Of course, you probably DID mean a non-demoninational, non-compulsory moment of silence.
But you had to juice it up to "institutionalized Christian prayer" because you realized how TRIVIAL it would sound otherwise. And how foolish you'd sound getting all worked up about it.
I don't support a Moment of Silence. I don't care about a Pledge of Allegiance.
I'm not a maniac, however, so I don't froth at the mouth at either of these trivial gestures.
20142. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 10:59:59 PM
"Lots of things that black people want would endanger your right to make choices. Ditto feminists. Or any lobby. It's the lobby power that I think should be kept in check."
Like what?
20143. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:00:36 PM
"And no, not a "non-denominational attempt to sneak prayer in the schools through the backdoor.""
If some students pray during their moment of silence, and other students think about sex, what the fuck do you care?
20144. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:01:53 PM
"I'm not a maniac, however, so I don't froth at the mouth at either of these trivial gestures."
My turn to "Laugh." What exactly have you been frothing over for the past fifteen minutes then? Or am I mistaking enthusiasm for your position for frothing?
20145. CalGal - 2/24/2000 11:02:09 PM
Incidentally, I should mention that I also disagree with more of what the RR want than blacks. (although probably not the AARP, and almost certainly not feminists)
But if any lobby group gets an inordinate amount of power, I get concerned.
20146. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:02:57 PM
I'm not talking about a moment of silence. I'm talking about PRAYER in schools.
20147. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:03:38 PM
Arky:
You're the one who equates moment of silence = Theocracy.
I'm laughing at you for it. I'm "frothing" at your absurdity, and asking you to defend it.
YOU made claims about a coming, planned Theocracy. When I seek details, you tell me: "Moment of silence."
20148. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:05:58 PM
"I'm not talking about a moment of silence. I'm talking about PRAYER in schools."
Ummmm... forced prayer? Teachers leading children in Christian liturgy?
How can this happen, exactly, without replacing the Constitution?
20149. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:07:41 PM
Can you name ANY Constitutional scholars-- conservative or whatnot-- who would construe such a scheme as REMOTELY constitutional?
Any?
Any single one at all?
Any conservatives who advocate such a thing?
Any?
Any single one at all?
20150. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:08:30 PM
"You're the one who equates moment of silence = Theocracy."
What?!! Man, you draw some strange parallels from my posts.
"YOU made claims about a coming, planned Theocracy. When I seek details, you tell me: "Moment of silence.""
Where? I said no theocracy, no moment of silence. You injected those two concepts into the argument.
20151. CalGal - 2/24/2000 11:10:15 PM
Arky,
Diversity hiring, requiring that a certain percentage of minorities be accepted to universities, and hey, reparations is far more blatant an income redistribution than vouchers for religious schools. Just for starters. And I forget what it's called when governments are required to hire black contractors.
All of those interfere with personal choice to some extent.
Now, I don't particularly object to these interferences. But I've yet to see a lobby not want more as it gets more power.
20152. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:13:04 PM
"How can this happen, exactly, without replacing the Constitution?"
It happened for years until the SC determined it was unconstitutional, and the RR has been pushing for changes in the interpretation ever since and supporting candidates who give lip service to it. All it takes is a few years of conservative presidents filling a few SC vacancies. Besides that, you're taking one issue of many that concern me about the RR agenda. And since I have work tomorrow, I don't have the time to spend on each one of them that we spent on this one, fun as it's been (rolling eyes and sighing ala A-5).
20153. Indiana Jones - 2/24/2000 11:13:31 PM
The Economist endorses McCain. Several good articles:
20154. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:17:43 PM
"Diversity hiring, requiring that a certain percentage of minorities be accepted to universities, and hey, reparations is far more blatant an income redistribution than vouchers for religious schools. Just for starters. And I forget what it's called when governments are required to hire black contractors."
I don't object to them either, and considering population percentages and distribution, even if I did, it's not the eminent concern the RR is, particularly here, as I said before. AR has become more and more religiously conservative in the past ten years or so, and the trend is disturbing to me.
When the four candidates from both parties emerged I really didn't think it would bother me which of them became president. After seeing GWB's strategy in SC, I don't want him in office, not just out of concern for what programs he might try to implement, but because of his tactics in general.
