I really like Krauthammer. He never smiles.Teal wrote:For all the 'Bush Doctrine' witch hunters...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... inionsbox1

Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
I really like Krauthammer. He never smiles.Teal wrote:For all the 'Bush Doctrine' witch hunters...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... inionsbox1
Yeah, I do, too.JackDog wrote:I really like Krauthammer. He never smiles.Teal wrote:For all the 'Bush Doctrine' witch hunters...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... inionsbox1
I don't see it as a big deal but she didn't know what Bush doctrine was. I didn't either. She responded, as if the term meant general policies of George Bush, and that's exactly the way anyone who wouldn't know the specifics would answer. If she knew that there are multiple terms she would most certainly take the opportunity to show her wit and ask which terminology Gibson was using because there are multiple meanings of the term. It was a hostile interview, and she would have loved to show off her foreign policy credentials, given a chance. No big deal, though.Teal wrote:For all the 'Bush Doctrine' witch hunters...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... inionsbox1
I didnt see it I was playing hockey...but I had no idea what it was.Teal wrote:Yeah, I do, too.JackDog wrote:I really like Krauthammer. He never smiles.Teal wrote:For all the 'Bush Doctrine' witch hunters...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... inionsbox1
LOL, I love that. They called her "good looking" and she is proving them wrong every day. LMAOTheHiddenTrack wrote:Raising the intellectual bar.
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q-hYslkDqBw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>
How about it! Where have all the thoughtful, erudite campaign commercials gone? I long for the days when campaign ads were 22 minutes long with deep analysis of the candidates' relative positions and sprinkled with witty reparte reminiscent of the Algonquin Round Table shot with cinematography to rival Bergman.TheHiddenTrack wrote:Raising the intellectual bar.
This, when Obama's new ad charges 'he ADMITS he doesn't know how to use a computer'. Yeah, that's about the issues, Barry. Way to go.MACTEPsporta wrote:LOL, I love that. They called her "good looking" and she is proving them wrong every day. LMAOTheHiddenTrack wrote:Raising the intellectual bar.
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q-hYslkDqBw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>
Something interesting from that article.FatPitcher wrote:USA Today is weirdly off message: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/e ... over_N.htm
It's odd to see the the Democrats doing a suicide run on religion. I don't think it will play well across the country and will come off as being hostile to religion in general. I suspect that many of them can't believe a genuinely religious person would not want to make their beliefs and morals law. I further suspect that the reason for this is that they themselves have spent a lifetime trying to make their own beliefs and morals law and thus think that all politicians do so.
Palin dubbed her plan "Alaska's Clear and Equitable Share." Oil company profits are taxed at a 25% base rate, up from the previous 22.5%. The tax rate rises 0.2% for each dollar the price of oil exceeds $52 per barrel.
The state's coffers are brimming, and Palin and the Legislature this month are sending $1,200 checks to every Alaskan, on top of $2,069 each will receive as part of the annual slice of state oil and gas revenue. Palin also suspended the state's gasoline tax for a year. Oil and gas royalties make up 85% of state revenue in Alaska, which has no income or sales tax.
Oil executives said the law amounted to a $6 billion tax increase this year and criticized it on the same grounds that McCain and Republicans have opposed efforts by congressional Democrats to repeal federal tax breaks for oil producers. They said it would cost jobs and reduce investment in exploration.
I've held the belief that the media drives the negativity. It's not that they also feed off of it.RobVarak wrote:How about it! Where have all the thoughtful, erudite campaign commercials gone? I long for the days when campaign ads were 22 minutes long with deep analysis of the candidates' relative positions and sprinkled with witty reparte reminiscent of the Algonquin Round Table shot with cinematography to rival Bergman.TheHiddenTrack wrote:Raising the intellectual bar.Where have you gone Lee Ayers?
Seriously, every time I see some snivelling talking head unload a steaming pile of, "Americans are tired of the bickering and negativity," I want to treat my TV like Palin treats a wolf. In addition to being an affront to thinking people everywhere, this sentiment ignores history and human nature. We want blood. And we should expect candidates to pound on each other to determine the highest elective office in the nation.
Americans can somehow find it entertaining to watch "normal" people starved beyond comprehension piss in each other's breakfast cereal in order to win a reality show, but they turn into New Yorker cartoon characters dropping their monacles at the prospect of grown men accusing each other of having unfair tax plans![]()
---Edit. HT, I wasn't directing the second part of that diatribe at you...it's just something I have to get off my chest every election cycle. LOL
The investigation also concluded that several of the officials “frequently consumed alcohol at industry functions, had used cocaine and marijuana, and had sexual relationships with oil and gas company representatives.”
