too, had to do what Wisconsin Cop did - shut down the computer, forget blogging, and go to bed last night when 10 p.m. hit. I was too angry and disappointed to blog.

All emotion aside (which is a lot of what you are reading above, so chill), I don’t think that anybody has ever said they weren’t willing to work together to “get things done where there is agreement.” That is, of course, appropriate and correct. What we do NOT have to do, however, is rejoice. Owen is by far more gracious than me. His congratulatory statement at the top of this blog is more than I can get out of my mouth. This is a very, very sad day for America. What is unfortunate, though, is that some do not even know it yet. YET.

Those who voted for Obama’s change were duped. In fact, they will feel the effects of being blindsided when their pocketbooks get hit and morality in this country declines like never seen before. The Obamanation list is long, but as Irwin Fletcher, above, stated:

So, in conclusion, every once in a while it takes a cold dose of reality to see just how good conservatives can be. mark my words.
Well said.

We will watch. And as we watch, we will see people choking on the celebratory “John Kerry champagne.”

We are sad, disappointed, but not without hope. Obama will reveal himself fully in the days to come and when he does, we will not be the only sad and disappointed ones.

Carpe diem.
Posted by GAMazy on November 05, 2008 at 0831 hrs

I thought the “he’s not MY President” crap was reserved for millions of bitter liberals. I didn’t think I’d see any conservatives acting like babies over an Obama win.

And for the record, the Dems do not have their 60 seats, Franken hasn’t found enough votes to win…yet.

The Dems have 56 seats right now with 4 up in the air. Of those 4 undecided, Republicans are ahead in all 4.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0833 hrs

The Public Television discussions were the best last night. Brooks was funny to listen to, even when trying to set up any future failure as a bipartisan failure. I think that’s a bit premature. Obama now has to govern and the realities of our economic position are likely tomake his governance quite different from his campaign. Perhaps only a democrat can cut the federal government. Policies that would have been declared cruel and inhuman from a GWB administration may now instead be called a mature response to reality. Just as a segment of Republicans were horrified by GWB’s emergence as a big spender, a segment of the Democrats may be equally horrified to see Obama morph into Newt Gingrich.

The Republicans have always been much more effective as a minority party than the democrats, so I think the nation is in little danger from overreaching by the democrats.

On the other hand, Obama may try to govern as he campaigned, in which case a single term is the most likely outcome.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0841 hrs

TAKE MY GOVERNOR, PLEASE!!

Leave us here with the disaster squad of Pocan, Miller, and Lawton. Expand state govt, tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend, and lets all remember to use our inside voices.
Then in 4 years we ROCK!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0857 hrs

Obama deserves congratulations on a very effective and successful campaign. As President-elect, he also deserves our respect. But, I agree with Owen, he does not deserve, nor should he expect, our subservience.

Perhaps the stunning defeats the Republicans have suffered in ‘06 and yesterday will be enough of a shock for them to get off their asses and stand for something.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0906 hrs

I think it’s funny that many of you think that Obama will be more of a socialist than Bush was. Where have you been for the last 8 years?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0937 hrs

Nobody wants your subservience.

Listen to Obama’s acceptance speech last night and listen to his keynote speech from 2004. He says the same thing about creating a more perfect union. He wants to make this country better by employing the best principals and ideas we have to offer. His judgement (and mine, and the majority of voting Americans) about what are the best ideas for this country differs from yours. Sorry that’s the game we play. There are winners and there are losers, be a gratious loser and support the country by trying to work towards promoting the ideas you think will benefit all of us the most.

Try and prove to us that our ideas are wrong, and yours are right. Our democracy will be stronger with a vibrant opposition. Keep us in check. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. We should all hope the Obama administration doesn’t let us down like so many other administrations have in the past. A strong oppostion might be the best thing to prevent the next administration from falling victim to it’s own success.

And Peter… peace.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 0948 hrs

Let’s see how far left we move in the first 90 days. Reid and Pelosi already have their agenda mapped out to “ram” (their word) through as much as they can right away.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1005 hrs

Peter,

I hope that your statements are the product of emotion on a tough night and that you will retract them. Regardless, they are completely inappropriate. I agree that America chose the wrong guy, but he is our duly elected president (almost) and the office and our nation deserve respect. We can vigorously oppose his policies while not wishing the man or the office ill will.
Posted by Owen on November 05, 2008 at 1007 hrs

Embracing that role of loyal opposition helps. It was my role four and eight years ago. All things come around.

Conservatives may feel they are in a morass of hopelessness and find it hard to believe that voters bought into Obama’s schtick and elected him. They can take hope in small victories. They can refuel for their new role in the next for years.

This is what makes America what it is, a centrist democracy. I remember wondering in 2004, what is the proper Democratic response to our lost election, slide the party more to the left, or bring it more to the middle? The answer was both.

