Salon.com, part of Salon Media Group (OTCBB: SLNM), often just called Salon, is an online magazine, with content updated each weekday. Liberal politics of the United States is its major focus, but it covers a range of issues. Salon's headquarters are located west of downtown San Francisco, California.

Responding to the question "how far do you go with the tabloid sensibility to get readers?", former Salon.com editor-in-chief David Talbot said:

"Is Salon more tabloid-like? Yeah, we've made no secret of that. I've said all along that our formula here is that we're a smart tabloid."

More liberal garbage....

"You can lead a Liberal to a tabloid, but you can't make them think."

Anyone that believes something from that site needs counseling! I love the phrase, "though he no longer has the DOCUMENTATION". Now, there is documented proof of Obama receiving ALOT of money from Freddie and Fannie, along with many other dems. And doesn't he have someone working on his campaign from there? And wasn't Barney Frank overseeing one of them? Love your unbiased research there, Main!

The Greek columns and the stadium were paid for by the Party not the Obama campaign. Same as when the Republican Party paid for the Greek columns for Bush at the 2004 convention.

2004 GOP convention stage

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110263/Battle-Congress-Suddenly-Looks-Competitive.aspx

wheeljc's Story Link

-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Obama has raised million in 5-10-50 and 100 amounts from millions.
Dems are signing up new voters 2 to 1 over republicans.

The conventions gave each a bounce and now it's according to most polls all even.

Polls are nice but are missing a lot of potential voters especially the younger ones who have no land line phones.

The DNC pays for the convention, the stadium, the decoration,,, sounds like you've had a dose of republican talking points today...

He is far more ready to lead the USA than you give him credit for.
Then again if we spread falsehoods some will actually believe it.

A reasonably prudent person would have some serious reservations about McCain being able to complete his term, leaving an adorable hockey mom who can blow out a moose's brains as the POTUS. The concern of this reasonably prudent person is that the Republican party has lost any and all respect it may have had for the office of the POTUS, as indicated by the members of the party who are respectable leaders being ignored, and exploiting an old man in bad health, physically and mentally, and a political neophyte as their candidates.

"I can't wait until tomorrow, because I get more lovable every day."

(if you include that refueling stopover)

-------
"You can lead a Republican to the truth, but you can't make him think."

Seems like you stay very busy these days scouring every newpaper, blog, etc for something anti-Palin. Why not spend just one day doing the same for Obama? You might be surprised at what you would find, or would you?

there really is no dirt on Obama..
even look at the crap about Ayers .. who is now a distinguished professor.

William Charles "Bill" Ayers (born 1944) is an American Distinguished Professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He is most well known for his violent radical activism in the 1960s and 1970s and his current work in school reform and educational curriculum and instruction. In 1969 he co-founded the militant radical left organization Weatherman active during the 1960s and 1970s and was one of its top leaders.

He was a social activist in his time as was our man Jesus..

Barak Obama was about 8 years old in 1969..

Arabic social activists? WOW!

William Ayers is a TERRORIST plain and simple and he should be in Jail. "Violent Radical Activism?" So that's what we call Terrorist bombings?

Barak Obama was about 8 years old in 1969..
So what?

So lets follow that Logic. Charles Manson killed a bunch of folks in 1968. I was less than 2 years old. Using OBAMA's logic, he really isn't a murderer because it happenned 40 yrs ago.

Is OBAMA going to carry that logic into office is he going to consider al Qaeda an "Activist group" because it has been 7 years since they bombed us.

Two things should SCARE people when they think about OBAMA becoming President.
1. He has ZERO experience leading ANYTHING. He's never led a committee, a business, a town...NOTHING! So what makes him this GREAT leader that all the mindless minions think he is?

2.Your Taxes are gonna double. He has all these incentive programs for Alternative fuels, and work training, and various other assistance programs. Where do people think the money is going to come from. Its coming from US the TAXPAYERS!

People get your heaads out of your Arses and think....OBAMA does not have AMERICAN'S Best interests at heart!

William Ayers WAS A TERRORIST 40 years ago. He is now a University Professor and still a community activist. PEOPLE CHANGE, well enlightened ones do.

Obama was 8 years old when Ayers was a radical,, does that mean Obama was a student radical by meeting the goy some 25 years later ?

Not Obama's logic - I am just refuting what i hear all day every day from the right wing spin machine.

EXPERIENCE leading did Regan lead anything ? Nixon ? Kennedy ?
LBJ ? they were politicians .. What has McCain led ? Where is his great executive experience?

My taxes are gonna double? More spin unless YOU make more than 200K YOUR Federal taxes are NOT going to go up .. You also may have not noticed but when Federal Taxes go down and we are at war spending $365,000,000. PER DAY ... WE ARE BORROWING MONEY AND INCREASING THE DEBT EVERY DAY.