The investigation separately found that the program’s manager mixed official and personal business. In sometimes lurid detail, the report also accuses him of having intimate relations with two subordinates, one of whom regularly sold him cocaine.
wco81 wrote:People said the administration was in bed with the oil industry.
But that was suppose to be a metaphor.
It's like a mini-UN in Denver!Feanor wrote:Has this come up in this thread yet?
Sex, Drug Use and Graft Cited in Interior Department
Probably the best bit:
The investigation also concluded that several of the officials “frequently consumed alcohol at industry functions, had used cocaine and marijuana, and had sexual relationships with oil and gas company representatives.”
The investigation separately found that the program’s manager mixed official and personal business. In sometimes lurid detail, the report also accuses him of having intimate relations with two subordinates, one of whom regularly sold him cocaine.
Whoa!!! That what McCain looked like at 46? That's two years younger than Obama is now. Whoa!!!Teal wrote:Here's the great intellectual high bar standard:
Might want to be more careful (again) about what you say, Barry-wow, this is getting to be a real theme
Id say its a bit of both...One of the reasons I didnt like the pick of Palin.JRod wrote:
I've held the belief that the media drives the negativity. It's not that they also feed off of it.
You try being stuck in solitary confinement while being tortured for 5 years and we will see what the f*** you look like.MACTEPsporta wrote:Whoa!!! That what McCain looked like at 46? That's two years younger than Obama is now. Whoa!!!Teal wrote:Here's the great intellectual high bar standard:
Might want to be more careful (again) about what you say, Barry-wow, this is getting to be a real theme
Drudge has had this running for a while: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080911/D934QAUG4.htmlXXXIV wrote:You try being stuck in solitary confinement while being tortured for 5 years and we will see what the f*** you look like.MACTEPsporta wrote:Whoa!!! That what McCain looked like at 46? That's two years younger than Obama is now. Whoa!!!Teal wrote:Here's the great intellectual high bar standard:
Might want to be more careful (again) about what you say, Barry-wow, this is getting to be a real theme
I appreciate the sentiment, 34, but I've seen pictures of McCain when he came back from Vietnam and years after that, and he looked just fine. Very good looking fellow, I might add. So why don't you go bark up another tree now.XXXIV wrote:You try being stuck in solitary confinement while being tortured for 5 years and we will see what the f*** you look like.MACTEPsporta wrote:Whoa!!! That what McCain looked like at 46? That's two years younger than Obama is now. Whoa!!!Teal wrote:Here's the great intellectual high bar standard:
Might want to be more careful (again) about what you say, Barry-wow, this is getting to be a real theme
So what was all that whoa whoa bullshit?...Who the hell are you kidding?MACTEPsporta wrote:I appreciate the sentiment, 34, but I've seen pictures of McCain when he came back from Vietnam and years after that, and he looked just fine. Very good looking fellow, I might add. So why don't you go bark up another tree now.XXXIV wrote:You try being stuck in solitary confinement while being tortured for 5 years and we will see what the f*** you look like.MACTEPsporta wrote: Whoa!!! That what McCain looked like at 46? That's two years younger than Obama is now. Whoa!!!
Try phrasing the question a little better next time, maybe someone will dignify it with a response.XXXIV wrote:So what was all that whoa whoa bullshit?...Who the hell are you kidding?MACTEPsporta wrote:I appreciate the sentiment, 34, but I've seen pictures of McCain when he came back from Vietnam and years after that, and he looked just fine. Very good looking fellow, I might add. So why don't you go bark up another tree now.XXXIV wrote: You try being stuck in solitary confinement while being tortured for 5 years and we will see what the f*** you look like.
Who the heck are you kidding sir?MACTEPsporta wrote:Try phrasing the question a little better next time, maybe someone will dignify it with a response.XXXIV wrote:So what was all that whoa whoa bullshit?...Who the hell are you kidding?MACTEPsporta wrote: I appreciate the sentiment, 34, but I've seen pictures of McCain when he came back from Vietnam and years after that, and he looked just fine. Very good looking fellow, I might add. So why don't you go bark up another tree now.
Much better, still ways to go, though. I am not kidding anyone, he looks very old to be 46 in the video. It cannot be attributed to being POW, at least not directly since he was still a good looking chap when he came back from war and a few years after that. That horrible combover is to blame I think, and the glasses don't help. Anyway, he looked at 46 as he does now at 72. Bad news then, good news now.XXXIV wrote: Who the heck are you kidding sir?