Obama ran a primary campaign from pretty far out on the left, and a general from an increasingly centrist position. Where will he govern from? What will Republicans do in the next few years? Democracy is endlessly interesting.
Posted by Mike on November 05, 2008 at 1015 hrs

This was a fair election and Obama won. He will be my Preisdent. This is our obligation as citizens. I wish no harm to him or our country and I pray he does well and will look forward to the next election-especially if he does poorly.

Fortunately our military does not choose to fight or not fight based on who they want as President. We as citizens need to do the right thing here.

Looking on the bright side, we now have a President of all people. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, pack you bags and get the hell out of here. You services are not needed now, and they never were in the first place.

To Peter: To hope of wish for another terrorist attack or that this man, a father of two, gets harmed in any way, is worthy of serious mental examination. Get help.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1116 hrs

Wow - what gracious losers you all are.

Owen - this election has made me lose all respect for you. I started watching this blog because I thought it was insightful and intelligent. Now it has become bitter, paranoid and inexplicably biased towards your personal political pics.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1117 hrs

Wendy: Thanks for putting Peter in his place. The man needs professional help. His presence here locally makes me think occasionally about buying a gun for self defense.

Mike:

Obama ran a primary campaign from pretty far out on the left, and a general from an increasingly centrist position.

I think that’s what all Democrats do. And the Republicans run their primary campaigns on the right, the move to the middle for the general. Happens all the time. I don’t know why this should be some kind of worrisome, semi-sinister thing now. The phenomenon is as predictable as Republicans claiming that our candidate is “the most liberal <fillintheblank>” or that his policies will mean “the largest tax increase in history.” It’s simply how things are done.

I hope—but don’t expect—that some of the partisan rancor generated by the campaign will die down by the time Obama is sworn in. Our problems are too serious to be talking about whether he’s a secret Muslim or once had dinner with a Palestinian. Let’s get down to policy and have it out there instead.
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1119 hrs

Kris, be realistic. Of course it’s biased toward his personal political picks. You can disagree with the tone and tenor of the posts if you want, but surely you don’t expect Owen to tailor his blog to fit someone else’s political views do you?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1125 hrs

Welcome to the soon to be formed People’s Republic of Americastan.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1130 hrs

John Galt and Wendy: very gracious. As was Sen. McCain last night. Impressive.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1138 hrs

the democrats have given us a roadmap for the future.Vilify the president for EVERYTHING. Say that you will govern from the center. Raise ungodly amounts of money so you can buy as many ads as possible that tell lies. I hve yet to figure out how to change the Quislings loyalty
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1145 hrs

Wow - what gracious losers you all are.

Owen - this election has made me lose all respect for you. I started watching this blog because I thought it was insightful and intelligent. Now it has become bitter, paranoid and inexplicably biased towards your personal political pics.

So here you are on a blog run by someone you’ve “lost all respect for”

Whatever… take your condescention elsewhere… I’ll take bitter, paranoid, and inexplicably biased over your arrogance any day.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1210 hrs

Did Peter just threaten the life of the President-Elect? Here’s hoping the feds show up and turn his house inside out as a reward.

As Owen mentioned earlier, Obama is our next president regardless of how any of us feel about him. We do our country no good by hoping for his presidency to fail. Of course, there are always reasons to oppose specific policies, and that’s a healthy part of democracy. But Obama deserves and needs our respect, best wishes, and prayers, regardless of how poorly the left personally treated and spoke of George W. Bush. Turning CDS and BDS into ODS does nothing to improve discourse in this nation and only serves to make yourself look stupid.

The conservatives survived Clinton and the liberals survived Bush. Something tells me we’ll survive President Obama too. Obama’s not short on problems to work on and none of us benefit by hoping for him to screw it up further just to make a GOP win more likely in 2012.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on November 05, 2008 at 1232 hrs

Peter, xxpilot and a couple of others sound—sadly but unsurprisingly—like paranoid, shrill, partisan kool-aid drinkers. Most of the other conservatives here sound more reasonable: defeated and unhappy, but not, you know, calling for anyone’s death or denouncing their country.

It’s sad when I have to praise conservatives for merely refraining from being extremist crackpots.

I generally disagree with the thesis that Republicans lost because they simply weren’t Republican enough. But I’ll give you this: you do need a return to genuine fiscal responsibility. One more tip since I’m feeling magnanimous: ditch Sarah Palin. If you seriously think she’s the future of your party you’re in worse shape than I thought.
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1237 hrs

“inexplicably biased towards your personal political pics.”

What’s inexplicable about this? It’s his house, his views, his rules. I never thought that this was an unbiased blog - it’s Owen’s (and Jed’s and Wendy’s) views on politics/current events/whatever they choose.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1244 hrs

scott… I was going to respond to you, but I’m reminded of how you run from every thread when your nonsense is exposed.

I will say one thing. Thanks for the air-time, calling me out by name. I must really get under your skin… But your associated commets (as usual) have nothing to do with me and should have been directed at Peter.

I stand by my comments.