WIND DOWN THE OCCUPATION of Iraq, bring most of the troops HOME.
Rebuild and Re Equip our military.

My head is not up my .... and I am thinking Obama is FOR THE PEOPLE

W - Shooter, Grampy McSame AND Caribou Barbie ARE FOR THE FAT CATS they could care less about Americans. They legislated the deregulation of oil, energy, banking both consumer and investment, medicine and pharmaceuticals all GOOD FOR YOU right ?

In one post you support Obama who has an ex Weatherman friend you compare to Jesus and in another you state that Christians killed your wife's relatives. Are you saying you don't like your wife, she didn't like those relatives, Jesus wasn't a Christian or are you just brain dead from supporting Obama?

my reply was to a statement that read
"No Christian wants to kill Jews because they are Jews".

I reminded that writer that Germany a nation composed primarily of Christians committed mass genocide of Jews exactly for that reason in 1938-1945.
The Nazis and Adolf Hitler are commonly thought of as representing the antithesis of Christianity and Christian values. If that's true, why did tens of millions of German Christians adore Hitler, join the Nazis, and participate in the Holocaust (among other atrocities)? Hitler and the Nazis promoted a Christian nationalism, anti-communism, anti-Semitism, and return to traditional values which most Christians appreciated. The Nazi party platform specifically endorsed 'positive' Christianity.

Intolerance is everywhere and it can happen again.

"Righteous Among the Nations" or "Righteous Gentile" is the name given to non-Jews who aided and saved Jews during the Holocaust. They are people who had the courage to care for others, and most certainly risked their lives for the sake of what was right. There were Righteous Among the Nations in every country under Nazi occupation; in total about 14 000 people. Some ask the question why so few became Righteous Among the Nations, while others ask why so many?

As far as my wife and her relatives, I find your reference repugnant and classless as is most Republican humor. Such as John McCain's Gorilla raping a blonde joke.

were terrorist bombers but I don't believe Jesus was.

of the SDS in 1969 Apart from an apparently accidental premature detonation of a bomb in the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion which killed three of Weatherman's own members, no one was ever harmed in the extensive bombing campaign, as WUO issued warnings in advance to ensure a safe evacuation of the area prior to detonation.

My point is to tie Obama into to do with this radical organization when he was 9 or 10 years old is misleading the public.

These people were radicals and activists - that my brother is what Jesus was.. like it or not Jesus would be a liberal today.

"Why not spend just one day doing the same for Obama?"

I have. And I agree with him, and his stand, on most of the important issues that are most critical to our country (Iraq, foreign policy, domestic and social issues, economy, education, energy).

My "scouring" the internet for information on McCain's ludicrous pick for his VP is the fact that nothing was known about this person and the vetting has been left to the media, bloggers and the general public. I actually believe it is IMPORTANT to know about a possible VP, who may be an integral part of ANY administration, and also to know WHY McCain chose her. His choice for VP still brings into question his judgment, which I and many other voters, believe is distorted.

It IS unfortuntate, for all of us as U.S. citizens, to find out that McCain's choice for VP is extremely underwhelming. Although she appeals to a great deal of voters who can identify with her small-town, right-wing values, she brings absolutely nothing to the table as far as leadership or a positive vision for the future of our country.

You can continue to sit on the fence and be critical of what other bloggers post here, or on any other site, however, I have yet to see you take a stand, on either side really. You seem like a very nice person, in general, and I've enjoyed interacting with you on Cal's website. But your criticism of my postings leaves me perplexed, as I've only posted items that turn out to be true, as shown in many articles and news outlets. I guess I could be posting crap from the Enquirer and if I was, maybe your critique of me would be more valid.

Would this type of posting be more fitting?:

"Palin Family"

-------
"You can lead a Republican to the truth, but you can't make him think."

Not to be missed - he even describes our own Lynn Westmoreland to a T!

http://cavett.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/experience-101/index.html

One little disclaimer here about the drivel cut and pasted above...in case you wondered who that unbiased author might be. It was none other than James Fallows. Don't know him??? Well, he was Carter's chief speechwriter (what???? you mean Palin wasn't the first one that had a speechwriter????) for the first two years of his presidency. I guess two years was enough even for him.

"You can't even lead a Democrat to the truth."

She was a Governor, not an ambassador, senator, congressman or foreign envoy. She was charged with running a city and a state. To say that it is "embarrasing", one must also look to the Democratic Presidential candidate for his foreign affairs experience. As a reminder, Obama is not running against Palin. Senator McCain has far more experience in all arenas as compared to the donkeys pick.

“Every time you vote Democrat God kills a kitten.”

Let's not get distracted. If the oldest man to ever run for president wins, she will be a heartbeat away from the boss's seat.

McCain himself said that his first priority in a VP is there ability to lead at a moments notice.