20155. CalGal - 2/24/2000 11:20:06 PM
Arky,
In the end, I think you're saying the same thing I am--it's the power of the RR you object to, more than their aims. And that's a totally legitimate concern, if you ask me. But if you just acknowledge that, rather than try to make too much of a distinction between African American lobbies and the RR lobbies, you will be spared the wrath of Ace. (g)
20156. CalGal - 2/24/2000 11:21:25 PM
BTW, I totally agree with you re: Bush. I felt the same way, prior to SC. Had no real issue with him being President. Now, I actively don't want him to win.
And the one thing McCain could do to lose my support is pander to the RR.
20157. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:26:35 PM
"In the end, I think you're saying the same thing I am--it's the power of the RR you object to, more than their aims."
No, it's the aims. The problem is that they have the power, at least here, which gives them a good chance of achieving at least some of them. But I do agree, of course, that they're perfectly within their rights to lobby for what they want. So are nihilists, whose aims would concern me as well if they had enough power to promote them in any real way. African-American aims, as they stand now, wouldn't bother me personally if they were realized, even though I agree with you that they would very possibly have an impact.
BTW,
Wrath of Ace is a tempest in a teapot. I've got him wrapped around my finger.;-)
20158. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:27:40 PM
Change "possibly" to "definitely," though I don't know how much on me, personally.
20159. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:33:30 PM
Enjoyed the discussion, folks. See y'all later!
20160. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:33:38 PM
It's okay, of course, for minorities to "force their views" on a helpless majority-- so long as we're talking about the *right* minorities, that is.
Arky would get upset about a Christmas tree in school-- but she's okay with Kwaanza celebrations.
20161. arkymalarky - 2/24/2000 11:35:56 PM
Hahaha. Of course I only care about the minorities who disagree with me, but the RR can do what they want as long as they don't try to legislate it, because as GWB's dear old dad said, you can't legislate morality.
20162. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:37:53 PM
"you can't legislate morality."
Funny. Murder, rape, drug use, gambling... all are "legislated."
I guess what you mean is sodomy. And abortion.
The only two things you care about, apparently.
Not that I don't care about them. Sodomy's great, and abortion is occasionally a necessary evil... and yet I have bigger concerns.
20163. Spudboy - 2/24/2000 11:37:55 PM
Ace:
That series of posts (particularly Message # 20123) is pure revisionism and spin. To wit:
I'm afraid of ludicrous bugaboos of my own invention, ascribing policy positions to my opponents which they have never espoused?
Yes, you are. Unlike Arky. As we shall see.
"I was thinking more along the lines of restricting people's rights to make their own personal life decisions and decide their own religious rituals,"
When did this happen? What bill is this? Can you elaborate?
WRT personal life decisions: It’s called the Human Life Amendment. This is not something that has mere fringe support. It’s explicitly part of the GOP platform:
The unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life.
20164. Spudboy - 2/24/2000 11:38:26 PM
On deciding their own religious rituals? Try the unending campaign to bring back school prayer. This also receives explicit mention in the GOP platform:
We will continue to work for the return of voluntary prayer to our schools and will strongly enforce the Republican legislation that guarantees equal access to school facilities by student religious groups. We encourage State legislatures to pass statutes which prohibit local school boards from adopting policies of denial regarding voluntary school prayer.
You can also look, as even many Christians do, at recently passed GOP legislation aimed at bringing the Ten Commandments back to school walls as yet another effort by religious zealots to force their brand of religiosity down the throats of those who take a different view.
20165. Spudboy - 2/24/2000 11:39:19 PM
"determining that no aspect of an American's life is private, allowing the government to tell people when to pray and what they can do in their bedrooms "
Ummmmm... when did this happen, Arky? Again, what bill has been proposed regarding this?
I’m not sure how much legislation actually makes it to the floor, but you can see above that the GOP espouses laws that in fact tell people when to pray (the only thing “voluntary” about their prayer proposal is that you either get to choose a religion or you just have to sit there while everyone else prays). As I’ve mentioned previously, I am an active, churchgoing Christian. I don’t want someone else telling me, or my kids, when it’s time to pray. Especially not someone at school. Or in any kind of government position.
“what they can do in their bedrooms” is a rhetorical stretch, but let’s face it: Any attempt to outlaw abortion, as the religious-right inspired GOP fervently desires to do, is an intrusion into the personal decisions my wife and I make behind closed doors about when and how we’re going to have children. My position is that it must stay the hell out at all costs, and I will vote against anyone who argues otherwise.
"and with their bodies."
Which is it here-- abortion (killing a baby who also has, yes, "her own body") or drugs?