Glad you had a good Obamagasm last night. Just a couple more months and the light will shine on this country again eh?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1245 hrs

Palin isn’t going anywhere. She is either going to be in the Senate or on “Dancing With The Stars”. Either way it is going to be hella entertaining to watch her continue to keep the GOP retrograde.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1247 hrs

Scott- (#46)
You’re right. That center shift is common election posturing between primaries and general elections. I was just trying to point out that conservatives should shore up the conservative base by moving thier party back to its roots. I’ve heard Jim Sensenbrenner say it. I think I heard Owen say it. I agree with them. Its what we dems did, and it works in American electoral politics.
(#53) I’m sticking up for xxpilot, here. Don’t lump his input with Peter’s on this strand. I learn a lot of good stuff from xxppilot’s strong conservative views. None of that applies to the other guy(?).
Posted by Mike on November 05, 2008 at 1255 hrs

What’s inexplicable about this? It’s his house, his views, his rules. I never thought that this was an unbiased blog - it’s Owen’s (and Jed’s and Wendy’s) views on politics/current events/whatever they choose.

I guess “inexplicable” was the wrong word. I should have used irrational.

You are completely right that the writers of this blog can write anything they want. My issue lies more in the increasing close-mindedness of this site.

I am not an Obama fan. I didn’t vote for him, and I don’t think he’ll be a particularly good president.

I just don’t think politics based on paranoia and fear works. It obviously didn’t work for McCain.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1313 hrs

I just don’t think politics based on paranoia and fear works.

I disagree…

Fear is the most powerful of emotions.

People didn’t vote for Obama because they are happy and things are good. They are fearful of losing their jobs, they are fearful of the economy, they are fearful of not being able to pay their mortgage. They are fearful of the future.

Obama offered them “hope”, but make no mistake about it. People are scared. Fear works in droves.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1319 hrs

I’m not ready to write off Sarah Palin yet - maybe not future presidential material, but her drawing power could be utilized by the Republican Party in a useful way.

Remember all the laughing at Howard Dean in 2004 - “the scream” thing? Who disputes the fact that the Democratic party hasn’t done so bad under his chairmanship?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1324 hrs

You are completely right that the writers of this blog can write anything they want. My issue lies more in the increasing close-mindedness of this site.

You can’t be referring to this site, unless you mean Owen’s penchant for certain kinds of *music*.

Maybe you should just avoid the comments.

As for Obama, I think a lot of good will come from his presidency. Unfortunately, I don’t expect much of it to be from his policies. Considering how cantankorous Congress has been over the past two decades, I won’t lose much sleep over him getting a lot done.
Posted by tee bee on November 05, 2008 at 1353 hrs

Accept it, fellow conservatives, the Messiah won.

Accept: Runaway taxes (both federal & state)
Accept: Government-run healthcare fiasco
Accept: Welcoming illegals
Accept: Welfare for everyone
Accept: Massive manufacturing layoffs and shutdowns
Accept: More manufacturing moving overseas
Accept: Runaway taxing & spending
Accept: Downsizing of the military
Accept: Racial preferencing
Accept: Elimination of free speach
Accept: Gunowner’s rights eliminated
Accept: Revamping of the constitution
Accept: Liberal supreme court appointments
Accept: Skyrocketing energy price

The man won. o use the cliche “you get the government you deserve”. Well boys & girls, we deserve it; we let him in by endorsing rinos and reupublican wanna-be’s. Face it, the United States is headed to a fast downward spiral and we let it happen. No more whining. Enjoy.

You get tghe government you derve.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1354 hrs

Please forgive the typos above,
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1356 hrs

you run from every thread when your nonsense is exposed.

I’m kind of fascinated by this narrative you seem to have generated about me. I think it all started when—after having wasted hundreds of well-thought-out words with you—I finally came to the conclusion that there was nothing further productive to say and left. The fact that you seem to have manufactured a full-scale character defect from it is remarkably similar to the way some on the right manufacture character defects out of Democrats in general. And of course there’s usually nothing there. It’s just a convenient distraction from having to actually discuss anything meaningful. (Not generally your strong suit, frankly.)

I’m sticking up for xxpilot, here. Don’t lump his input with Peter’s on this strand.

Peter’s in a class all by himself—a small, pathological class that he occupies with nobody else I know personally. But I think xxpilot earned a rebuke as well when he wrote things like “our country tipped away from freedom and went on the downhill road to socialism.” YMMV, I guess, but I’ll not be apologizing for calling him out on it.

Fear works in droves.

Worked like a charm for Bush.

In all seriousness, though, I’m not naive enough to believe that last night signals a grand-scale repudiation of conservative political thought in America. Obama won because a) he is charismatic, b) he had a consistent message of unity, c) most of his policy ideas on Iraq and the economy resonate with voters. I guess we could add d) McCain’s campaign wasn’t as disciplined, e) lacked consistency, and f) appeared angry and erratic. (I won’t even get into g) Palin.)