The most important thing to consider as you make excuses for the unprepared Alaskan girl is summed up in an Editorial in the Chicago Tribune. Garrison Keillor wrote,

"So the Republicans have decided to run against themselves. The bums have tiptoed out the back door and circled around to the front and started yelling, "Throw the bums out!" "

That sums up nicely why I won't let em throw sand in my eyes with fake lipstick on pig outrage, and it explains why the "family values" folks have failed to actually demonstrate those values. I'll stick to the issues and vote Obama/Biden.
Good lucj setting the Palin bar low. You'll need more.

I going to take a guess here and say that you can't wait for Britney to make her comeback.

Please tell me why you think that Sarah Palin is "unprepared" to be the VP. I'm just comparing Democratic PRESIDENTIAL candidate to the Republican VICE Presidential candidate. WOW! She has managed a budget for a city and state. She has taken on "Big Oil" and won. She actually worked for a living. She has taken on corruption within her own party. Do you need more?

The Democratic candidate was a "community organizer" and a senator for 143 days. Experience? Riiigghht. So he went to Columbia and Harvard, as have many others. We're still waiting for that senior paper to be published. Again, I'm guessing that your stance is that it is OK for a woman to be a leader, just as long as she is a Liberal/Democrat. I have a feeling that Rosie the Rivitter would disagree with your summation.

As for your quote from the Chicago Tribune...Huh?

“Every time you vote Democrat God kills a kitten.”

"I going to take a guess here and say that you can't wait for Britney to make her comeback."

You're about to vote for her. Conservatives all googoo gaa gaa yet noone can figure out what talent she actually brings.

But I agree with Bill Oreilly and Rush Limbaugh with respect to Britney's family. It is tragic when a mother is blinded by ambition and power and does not keep her focus on her kids. These kids often stray and find themselves in legal trouble or pregnant without spouse or maturity. I agree with Rush and Bill that these types of parents are "pinheads" who are partly to blame for these ills beset upon our society.....

But I digress.

If Palin is ready from her "management" as mayor, Harold Logsdon is 6X as ready here in our metropolis. Heck! Shirly Franklin is OVERQUALIFIED for the job of VP "what exactly does a VP does anyway?"

I do like the sway Sara Palin taxed oil company profits and gave this to citizens. That's why I'm voting for the party that will carry on that tradition.

I do like open govt. Why is Sara claiming a commission of 2 democrats and three republicans is "politically" motivated. Sounds like a whiner. I'll give her a pampers, but I have to say "Thanks, but no thanks" to Sara Palin

"Every time you vote Republican you risk the life of your children."

Vote McCain Warmonger extraordinaire.

Not that facts matter but the Rand Corporation did a study on how terrorist groups actually end. Unfortunately for the warmongers, military action only accounted for ending about 3% of the groups. 83% were stopped by diplomatic methods and inclusion in the political process or by police action. These methods were and are rejected by the Bush administration and by most people blogging here (and for the same reason).

How Terrorist Groups End

“All terrorist groups eventually end. But how do they end? The evidence since 1968 indicates that most groups have ended because (1) they joined the political process (43 percent) or (2) local police and intelligence agencies arrested or killed key members (40 percent). Military force has rarely been the primary reason for the end of terrorist groups, and few groups within this time frame have achieved victory.”

Scroll down and you can download a free copy.

I got to quit this darn web searching and do something more productive.

Anyways, I see some news buzz about clandestine operations just across the border in Pakistan to capture/kill Al Qaeda operatives including Osama.

US finalises three-phased cross-border raids into Pakistan
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Since Bob Woodward knew about these attacks, some before, and a bunch to come, many months ago, I suppose that is why an Indian newspaper wrote and article today saying we were in phas l of 3 phases in such a plan for Pakistani incursions from Afghanistan, and of course other places.

Woodward in his new book just said we were in a secret plan for attacking the Pakastani terrorists (I don't know if Taliban or Al Qieda) and he couldn't say more due to compromising lives.

If Bush can get someone with this--most anyone important--he can go out soon with more of a bang.

What has he got to lose? Ceptin maybe that new bunch of Muslims what just got elected in Pakistan might get itchy! Don't know their variety yet!
Russians are getting mean too with their $100 oil riches!

He (HE) has done enough damage!

Their idea of joining the political process is killing you and inherently their political process is not challenged. Not that facts matter, as you say. What local police and intelligence agency could deal with a threat this large and well financed? If police and intelligence are successful 40 percent of the time by arresting or killing them, yet are not organized enough or able to handle it, what then? Logically, larger groups of police and intelligence called the military.

"The authors report that religious terrorist groups take longer to eliminate than other groups and rarely achieve their objectives. The largest groups achieve their goals more often and last longer than the smallest ones do."