Um, sorry, but I thought that the law held that the baby does not have a body separate from the mother’s until the third trimester.
Oh, and I note that you call it “killing a baby.” Is that really what you think it is? My God, man, why don’t you do everything in your power to stop it?
20166. Spudboy - 2/24/2000 11:40:36 PM
At any rate, it’s clear that Arky isn’t just imagining this stuff. It’s right there in the GOP national platform. And it’s very much alive and with us in this year's campaign. She sees Ralph Reed up there on TV, helping steer Bush’s campaign. She sees Robertson pull out the big guns to help shoot down McCain in South Carolina. She hears the sermons and the conspiracy theories about how this really is a Christian nation and the separation of church and state is a myth and the Federal Reserve is a secret corporation (that’s one of Robertson’s theories too). Christ, more than you do in your insular little life, she gets to live with all the yahoos and rednecks who take it as a given that the government is just an evil entity out to get them and that only the good Lord JeHaysus is ever going to set this nation right. And she sees every politician in sight pandering to that stuff. You bet your ass it’s real.
20166. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:40:37 PM
I EXPLICITLY mentioned "abortion" in that post, moron. I also mentioned the fact that a mother has a "life decision"; so does an unborn baby. You wish to side with the mother in all cases. That doesn't change the fact that you ARE making a "life decision" for the baby, who will be killed.
And what about:
"I was thinking more along the lines of restricting people's rights to make their own .... religious rituals,"
THAT'S what I was asking about, Froot Loops.
20167. CalGal - 2/24/2000 11:41:48 PM
The reason that African American aims don't bother you in part is because they don't ask for much (although I really think reparations and too much more in the way of AA would be a bad thing). The reason they don't ask for much is because they don't have that much power.
I realize, too, that you have more sympathy with the aims of African Americans than those of the RR. But give any group too much power, and it's hard to maintain the sympathy, even if some of their aims are legitimate.
20168. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:43:39 PM
"Um, sorry, but I thought that the law held that the baby does not have a body separate from the mother’s until the third trimester."
OHHHHH!!! OHHHHH!!! Thanks for telling me, Spud. Then there is no controversy. Because a group of guys made a "ruling." End of story.
Jesus. What's you IQ? You really are dim.
"Oh, and I note that you call it “killing a baby.” Is that really what you think it is? My God, man, why don’t you do everything in your power to stop it?"
It IS "killing a baby." You can play semantic games all you like, and call it a "fetus," but it's a baby. It's killing an unborn child.
Will I stop it? No, I will not, because I do in fact concede that perhaps there are times when euthanizing an unborn infant is better than the collosal problems of an unwanted pregnancy.
But-- you see-- I can call it what it is without hiding behind euphemisms.
20169. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:45:02 PM
Abortion is KILLING AN INFANT.
And I support abortion.
I support, yes, KILLING INFANTS in certain circumstances.
Does Spuddy-Boy? Of course not. He only supports "terminating previable fetuses."
20170. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:45:32 PM
(sounds nicer, you know)
20171. Jonesy - 2/24/2000 11:48:17 PM
Ace- The RR is not a monolithic bloc, but there is a often used argument from the RR that the US is a "Christian nation" or a "Judeo-Christian" one. They wouldn't tear up the constitution, they claim it has always allowed for prayer in public schools, but that liberal activist judges on the Supreme Court have perverted the constitution. They deny the separation of church and state, and read the first amendment as only prohibiting an official national church. This is what some of us are concerned about. Its ok to deny equal protection to gays because God says so. Its ok to legislate the sexual behavior of married persons because God says so. etc.
The folks who are really calling for theocracy are the Christian Identity people. The "mainstream" RR uses "Judeo-Christian" to reassure folks that they aren't ready to stoke up the ovens for the Jews.
20172. Spudboy - 2/24/2000 11:53:53 PM
Well, CalGal, I think there's a major difference between reparations demands or other demands that African-Americans might make, and encoding/enforcing religious beliefs. The former fits well within the tradition of justice and fair play, though one may quibble over the details (like reparations). The latter strikes at the First Amendment, which I'd argue undermines our entire way of life. My concern about the RR isn't merely the quantity of power they possess (I frankly have similar misgivings of the power of multinational corporations and labor unions) but about how they wield it. And I think they wield it in a way that strikes not just at my private life -- which is bad enough -- but at the nation's well-being.
20173. AceofSpades - 2/24/2000 11:55:06 PM
"They wouldn't tear up the constitution, they claim it has always allowed for prayer in public schools, but that liberal activist judges on the Supreme Court have perverted the constitution."