What I do think is fascinating is the Republican chatter about where their party needs to go next. Some say that they lost because they acted too much like Democrats. (Not sure how that reasoning works, but okay.) Others more realistically admit that they need to think about “reaching out to” (read: accommodating policy-wise) demographics that they have spent the last 30 years taking a collective whiz on; that they can’t win just by holding onto a few southern states anymore.
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1356 hrs

Accept: Runaway taxes (both federal & state) – Already happened. (Bush raised my taxes more than any other president in my lifetime, presuming I live for another 20+ years at least)

Accept: Government-run healthcare fiasco – Already happened.

Accept: Welcoming illegals - I’m OK with this.

Accept: Welfare for everyone - The last Democrat contracted welfare, so you don’t have much to stand on here. Also, I’ve never heard this in Obama’s platform, so you’re just making it up.

Accept: Massive manufacturing layoffs and shutdowns – Already happened.

Accept: More manufacturing moving overseas – Already happened, would likely have happened anyway.

Accept: Runaway taxing & spending – Uhm, really? You do know that the current President increased discretionary spending more than did LBJ during the Great Society programs BEFORE the prescription drug benefit and the Iraq war, right? This, again, already happened.

Accept: Downsizing of the military – Perhaps, but unlikely.

Accept: Racial preferencing – We already have some, maybe we’ll get more. I doubt it will matter much.

Accept: Elimination of free speach – The biggest restriction on free speech in America is the McCain-Feingold act. Pretending that it is not is idiotic.

Accept: Gunowner’s rights eliminated – This right is protected by the 2nd Amendment. Maybe it will be curtailed a bit, which is admittedly annoying, but it will not go away.

Accept: Revamping of the constitution – You mean, like to eliminate gay marriage, you hypocritical bastard?

Accept: Liberal supreme court appointments – Well duh.

Accept: Skyrocketing energy price – Already happened.

What was your point again?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1426 hrs

I won’t lie: I would have liked to have seen obama with a bit thicker resume, maybe another Senate term or two (he’d still be under 60) with some solid bill sponsorships in his pocket. But you’ve got to strike when the irons hot.

I’m hoping for Clinton without the cigar issues.

spice
Posted by jimspice on November 05, 2008 at 1455 hrs

we deserve it; we let him in by endorsing rinos and reupublican wanna-be’s. Face it, the United States is headed to a fast downward spiral and we let it happen. No more whining. Enjoy.

You get tghe government you derve.

I agree…

If the masses and mass media needs to be fed ideas about freedom and small government, John McCain was none of that.

For too long the republicans have reminded me of the dude on The Price is Right that bids $1 over the highest bid. Republicans have done that. They have followed the democrats (chased the democrats) left figuring that as long as they stay “one step” to the right of democrats, they’ll get all the conservative vote (no matter how much real conservatives complain about liberals like McCain, theres no way they vote Dem) but they’ve planned on getting all the conservative vote and snag enough liberals to win. Bad tactic.

You can’t beat liberals at the liberal game. They will always out-liberal you.

Its time to appeal to the conservative values (and I don’t mean the religious right) I mean limiting the role of government and protecting rights, not aggregating them.

Fear works in droves.

Worked like a charm for Bush

Damn right it did… Did you see all the spineless scardy-cat senators and congressmen (most of whom where democrats including Obama and McCain) running to jump on the bail-out package that was ram-rodded through congress with emergency sessions. Good grief. Fear is right.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1502 hrs

Frankly, I thought the “experience” issue was the most valid criticism against him. Still is, actually.

Clinton? Clinton was a moderate who happened to preside over some nice economic times and a relatively peaceful period in foreign policy. What did he really do for us, though? NAFTA? Welfare reform? He represented a move to the middle for Democrats and it’s one of the reasons he was elected.

I’m hoping that an Obama presidency brings a modicum of sanity to our budget, some more progressivity to our taxation, some redirection for our foreign policy and—finally—some meaningful health care reform. If he does these things he’ll have achieved much more than Clinton was ever called upon to do.
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1505 hrs

more progressivity to our taxation

Scott can you explain what you mean by that? You aren’t the first that I have heard say it. I want to know what you think it means.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1517 hrs

I don’t want people who make over $10 million dollars in income annually to pay a lesser percent of their income in federal income taxes than I do. Under Bush that was (still is?) the case. I would like for corporate America to start actually having to pay some of their taxes instead of avoiding it all. (In spite of a, what, 35% rate, most of them actually pay between 0-5%.)

i’m not asking for the moon, here. I’m asking for Clinton-era levels of taxation on the top 5% of earners. Not outright communism. (Just forestalling the inevitable, breathless, shrill accusation that I and Obama are crazy, radical, socialists. Or something.)
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1528 hrs

Scott,

You do realize that any taxes on corps or especially cap gains, etc, get directly passed on to the consumer, and as a result, are very much a non-progressive tax, don’t you? You do realize those sorts of taxes inversely affect the rich in relation to the poor, especially in regards to ‘gas taxes’ or other taxes on goods, no? You do realize that taxes on corporations lead to more off-shorization and such, right?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1536 hrs