What exactly was/is your plan? Wait them out? Appeal to their human compassion? Pay them off? Send your daddy to negotitate? All of the above??

"Their idea of joining the political process is killing you and inherently their political process is not challenged."

Does that mean anything?

In any event, read the report if you want to know the answers.

By the way, where was your plan? Didn't have one? Still don't? I didn't think so.

I gave you the answer. Why don't you read it? Do you expect to find the answer to global terrorism in a blog? Its more complex than that.

I should have known you'd have to get your ideas from someone else. I asked you what your plan would be. Just like the rest of those liberal talking points regurgitators. Don't hurt yourself by attempting an original thought.

and dismiss them like gum on your shoe.

I give you a study by a non-partisan think tank which has studied every insurgency since 1968 and determined how it was defeated and you refuse to read it because it apparently doesn't conform to you preconceived ideas and now I'm arrogant because I'd rather converse with someone who has at least a minimum understanding of the subject, after I gave it to you on a silver platter?

What if I were to give you a discourse on global terrorism? On what basis could you evaluate it?

That's exactly why I prefaced this blog topic with “facts don't matter”.

Have it your way. Suits me fine.

Supposing I refuse to read it? I'm surprised that with your superior powers you couldn't determine that I did download it. How did you miss that? I see nothing wrong with reading it and I plan to. Does that mean it would really work in this case? Who knows? You sure as hell don't.

All you guys do is whine that the way we are doing things is wrong. When I ask you, with my "preconceived ideas", what you would do that would be a better option I wanted your ideas. But, since I don't have a minimum understanding of the subject in your eyes let's don't bother.

That's the arrogance I speak of. Get over yourself.

“What local police and intelligence agency could deal with a threat this large and well financed? If police and intelligence are successful 40 percent of the time by arresting or killing them, yet are not organized enough or able to handle it, what then? Logically, larger groups of police and intelligence called the military. “

You downloaded a 250 page report and are arguing with me about it after 44 minutes and expect me to believe that you aren't expressing pre-conceived ideas?

As I said, the answers are in the report.

“What exactly was/is your plan? Wait them out? Appeal to their human compassion? Pay them off? Send your daddy to negotitate? All of the above?? “

“By the way, where was your plan? Didn't have one? Still don't? I didn't think so.”

Then:

“When I ask you, with my "preconceived ideas", what you would do that would be a better option I wanted your ideas. “

Right.

Again, your arrogance is amazing. You think your role is handing out reading assignments before you can reply with your thoughts??

I don't care what you think about anything. You made it clear you think I don't even have minimal understanding of this issue.

So let me make this clear. You appear to be an arrogant brat born to a limp-wristed, failed, one-term ex-president. Nobody here (not trying to kiss your butt) cares who your daddy is. Nobody is imtimidated or impressed. You are just one of many bloggers.

Remember the deal??? You don't answer my comments and I don't read yours. You don't answer, I can't read them. Too hard for you??

I invited you not to read my stuff because it bored you. I never agreed not to comment on yours.

For someone who claims to be mean you're awfully touchy. Used to everybody cowtowing to you?

You posted: "Barry said conversation and diplomacy will work. How would that go now? "Pretty please, would you fellows mind stopping with all those car bombs? I know your doctrine mandates killing all non-Muslims and all, but can't we talk this over. Pretty please????"

And I responded with a study showing that was crap. If you can't take it don't dish it out.

"You are just one of many bloggers." Have I ever asked for anything else?

The success of any plan is usually based on the results of the implementation of that plan. If the plan of terrorists is to create havoc and chaos - and to kill Americans - they have succeeded. If the plan of the 'west' was to capture terrorists; restore peace to the Middle East; capture Bin Laden - they have failed. If the plan was to secure the oil pipelines (whatever) - maybe they've succeeded. If a strategy for success is not working - after many years - it's time for a change. Both Democrats and Republicans are now agreeing on this. The world is waiting for the plan that will be successful in stopping terrorist acts; bring peace to the Middle East; and stop the killing of young men and women. Thank God there are intelligent persons who are trying to develop such a plan.

After much thought, I would like to apologize. I did not appreciate your arrogant attitude, but I should not have said that. Especially about your family and that is what I apologize for.

As far as being thick skinned, trust me I am. These blogs are not all intelligent discourse as your friend would like to think. Too bad they aren't. Negativity and name calling appears throughout on both sides. If anybody can't take it, then don't write. That's part of the game and I'll continue the conversations in kind.

That was a very gracious note.

I will soon post my ideas on fighting global terrorism for you.

I look forward to your thorough dissection of it!

Hope you have a nice weekend.

"You are just one of many bloggers." Have I ever asked for anything else?

No.

____________________

"Puddleglum" by Weatherwax (one of the Muddlings).