Yes, and they're largely right--with regard to VOLUNTARY prayer.
Did you know you can have a Dungeons and Dragons club but not a Christian Youth Club meet after school at a public hs?
The "Constitution" apparently says so. The Constitution, it seems, not only prohibits the state from promoting religion, but it requires active state hostility-- allowing some groups to meet after school but not religious ones.
"They deny the separation of church and state, and read the first amendment as only prohibiting an official national church."
Well, you're overstating it. They reject active state hostility to religion. And they're right.
There's no "constitutional" argument against vouchers for religious schools, for example. If you can give a voucher to a non-religious school, then you can give one to a religious school. Religion is not to be promoted-- but neither is it to be discriminated against.
THAT'S their argument, Jonesy.
"This is what some of us are concerned about. Its ok to deny equal protection to gays because God says so. Its ok to legislate the sexual behavior of married persons because God says so. etc. "
Please.
20174. Al D - 2/24/2000 11:55:21 PM
Um, sorry, but I thought that the law held that the baby does not have a body separate from the mother’s until the third trimester.It is nice to have a court let us know when one is really a human. Now, if some day they would like to change that, say until the fetus is one year out of the womb to see if it conforms to one's wants, they can do some wonderful social planning. I don't think it would be necessary to bash the little bugger's brains in. One could just withhold all fluids for about a week; that ought to take care of things.
Of course, there are some really far out wackos who actually believe the decision doesn't really beling to the courts. I imagine they are the Patriots or the Posse Comitatus.
20175. CalGal - 2/24/2000 11:57:56 PM
Spud,
Much of how they wield their power is due to the fact that they have so much. So I think that's related.
I've already said that I have more sympathy for the aims of African Americans than the RR--in large part because I think much of the black lobby wants to try and make up for past wrongs. I think that's ill-advised in part, but I have more sympathy for that than I do of the far religious right's aims.
But at the same time, I think the religious right has an important part to play in keeping things in balance--if they weren't around, things would get loopy somewhere else. So it's not that I want them to go away; I just don't want them to become too powerful.
20176. CalGal - 2/24/2000 11:58:49 PM
toy check
20177. Spudboy - 2/24/2000 11:59:39 PM
That's right, Al, there are some people who believe the decision doesn't belong to the courts.
Or the Congress.
It belongs to the parents, wouldn't you think?
20178. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 12:02:14 AM
Spud:
If you want to kill your three year old son, is that decision up to the parents? The mother's right to kill a misbehaving child, perhaps?
Of course not. Christ, you haven't thought about this issue AT ALL. Your thinking is so superficial, so embarassingly sloganistic, I'd be mortified to open my mouth if I were you.
20179. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 12:04:19 AM
There is no clear moral right here. A mother has a right not to incubate a child she doesn't want; but a child also has the right to LIFE itself.
It comes down to strict utilitarianism. But the Moral Vanity Artistes of the Liberal Establishment can't make an argument without a high horse to ride, so everything boils down to bubble-gum slogans more insipid than "1, 2, 3, 4, we don't want no fucking war."
20180. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 12:10:34 AM
Spud:
Explain in what *relevant* ways a six month old fetus (which breathes (in a liquid way), dreams, sleeps thinks, and can flex its muscles voluntarily) is different from a one year old baby-- in terms of granting the right to euthanize.
Don't tell me "it's dependant on its mother" -- so's the one year old.
Don't tell me "because it's a fetus" -- that's a semantic bit of meaningless which is actually more insipid than saying "Because God says it's okay to kill fetuses."
20181. Jonesy - 2/25/2000 12:24:18 AM
Did you know you can have a Dungeons and Dragons club but not a Christian Youth Club meet after school at a public hs?
The "Constitution" apparently says so. The Constitution, it seems, not only prohibits the state from promoting religion, but it requires active state hostility-- allowing some groups to meet after school but not religious ones.
This is completely false, and has been for some time. Yet it is frequently repeated by the RR. Congress passed a specific act demanding equal access. The Supremes upheld it in a case concerning a suburban school district in Omaha. The district's position was not that it would ban Christian prayer or activities, but that all school groups must have a faculty sponsor, and be subject to school discrimination and discipline policies. Their concern was that the faculty sponsor would inevitably get caught up in a denominational split and thus lend the schools authority to some particular doctrine or demonination.