You do realize that any taxes on corps or especially cap gains, etc, get directly passed on to the consumer

Buddy, you do realize that any tax on middle class slobs such as myself get passed directly on to corporate America, from whom I can no longer buy a bunch of goods and services…right?
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1539 hrs

P.S. you do realize, especially, ‘windfall profits’ taxes on oil companies would directly affect small cap ‘401k’ type plans, the vast majority of state and most private pension plans, right? And that will vastly affect the ‘average american’ retirement plan in an extraordinarily negative way, right? That would be because goods and commodities markets are generally pretty stable earning entities, and many managed retirement plans (you know, like the kinds of pension plans most state governments offer their employees, for instance) use those sorts of things as a base.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1543 hrs

Scott:
Far as I remember, nobody was talking about raising taxes on the middle class, so your point is irrelevant.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1546 hrs

Fear works in droves.

Actually, maybe it finally, at long last, is starting to lose its ability to be such an effective tool to work on the minds of voters. At the end, it was the only thing John McCain had, and he played it for all it was worth. Obama’s a socialist! Obama’s a secret Muslim! Obama’s going to surrender! He’ll take away your guns! He’ll force your children to take gay classes!

People finally decided they weren’t going to buy into that nonsense any more. They rediscovered their Americanness, if you will, in that they remembered what this nation has done in the past and what this nation stands for. They remembered “nothing to fear but fear itself” and “the better angels of our nature.”

Personally, I hope fear is gone once and for all as a tactic, because a lot of shameful things were done in our name while we were under its sway.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1559 hrs

well it looks like Scott and Buddy agree that less government spending and lower taxes for everyone results in a better US of A. My only question is how do you pay more in taxes then someone making 10 mil a year?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1600 hrs

nobody was talking about raising taxes on the middle class, so your point is irrelevant.

I think it’s relevant. The McCain campaign ran ads claiming that Obama was going to raise taxes on the middle class.

Look, my point is this: I think it’s a fine idea to tilt the tax burden a little more in favor of the middle class at the expense of the wealthy. I don’t think it’s good for people making $10 mil to pay at a lower rate than I do.
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1612 hrs

it looks like Scott and Buddy agree that less government spending and lower taxes for everyone results in a better US of A.

No. There is a point of diminishing returns on that principle. You can only lower tax rates so far before the costs outweigh the benefits. We may or may not be precisely at that point, but that’s not even my issue. I’m less concerned with the total tax bill that we share than I am about how we’re sharing it.

how do you pay more in taxes then someone making 10 mil a year?

I don’t pay more than them in dollars. I pay a higher percent of my income than they do. or at least I did in the summer of 2005. Read about it in the Times and blogged it. That’s how I remember.
Posted by scott on November 05, 2008 at 1616 hrs

Scott,

If you were genuinely concerned, then you wouldn’t be speaking for raising any sort of tax on corporations as an entity, because those costs will get passed directly on to, ya know, the middle and lower class, disproportionately more than they will the rich guys (as a percentage of income). But, since you are, count me unimpressed at your level of empathy for the small guy.

Look, you guys want to give me an extra 2k in ‘income tax’ back next year—hey thats a good thing (except for the point that I already pay no income tax as it is) Lets cut to the chase, I’ll give you my bank routing info and you can setup a direct deposit to me, directly. Lets cut the gov’t out of the loop, and spread the wealth!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1631 hrs

Actually, maybe it finally, at long last, is starting to lose its ability to be such an effective tool to work on the minds of voters. At the end, it was the only thing John McCain had, and he played it for all it was worth. Obama’s a socialist! Obama’s a secret Muslim! Obama’s going to surrender! He’ll take away your guns! He’ll force your children to take gay classes!

People finally decided they weren’t going to buy into that nonsense any more. They rediscovered their Americanness, if you will, in that they remembered what this nation has done in the past and what this nation stands for. They remembered “nothing to fear but fear itself” and “the better angels of our nature.”

You know I think everyone wants to draw their own conclusions about why people voted how they did. I’ve never really prescribed to the macro-conclusions.

I remember in 2004 all Tim Russert would talk about was the “evangelicals” and the effect “born again christians” had on the race. Whatever… Thats all spin. I think many people want to spin results of elections as edification of their particular values and beliefs. They would like to believe that their individual values and beliefs were verified by the masses.

I think thats rarely the case.

I remember George Bushie saying after the 2004 election that he believed it was a mandate for him to pursue his policies and he was going to spend that “moral capital” or whatever he called it.

I think he was drastically mis-understood what the country wanted from him.

I think its very likely Barack’s impression of what people want from him is MORE based upon what B.O. WANTS to think people want him to do rather than what they really want him to do.

Its my belief that the shift of the 6% or whatever is was “swing vote” in this case is probably not people who intellectually understand the ramifications of public policy or anything like that.