Jeeves to the Rescue

You know, I don't agree with most of the Repub bloggers on here, however, when there is intelligent discourse between the two sides, say like Jeff and Richard, most of us actually gain knowledge and insight from the discussion, whether we are Dems or Repubs.

Quit being a total p**** and join in the discussion and TRY to contrubute an idea, instead of hurling feces.

-------
"You can lead a Republican to the truth, but you can't make him think."

Reread the thread and see where your buddy Jeff went off the intelligent discourse. Telling someone they don't even have minimal understanding of the issue is intelligent discourse??

Quit being a total p**** and join in the discussion and TRY to contrubute an idea, instead of hurling feces.

Yeah, I'll consider your suggestion. Is that your intelligent type of discourse?? Like your name calling of Sarah that you do on here?? That's intelligent contribution for sure.

what is YOUR plan to address this thorny issue? Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport

Korea we are still involved, Did war stop Communism ? No but bringing them into the modern world and introducing Capitalism sure works.

I was a Vietnam war vet tell me how we WON THAT ?

There are roughly 1 Billion Muslims, Extremists make up a tiny portion of THAT faith, so the solution is death of the total billion including many American citizens ?

Under that philosophy due to extremist violence in Northern Ireland, who do we wipe out all Catholics ? or all the Orangmen ?

Show me a doctrine defeated by a military and not by negotiation.

so the solution is death of the total billion including many American citizens ?

Try to pay attention here. They want to kill US. Not the other way around.

Some of those "extremists" attacked OUR country that day. Maybe we should have had you standing on the towers negotiating that day, huh? I'll bet they would have landed safely instead.

Nobody here advocates war. If they would live their extreme existence without endangering other countries and other non-believers, who would care? Like Christian vs. Jews. Who cares, right? No Christians want to kill Jews because they aren't Christian. That is the difference. Why don't you head over and start the niceties and let us know how that works out for you?

Some extremists did attack our country, we actually had them cornered in Tora Bora and let them get away nearly 7 years ago. Is what happens when you take your eye off the ball.

W said we'd smoke em out of his cave, get em dead or alive, now he claims that he just does not spend that much time worrying about him.

Dana Purina the latest press puppy at the White House even tried to say on Friday we don't care about Bin Laden because we got Sheik Kahlid in Guantanamo and he was the Mastermind behind 9/11. GIVE ME A BREAK -- IF YOU MOVED THE GOAL POSTS ANYMORE, THE STADIUM WOULD BE IN ANOTHER STATE.

No Christians want to kill Jews?
I guess that kind of overlooks the Holocaust, where a nation put 6 million Jews to death for being Jews.

That might have slipped your mind, or you don't believe it happened,
or is ancient history ?

Well I am married to a person who had 55 relatives alive in 1939 that were no longer around in 1945, so let's not talk about a few bad people doing bad things to other people.

When I said "No Christians want to kill Jews" I was speaking present tense. As in, currently it is radical Muslims who want to kill us. Not Christians versus Jews. I wasn't specific that I meant now because I figured most could figure that out and were aware of Hitler and the Holocaust. Obviously, I gave you too much credit.

How do you figure no one wants to kill us right now? You have news that they have decided to back down? Share with us all please.

And speaking of Hitler, remember he, Jim Jones and Charles Manson were all "community organizers" like your hero Barry...

groups are the cause of much of the world's terrorism. Some of these groups have cried out that they want to strike at America and on at least 2 occasions at the World Trade Center they did.

That being said and agreed to, the goal is to find those who will do evil, not condemn all Muslim's as evil doers.

groups exist in the Philippines, Indonesia Pakistan and other countries, as well as Al Qaida.
Sending an Army to quell and quash them does not work.

In some cases they can be brought back into the fold through political negotiations, in other cases they have to be dealt with by small elite military counter insurgency units.

If we'd taken this course in 2001, found Bin Laden and his men, brought them to justice and did not attack a country that had no WMD and NO ties to Al Qaida, just wonder what we'd be talking about today.

Jack you must reside on the set of a reality TV show. Sending an Army has worked (seven years now, it seems). In your defense, small elite military units do, on occasion, work well, but most often they do not(example: 1979 in the Iranian desert: 2003 on the streets of Mogadishu). Political negotiations only seem to delay things. Reality in political negotiations has little or no relevance.
I guess we should have used the "Clinton" strategy of getting Bin Laden(1998). No WMD, that argument has long been lost by those who wished to rewrite history. The same can be said about ties to Al Qaeda.
To adopt you methodology and go out and get only the "bad guys", would you suggest that we first begin by shutting down the Islamic Madrassas that are infamous for spreading hate(you know the ones that teach that it is honorable to shed the blood of infidels)? Let's see, was it not the policy under Bill Clinton that terrorists were to be tried through our courts and were a law enforcement issue? It didn't work throughout the nineties, did it?
Keep it up, you and Nitpicker$ are on the same level.