I have heard Pat Robertson specifically claim that the first amendment does not impose a separation of church and state several times.
Yes, and they're largely right-- with regard to VOLUNTARY prayer. Sigh, another big lie from the RR, the Supremes have NEVER permitted a ban on voluntary student led prayer.
But you don't remember when schools did have teacher led prayer, so I can't really hold this against you too much.
20182. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 12:28:32 AM
Ace --
"Jesus. What's you IQ? You really are dim."
Your IQ.
Carry on.
20183. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 12:48:42 AM
Jones:
Then it was illegal to have a Christian Youth Club BEFORE Congress acted. This was in 1993 or 94, right?
20184. Angel-Five - 2/25/2000 12:51:06 AM
N.Y.'s Closed Primary Challenged
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -- A supporter of Sen. John McCain who had been an independent voter is suing for the right to vote in New York's closed Republican presidential primary March 7.
A federal judge is expected to hear arguments next Tuesday.
Some 2.2 million independent voters would be able to participate in New York's Democratic and Republican primaries if Wendy Van Wie of Columbiaville wins her lawsuit.
Currently, only voters registered with the party may vote in its primary.
Most of Texas Gov. George W. Bush's state supporters, including state GOP Chairman William Powers, oppose allowing independents to vote in the primaries.
Independent and Democratic voters helped push McCain to victory over Bush in GOP primaries in New Hampshire and Michigan.
Van Wie, 46, had been independent but registered as a Republican after a federal judge ordered that McCain be placed on the ballot statewide. But she was told that state law would keep her from voting in a New York presidential primary until 2004. Voters who switch or join parties after being uncommitted must wait until after a presidential election to participate in the new party's primary.
20185. Angel-Five - 2/25/2000 12:51:22 AM
``I personally want to vote for John McCain,'' said Van Wie, who has asked a federal judge to stop New York's political parties from barring independent voters from their primaries. ``I don't really care who anyone else votes for, though. I just want people to be able to vote.'' Van Wie's lawyer, Susan Galvin, said state law was discriminatory because unregistered voters can wait until at least 20 days before a primary to register with a party and vote.
``If you haven't bothered to register or you haven't bothered to exercise your right to vote in the past, you get preferential treatment over somebody who is registered and has voted,'' Galvin said.
Galvin, Van Wie and Guy Molinari, co-chairman of McCain's New York campaign, insisted Thursday that McCain's campaign was not behind the lawsuit.
20186. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 12:57:54 AM
Angel:
Just guessing, but that sounds very, very specious.
20187. Angel-Five - 2/25/2000 1:03:16 AM
I'd have linked it but it's the Times.
20188. Angel-Five - 2/25/2000 1:03:17 AM
I'd have linked it but it's the Times.
20189. Angel-Five - 2/25/2000 1:06:17 AM
I don't think it would be that big of a deal, for one reason -- it looks like the Indies would have to register as Republicans in order to be able to vote in the Republican primary. Some will be willing to do that, but many will not.
20190. Al D - 2/25/2000 1:06:22 AM
spud
Well, having the parents make choices for their children instead of the government would be nice. Now, does that enclude their choice in educating the child? It seems from your book that when a parent thought his child wasn't getting the education he deserved, the government was all over him for taking him out of the public school. I would have suspected that you really believed these decisions are better left to government. You seem to feel that whatever they do is just fine, and that those who have a beef with government are some kinds of kooks. Well, I've had a few run ins with government, and I never had a more powerful enemy.
20191. robertjayb - 2/25/2000 10:40:59 AM
.
McCain overwhelms Bush in Mass. poll
"The Arizona senator would crush Texas Governor George W. Bush by a nearly 2-to-1 ratio, 59 percent to 32 percent, drawing strong support from registered Republicans - a constituency that has tended to favor Bush in recent primaries - and the overwhelming backing of independent voters who expect to vote in the GOP primary."
20192. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 12:52:49 PM
RJB --
Those aren't "real" Republicans. Real Republicans are, by definition, those who support Governor Bush.
I hear the governor is doing real well with them.
20193. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 1:00:10 PM
From today's Los Angeles Times:
***
Bennett, Conservative Bulwark, Likes McCain
Politics: Former Reagan Education chief says Arizona senator a 'better bet' to win the White House.
By RONALD BROWNSTEIN, T. CHRISTIAN MILLER, Times Staff Writers
NEW YORK--Presidential candidate John McCain, who has faced relentless attacks on his Republican credentials from rival George W. Bush, received a boost Thursday from influential conservative leader William J. Bennett.