They desprately wanted “change” and they rolled the dice hoping Barack would do “something”.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1639 hrs

Look, my point is this: I think it’s a fine idea to tilt the tax burden a little more in favor of the middle class at the expense of the wealthy. I don’t think it’s good for people making $10 mil to pay at a lower rate than I do.

I heard a comment, I believe it was from John McCain. He said “I can’t believe in this economy we are talking about raising ANYONE’s taxes”

I tend to agree with that.

We need to freeze government spending (cause you know cutting it will never happen) and stop the tax creep.

All these new spending proposals in this economy are not what the doctor ordered quite frankly.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1644 hrs

Fear does work when there is something to genuinely be fearful of.

Obama did subtly use fear to his advantage in this election. People are genuinely fearful that they may lose their jobs, their retirement savings, or their health care. He reminded them of that and convinced the voters he had a plan that offers good strategies to avoid their fears coming true.

McCain did the same thing, but was not as convincing with his plans. Where he erred was in also trying to scare voters into believing Obama is some foreign unknown radical socialist. The voters saw through that and voted against his disingenous brand of fear mongering.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1647 hrs

Re 65” Really? Look at the tax tables from the Clinton years through the Bush years. My taxes went down, down, down. You must have different tax tables than everyone else.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1654 hrs

Re #65 - Really? Look at the tax tables from the Clinton years through the Bush years. My taxes went down, down, down. You must have different tax tables than everyone else.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1657 hrs

Re #65: For each “already has”, it will get worse. Re: “Dumb Bastard” comment, you’re showing your true colors.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1700 hrs

bajaskier, i did not write the words “dumb bastard,” I wrote “hypocritical bastard.” Of course, your inability to correctly read this makes the case for the former, I suppose.

Second, the only way to cut taxes is to also cut spending. Anything else is merely a tax deferral, which will result in higher taxes at some point. Raising spending, as Bush did in spades, raises taxes.

(Before you mention the Laffer curve just understand that it doesn’t say what you think it does. Cutting taxes only raises government revenue in certain limited circumstances. Regan’s cut on the top marginal rate was very likely one of these, but any cut now will almost certainly not be. The Laffer curve merely states that tax cuts are not as expensive as their gross figures, and tax hikes are more expensive than their gross figures, due to the incentives created through tax policy. Aren’t you glad I saved you from embarrassing yourself?)

While the market (and most economists) are smart enough to figure this out, most people are not.

The “tax cuts” that you saw were illusory. They were loans, which will have to be paid back by you, me, and everyone else, likely from the poisition of a higher marginal tax brackett.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1720 hrs

Some light reading:
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1724 hrs

xx, you’re right; people desperately wanted change, and getting rid of fear-based elections/policy-making is just a small part of it. I’m not so sure casting a vote for Obama is just a “roll of the dice” as far as getting that change, though; I’d say it’s a pretty sure bet that it will be a fundamental change from the Bush administration, wouldn’t you?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1730 hrs

1) While I certainly agree that one of ways to cut taxes is to cut spending, The Messiah is boating of all his increases in spending rather than cutting.

2) Hypocritical bastard” or “dumb bastard”, you are STILL showing your true colors.

3) You specifically said “Bush raised you taxes”. Not true if you look at the tax tables.
If you use your indirectly raising taxes via increased spending logic, then Oboma is raising taxes by promising refunds to those who don’t pay same.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1741 hrs

Not true. We should dispense with the rumor that poor people do not pay taxes. Poor people do not pay INCOME taxes. As far as Macro concerns go, this is hair splitting in the extreme. Until the tax burden on the poor is exceeded by some tax credit, said tax credit is not appropriately called welfare.

If you seek to simultaneously defend the Consitution and use consitutional amendments to deny certain rights to American citizens, then you are a hypocritical bastard. I’m not sure how anyone can even argue the point.

Obama may very well raise my taxes, but he has not as of yet. If he increases spending even more, you will find me back here whining about it. I don’t really like Obama. My problem is that most of you conservative types have been putting up with - nay - endorsing the types of behavior that Obama will shortly engage in, until it was Obama, and not Bush, who became the actor.

That, by the way, makes hypocrites of most of you. I, at least, don’t like any of these policies regardless of the figurehead.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1756 hrs

When referring to the Constitution and denying rights, and I am assuming you mean the gay issues; I really could care less what gays do in the privacy of their own home. To pretend gay is “normal”, well no, it isn’t; Tab A does not fit into Tab A so to speak. Remember the Constitution was written by Christians whether you like it or not. I was referencing gun rights; i.e. denying my right to arm/defend myself.

Under Obama’s plan, the estimated 40% who do not pay income taxes would receive refunds. Don’t know how he’ll pull this off.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1824 hrs

Time out PaulNoonan, I have not endorsed the Bush spending and will not endorse the Obama version either.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 1836 hrs

Who did you vote for Noonan?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 2025 hrs

I’m guessing Jay.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 05, 2008 at 2102 hrs

bayaskier

As a gay man let me assure that tab A and tab A do indeed match, and play time is great. To even pretend that it is not normal means that you have a very limited scope of the world, and must have been unpopular as a kid. I know all my friends as a kid played alot with other tab A’s long before we knew where we lined up on the gay/st8/bi thing.