As I mentioned before, this fight is not aimed at peaceful Muslims. Never has been an attack on just any old Muslim in the world. You discuss rationally when you can, you negotiate when you must, and then you use military units as a last resort. We would differ on the size of these units. Whatever it takes.

My guess is we'd still be talking about this election....your boy king versus our hockey mom.

I choose Brains over beauty. As one can see beauty is fading fast !

There is no doubt that Barry has "brains". I can admit that, but you can't give her her due. You can try to belittle and minimize Sarah Palin all you want. You saying she is just beauty and no real brains (what you are inferring) no more makes it true than most other things you say. That is the way your party thinks and works. Say something enough times and it will be true. There is unfortunately a portion of this country who will believe anything they hear. Target them for best results. Objective people in this country know she is more than just "beauty" or she would not be the governor of a state. I seem to recall that ole Slick Willie was just a governor from Arkansas wasn't he??

I guess we'll see how smart Barry is in the debates. Hopefully (for you) he will have that Popeil Pocket Teleprompter safely in his hands by then.....

That actually is giving her, her due.

There is unfortunately a portion of this country who will believe anything they hear.

Not sure what to make of that ? I was born, raised educated and lived in Massachusetts for 42 years and have lived in Peachtree City the last 16. I have lived 3 years i Germany and traveled to 62 countries (many of them many times). Does this make me objective or from the part of the country that believes everything.

Sara Palin is old news - on the Friday McCain announced her the Bloogers went to work digging. She is now pretty well considered what she is an ambitious politician. Based on her high school yearbook that can be used to see who she gave jobs to after being elected governor a pretty crafty politician.

You guys own her, enjoy her.

As, I said....say as many times as you want that there is nothing to her but her looks. Still doesn't make it true and makes you appear even more dismissive of women. Unless you start commenting on how pretty Biden looks with that new crop of hair plugs. We already know about his "brains" with that bad little habit of plagiarism he has.

Matters not to me where you have lived or visited. You either fit into that group or you don't. I don't really think the number of stamps on your passport would be a determining factor anyway. A person is either gullible or not.

Good grief, grow up. They are all ambitious politicians. They are all crafty politicians. You think Barry didn't hook up some old buddies along the way? That is well documented too. Rezko, et al...

By the way....what is a Blooger? A blogger who picks their nose while blogging? bwaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh....

You said

"No Christians want to kill Jews?
I guess that kind of overlooks the Holocaust, where a nation put 6 million Jews to death for being Jews."

Just where did you get your information that Hitler or the rest of the Nazis were Christian?

Germany was basically "Christian."

It has been said that without Martin Luther and Lenin, there would have been no Hitler!

More Lutherans voted for Hitler than did Catholics, however.

The NAZI members were a mixture of religions who thought the state came before religion. Marin Luther's writings were used by the Nazis in their propaganda to form a German Christian religion.

They also abolished Jewish Traditions.

Hitler earlier did receive Sacraments.
Christians were tolerated as a useful tool later with which to lead.

It is what happens when government and religion are mixed! One or the other are determined to win!

nazi leaders were Christian as well.

Professor Guenter Lewy, author of "The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany" quotes Hitler as saying that he "... regard Christianity as the foundation of our national morality and the family as the basis of our national life."

In Mein Kampf Hitler speaks of the "creator of the universe" and "eternal Providence." He also states his belief that the Aryan race was created by God, and that it would be a sin to dilute it through racial intermixing.

According to Steigmann-Gall, Hitler's reference to God as the "Lord of Creation" and the necessity of obeying "His will" along with several references to Jesus, reveals the infusion of Christianity into his thinking. Other sources also show Hitler's Christian thinking, according to Steigmann-Gall. He notes an unpublished manuscript where Hitler sketched out his world-view with similar Christian references, and he gives as an example a speech on April 1922 where Hitler said that Jesus was "the true God". Finally, Steigmann-Gall gives another example where in a private Nazi meeting Hitler again stated the centrality of Jesus' teachings to the Nazi movement.

She was a MOOSE in Headlights with the Bush Doctrine questions, which he had to ask her 3 times and then actually explain it to her.

She's a hockey mom that's all you need to know..

She also passed a law in Wasila that if your raped you pay for the forensic tests. How'd you like that in PTC Momma someone you know gets raped and goes down to the Police and they do the forensic tests
and then hand them a bill for $1200. for tests that will help the perp get identified and put away ???

Oh in Sarah Palin's world you win twice if you get raped and get pregnant you also have to get to have that child after carrying your rapist's child to full term.

In Sarah Palin's world that baby in you because of rape or incest. Is not your DECISION to make any more it's the government's CHOICE.

I watched the first interview. I tried to be unbiased, but as we all know, our political tendancies color our vision.