So you may think that denying rights is cool, but Obama proved last night that civil rights are always to be fought for, and when won are wonderful.

So the fight goes on.
Posted by Gregory on November 05, 2008 at 2303 hrs

Keep on hoping but I guarantee the fecal matter will hit the fan after inauguration day. There is always some crisis that happens not long after a new president is elected. Remember that 9/11 happened the same year that “Dubya” was inaugurated. Look at your history books and you will see this “trend” with prior presidents. That is all the proof you need to essentially foresee a possible future “terrorist event”, albeit a false flag one.

Obama’s VP Joe Biden last month told an audience in Seattle:

“We’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

You’ve seen the commercials about that, and it was on the news nationally prior to the McCain ads, so it was not something McCain just made up.

Colin Powell knows something will happen sometime around the 21st or 22nd of January, the days right after inauguration day, he stated this on Meet the Press recently, and I quote:

“The problems will always be there, and there’s going to be a crisis come along in the 21st or 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.”

here is the link to that transcript on MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27266223/

Keep in mind that Colin Powell endorsed Obama, so he wasn’t just blowing smoke to scare people away from voting for Obama.

And Trilateral Commission co-founder and top Obama advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski has also stated this on CNN only days ago (see links) http://www.infowars.com/?p=5708
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0811/02/fzgps.01.html

So be prepared. Keep this in the back of your mind so that when the big event does happen and it’s all over the news, you will see that Obama is being set up!!!
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 0217 hrs

“When referring to the Constitution and denying rights, and I am assuming you mean the gay issues; I really could care less what gays do in the privacy of their own home. To pretend gay is “normal”, well no, it isn’t; Tab A does not fit into Tab A so to speak. Remember the Constitution was written by Christians whether you like it or not. I was referencing gun rights; i.e. denying my right to arm/defend myself.”

Wait, what? It doesn’t even matter whether or not being gay is “normal.” Something doesn’t have to be “normal” to be free from government oversight. Being gay doesn’t harm anyone, so there’s no reason the government should oppress it. It’s not something that people choose, so doing so is oppressive and cruel.

Regardless of what I like, the Constitution was not “written by Christians.” There were a few of them, but not all and not even close to a majority. Thomas Paine and Ethan Allen were undoubtedly non-Christian diests. Patrick Henry, Sam Adams and John Jay were without a doubt Christians. But it gets muddy when it comes to some of the most important ones. Ben Franklin, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and James Monroe were all something closer to Unitarian. Some scholars use the term “theistic rationalists” to describe the guys in this last group. Jefferson and Adams rejected the notion that Jesus was divine, but thought he was a cool dude. The other guys in that list were on board for some aspects of Christianity but rejected some other, notably the trinity.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1057 hrs

The choice question is one gays would do well to stay away from. It can only have a bad ending. The constitituionality argument is the one to make.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1109 hrs

It’s not something that people choose, so doing so is oppressive and cruel.

I feel kinda strange mostly agreeing with jijawm…

Whether or not they choose to be gay isn’t really important in my view. Same as whether or not it’s “normal”. It’s nobody else’s business where I choose to put my “Tab A”, especially not the government’s.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1132 hrs

Re #95:
Please refer me to the first natural gay pregnancy/birth and I will rescind Tab A not fitting in to Tab A (or Slot B not fitting into Slot B for that matter).

Get over yourself. If you learned to READ as well as you protest, I said do what you want to do, enjoy yourself, fall in love, be passionate, but please don’t tell me it is natural or normal unless you can illustrate above.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1236 hrs

I drank some water 10 minutes ago and id didn’t result in a pregnancy or birth. Does that mean that drinking water is not “natural”?
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1247 hrs

A couples ability to reproduce has absolutely nothing to do with the rights entitled to them. Should sterile hetero married couples be prohibited from obtaining the rights of reproducing married couples?

The government shouldn’t be in the marriage business at all. Any two consenting adults joined in a civil union should be entitled to the rights of any other two concenting adults joined in a civil union. Acknowledgement of marriage should be left to the non-governmental communities couples wish to be involved in.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1249 hrs

Ok, with all this talk, Tab A fitting into Tab A is known as “docking”. It’s not my thing, but I’m not going to impose my feelings on the subject to anyone else, and it’s not the responsibility of the government to do so either.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1256 hrs

Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

We’re getting off election subject anyway.

Enjoy.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1323 hrs

#100 clearly shows why many have long argued that civil rights should not be put up for a vote, as if it were not anymore important than a school bonding issue.

I am so tired of breeders telling me that my rights are less important than those who can pop out babies. That has nothing to do with the basis for wanting and needing full civil rights.