I thought Gibson's tone of voice was abhorent. He talked down to her as if she didn't really have the right to take up his time with her selfish decision to be the Vice President.

He asked embarrassing questions. Questions he knew the answer to, but he wanted all of his friends in the media to pat him on the back and say "Way to go Charlie!, you really are a news anchor like Cronkite!".

But when he arrogantly asked her about whether she really, really, really thinks she's ready for the VP slot, I just said screw you Charlie. For God's sake, did he expect her to start crying and say, you're right Charlie, I'm not ready? No, instead, he just wanted to pick on her, to bully her, to talk down to her. But did she flinch? Nope.

The word Hubris came up during the interview. That caused me to think, has Charlie acted this way before in other interviews? Maybe, I'm the one that is blinded by my own politics. If Charlie treats his other interviews in the same fashion, then all is fair.

So I found Charlies interview with Obama, and the word Hubris came up there too. Now, if you want to actually and honestly compare both interviews, then please do. But if you look at this video, at about 3:22 minutes into the tape, you'll see the exchange. Watch the facial expressions when he asks Obama the same question. Tell me if you don't see the "Tingle" go up his spine, when he asks about Obama's hubris.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzecb7Qe6vo

There is no doubt that Charlie's first 10 minutes of this interview proves his arrogant bias and disrespect. Now I wonder if he calms his ass down and asks some more unbiased questions.

and could handle all this?

Come on Richard. You really think Sarah should get a pass because she's a girl?

btw - on another topic...I know you and I, sometimes, see eye to eye on the subject of religion so I hope you're not offended by this song I found on youtube. I thought Sarah could use this as her new theme song, since she can't use Barracuda any longer.

Sarah's Song

-------
"You can lead a Republican to the truth, but you can't make him think."

Peruse Charlie "Good Time" Gibson's questions put to Obama and Palin.

Obama interview:
How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” and breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?

Palin interview:
Do you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically, have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy:
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war?

For example, on the BUSH DOCTRINE, that hit her between the eyes. It hit me hard too. I didn't really know of what he spoke and I thought he chided her for apparently not being as informed as he was.

So I looked it up in Wikipedia, and I scratched my head. What is the Bush Doctrine? Then Charles Krathammer (sic) came out today and reaffirmed what Wikipedia said. He said he coined the term, and that indeed it had been used for four seperate types of actions that were taken by the Bush administration. In addition, there is no offical or real definition, outside of what journalists/commentators penned over time and over differing issues.

So, although it looked like she stumbled, her reply to Charlie was correct. Well no, instead of saying to Charlie, "in what respect?" She should have smacked the liberal crap out of him and asked him what Obama said to the same question. Oops, it seems he didn't ask Obama that question, nor neither did he ever show the kind of aggression and indignation with Obama that he did with Palin. Gibson is an idiot and Sarah politely let him prove that again the liberal media is in the tank for Obama.

So, you mocked her performance, I dare say, most of America saw a different Sarah. Someone who stood up with class and dignity to a bully who had met his match. These interviews helped McCain/Palin by pissing off the undecideds who continue to see the shameful bias of our supposedly "free" press.

Oh, by the way, my Gnostic tendancies doesn't mean I don't find many wonderful qualities in people of faith, whether Christian, Muslim or Jew, but I am confinced that any religion, predicated upon the ignorance of the masses, that plays upon heritage and bigotry to promote itself, and then considers violence an appropriate means to an ends, is beneath contempt, and should be fought until it is crushed.

Regarding your video, I couldn't find any music, but I thought the guilt by association argument you make can be found below as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSemkPChvHo&feature=related

This fellow did have tea and crumpets with your boy king's spiritual advisor. I wonder if they know something we don't know about your Messiah?

There was only one person even remotely qualified to be vice president at the interview and it wasn't Palin.

Conservatives who are scared like you would make the same claim when Barry was interviewed by Gibson. Keep him tethered to that teleprompter....

I suppose you are right---Palin should have been interviewed by Hannity or Limbaugh!

Maybe she will have one more interview?

But Karl Rove knows better than to have his media agents interview her--that would make her out to be one! Notice how I hold up my head with these designer glasses?

Anyway the questions would have gone something like this:

Hannity: Governor, do you consider all republican governors to be qualified to run for VP and be a possible President if required?

Palin: Why, by all means! Can't think of a one!

Limburger: Governess, do you buy BOSE radios? You do? Then you have taste and will make a wonderful figurehead President if needed. Thank you for the interview. Can you leave that husband and daughter in Alaska?

but smarter, more principled, honest and ingenuous than either (any!) of the Democratic candidates. Any ya know what? I'll be perfectly happy if that RINO McCain experiences some incapacitating issue as a result of his advanced age and Sarah becomes POTUS. A thousand times happier than if something should happen to Bush and Cheney and allow that blithering idiot Pelosi to ascend to the throne.