I agree with #102, but would want one term or word to apply to all such ‘unions’ be they gay or straight. Words matter and convey much meaning, so one common term would be best.
Posted by Gregory on November 06, 2008 at 1330 hrs

Be careful with the pig analogies. Obama got himself into trouble using one.

You can interpret who is the pig a couple of different ways.
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 06, 2008 at 1405 hrs

Pig, in this case means “someone/something not capable of undersatanding or acting upon the concept presented to them”
Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 07, 2008 at 0926 hrs

The writing is on the wall.

We fell asleep as a nation.

This country was hijacked from within. We let it happen.

It started at least 30-40 years ago, with extreme liberal educators creeping, sneaking into the classrooms, feeding propaganda kool aid to the kids, who knew no better.

Most of the kids were raising themselves in our country with t.v., video games and running the streets because parents (if there were 2 parents) were either working or not available.

Now we have a generation of misguided youth, who have seen the hypocritical examples not only in their personal lives, but by watching the debauchery from Hollywood against conservatives.

GOP needed to lose. It will teach all of us, a lesson…Wake Up!

We are losing our morals, values, natural affections and our country.

A shaking up was necessary to cut to the core of the mindset, the great deception, that has covered our nation like the Black Plague.

I am disappointed in McCain. I have always had the highest esteem for him.

I think the pivotal moment was when he “rebuked” the citizen who called Obama a terrorist.

McCain praised Obama.

The biased main stream media has not let up on smearing Palin. The only one in my opinion, between all of the candidates, who has Integrity.

Where has McCain’s voice of rebuke been? He praised her when it was getting him leverage. Where is he now?

Talk about mixed messages!

The silence in the crowd was very telling and you could hear a pin drop.

I knew then, he lost the election.

It was his poorly inapt campaign who put the propaganda out there, which started the avalanche of suspicion, against Obama.

Of course I am glad it came out. I did my due diligence on the Pres Elect.

Elect? It was given to him. It was the most corrupt campaign I have ever known of and makes Watergate look like kids play.
Posted by 2BlueStarMom on November 09, 2008 at 0925 hrs

#108….there is another way to look at the election than how you view it of course. Welcome to the 21st century.

The Democrats have built what looks like a coalition they can ride for 20 or 30 years,’ said Simon Rosenberg, head of the pro-Democratic group NDN, which has spent millions of dollars targeting Latino voters. Obama’s winning coalition, some Democrats said, could mark a turning point in history: Republicans can no longer achieve an electoral college majority with their decades-old strategy of winning whites in the South and conservatives in the heartland. Now, Democrats have a path through the Rocky Mountains and even some states in the old Confederacy.”
Posted by Gregory on November 09, 2008 at 1256 hrs

#109

“Change”

Yes, this gives “American Idol” a whole new meaning.

Clinton played the saxophone, among other things and O knows how to “break it down” dancing.

That is way cool. We are electing politicians for their charisma, hollywood vetting and talents, but not their record.

O’s “dancing” around issues and failure to be truthful or answer allegations, was just what the 21st Century needed.

More ignorance.

The media… or the DNC, for that matter… having the chutzpah to dictate to the McCain campaign vetting criteria and standards, strikes me as petty, vindictive (for being left out of the info loop, of course), and above all, hypocritical.

Did anyone delve into the DNC vetting of Obama?

Did the party leadership call personal friends (Rev. Jeremiah Wright) and fellow community organizers buds (like William Ayers)?

Did they bother to try and check into Obama’s experience on education, like the Chicago Annenberg Challenge?

The man could not get security clearance to clean toilets in the White House. Perhaps a “few” steps were missed doing the Obama Shuffle while everyone turned their heads, because he is so totally Rad?

So, who “vetted” him?

Lation’s, southerners, blacks?

So this was about race after all?
Posted by 2BlueStarMom on November 09, 2008 at 1402 hrs

BHO and his coalition, want to “spread the wealth”

I think a nice gesture to ring in the “21st Century” would be giving the tax payers the 700 billion dollars to get out of debt, and start their own business’s.

This would enable us to feel vindicated with the “huge” tax burden that is going to be hanging around our necks for the next 20-30 years.

While they’re at it, get rid of the electorial vote, lobbyist and greedy, crooked politicians.

Yep, Pelosi, Franks and the rest of the coalition along with their “one” can pull the rabbit out of the hat for this one.

I bet that would really bring harmony for all races.
Posted by 2BlueStarMom on November 09, 2008 at 1423 hrs

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama

Show all recent comments

September 2010
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30

Total Entries: 17560
Total Comments: 112292
Total Trackbacks: 1069
Most Recent Entry: 09/02/2010 03:03 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 09/02/2010 04:38 pm
Total Members: 9748
Total Logged in members: 7
Total guests: 94
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 09/02/2010 04:46 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm

Current Logged-in Members: crusher Owen Rich2 Steve-O steveegg the_bender Wendy

Syndication: RSS 2.0 | Atom

Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).