Love all the noise ever since her selection. The Messiah is on the run, trying to catch up, not happy about it one bit. Trying to peddle that empty suit that's been masquerading as a leader, not even possessing the "qualifications" of a Kerry, Edwards or Gore. Run Barry, run.

Have you counted the electoral votes lately?

It will take a miracle for McCain to win.

John may even get more popular votes than Obama but he still can't win---just as Gore couldn't!

Not one vote cast, much less counted. We haven't even had the debates yet.

Go ahead and start measuring for new drapes in the White House. We love that "he still can't win" arrogance. We'll see.

That "miracle" is what you see in your rear-view mirror. Closer than it appears.....

that the more things change the more they stay the same. It is evident that people will not be convinced one way or the other about anything that takes place in this election. When we look over the comments here about the interview, those who believed from the gitgo that Governor Palin was the proverbial "Knight in shining armor" af\re even more convinced now. And those who believed that Governor Palin was 'the devil incarnate" have not changed their view either. The polarization that has taken place in this country has merely widened. When will we, as voters, begin to realize that we cannot continue along this path without ripping the very fabric of democracy to shreds.

I don't have the answer, but I do know that we are rapidly reaching a critical point at which government will cease to represent "the people" and begin to represent only a segment of society.
Which segment it will represent is up for grabs. Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport

From the Great Smokey Mountains.

You are spot on but unfortunately I don’t see it ever getting better it’s only going to get worse.

Wulf

where the heck in the Smokies are you? and why didn't you offer to take me with you?

Glad to see you are staying in the loop and look forward to your insightful and honed comments. Come join us as we remake government and politics. Keep the faith

Democracy is not a spectator sport

We are in the Cherokee NC area, one more week to go before we head back home if we can find some cheap diesel fuel.

This country looks to remain just as divided no matter which candidate wins.

I don’t have the answer, just too much bad blood between the Republicans and Democrats.

Wulf

There isn't an inch of real difference in the parties!

They "say" there is, but there is not!

Conservative republicans = 10 Trillion dollar debt---don't blame congress, it is leadership causing the problem!

Democrats = a war policy----Well throw that one away!

Inflation = always democrats---not any more!

Republicans = good at foreign policy---you must be kidding!

Democrats = helpful to ignorant and poor people = used to be only.

Ran banks with an iron fist = who do you choose?

Has the most corporate crooks = you guess?

Still likes "dribble down" economics = has to be the republicans.

Has destroyed most of our middle class jobs = big sucking sound!!!

Solved the illegal immigration problems = you bet. We are building a fence!

Has put a stop to wasteful medical spending = who did you say?

What is our biggest industry now? Is it health and medicine?

Destroyed our human army and Navy = I remember Colin Powell saying we didn't need many foot soldiers-- we had terrible weapons.

What will the current working generation do for a social security retirement check and medicare? Ahh, they will both solve that with the 401-k accounts---now almost empty buying stuff they can't afford.

So, my friends, as John says, elect me and I will see it happen.
No, says Obama, it will be more of the same.

Not a lot to argue about.

Wulf

Did you catch that Trout?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Yep, I caught four the Mrs. only gives me $20.00 a day fishing allowance it don’t go far at $3.00 lb.

We put them on the grill last night and invited a nice couple that’s parked in the campsite across from us over for dinner.

Wulf

Outstanding!!!

In Cherokee, eh. You by any chance wouldn't be at Happy Holiday Campground? We were there in 02.
------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Nope, but we are not far from it.

Wulf

I agree wholeheartedly with your comment regarding the great divide in our country. It seems as deep, if not deeper, than the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections.

In my opinion, I believe that it is the social issues (abortion, gays, church/state, guns) that divide us the most and that will continue to divide our country. Most everyone, across the nation, has deeply held beliefs regarding these issues and I see each political party exploiting these social issues for their own gain - that's just the way the political game is played. Why else would folks in Kansas and Oklahoma, and throughout middle America, continue to vote against their own best interests of affordable healthcare, secure jobs, investment in roads and infrastructure vs. nation building in Iraq, etc. etc.

Personally, I used to be a one issue voter (pro-choice), however, with the current dismal state of our country, maybe it is time that we try and look beyond the social issues we vote on, or against, for the betterment of the country. Easier said than done, right?

I don't know what the answer is... maybe we need more political parties, for example "The Fundamentalist Party" for the far right and the "Ultra Left Socialist Party" for the far left and let the Repubs and Dems get back to the fundamental roots of their respective parties.

(btw - we missed the gathering on Wed. at Maguire's and will try and make the one in October.... are there any election parties going on Nov. 4??)

-------
"You can lead a Republican to the truth, but you can't make him think."