In an interview with The Times, Bennett--a former Education secretary under President Reagan who has advised both Bush and McCain this year--condemned the recent direction of Bush's campaign and said McCain is impressive.
"You can make the call right now that it is pretty clear that John McCain is a better bet for winning the presidency for the Republicans than George Bush," Bennett said.
***
Read the entire article here.
20194. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 1:08:30 PM
Hmmmm. Not only is Michigan Governor Engler a whiner, he might also be wrong. From the Detroit Free Press
***
McCain just may keep what he borrowed
Independents, Dems could stay with him in November, says poll
February 24, 2000
BY CHRIS CHRISTOFF and DARCI McCONNELL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERS
Non-Republicans crashed the GOP primary Tuesday and carried John McCain to a swooning victory.
Was it a one-night stand or a lasting relationship? There are signs of marriage.
A large percentage of McCain's Democrats and independent voters would vote for him again in the general election, according to a Free Press/WXYZ-TV telephone poll taken Tuesday.
Sixty percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents who voted for McCain said they were very or somewhat certain they would stick with him in November.
That refutes Gov. John Engler's remarks that McCain had "borrowed" Democrats to beat George W. Bush. Engler is Bush's Michigan campaign chairman.
***
Read the entire article here.
20195. Ronski - 2/25/2000 1:12:25 PM
That's already been well established by a reading of the polls: the crossovers voted for McCain overwhelmingly because they liked McCain. Only a small number of party hacks and ideologues voted for McCain to embarrass Engler.
Bush whines in defeat. Engler whines in defeat.
Bush-Engler in '00. Perfect together.
20196. Al D - 2/25/2000 1:25:00 PM
The guy who not only whined but went balistic in defeat was McCain in S.C. This guy did not get a reputation for bad temper for nothing.
One question: McCain has said that if elected he will expose the graft takers in Congress. Do you suppose if he does not get the nomination, he will resign from the Senate and expose the graft takers? Isn't that what a real hero would do?
20197. cazart - 2/25/2000 1:28:23 PM
If McCain said that, Al D, I'd like to see a cite.
If he said it your point is perfectly valid; if McCain is so 'reform'-minded, why would he put any conditions on identifying graft takers. He wouldn't have to resign from the Senate to do so.
20198. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 1:35:46 PM
Al --
"One question: McCain has said that if elected he will expose the graft takers in Congress. Do you suppose if he does not get the nomination, he will resign from the Senate and expose the graft takers? Isn't that what a real hero would do?"
That's two questions. Not only do you have problems spelling, you also apparently can't count.
Here's a question back at you: do you have a source for that quote?
I ask because it's pretty obvious that you're a Bush sympathizer, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see you, um, paraphrase a bit.
20199. CalGal - 2/25/2000 1:46:27 PM
Sixty percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents who voted for McCain said they were very or somewhat certain they would stick with him in November.
Do you think that now these folks will listen to us, TS?
I feel so....trendy.
20200. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 1:51:05 PM
Cal --
You live in the Bay Area. Of course you're trendy.
20201. CalGal - 2/25/2000 1:52:36 PM
Yes, but that's food, coffee drinks, and job selection.
I'm not used to being trendy in politics.
20202. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 2:01:40 PM
Cal --
It takes some adjusting, I know. You'll manage. [g]
20203. TheWizardofWhimsy - 2/25/2000 2:08:33 PM
20204. Ronski - 2/25/2000 2:38:19 PM
How does one distinguish graft-taking from the normal way of doing things in Congress?
20205. janjon - 2/25/2000 2:42:03 PM
God - don't you long for the days when graft was defined as tinkering with the stamp account? Boy, Dan R. was bad.
20206. cazart - 2/25/2000 2:47:39 PM
To tell the truth, I do seem to recall McCain saying that if he were President--he would identify those legislators who took special interest money in exchange for votes on specific legislation.
Not quite the 'graft-taking' charge levelled by Al D.
But it does point out a fact that kind of shows McCain to be a hypocrite. Why does McCain need to be President to do this? If it's the problem McCain is hyping it to be, why hasn't he done it in the past?
20207. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 2:54:55 PM
From the editorial page of today's Wall Street Journal, print edition, A-18:
***
... [Senator McCain] is one tough customer. So tough, indeed, that he thought it possible to show a little steel and issue a bulletin or two on the nature of the Bush Campaign in South Carolina, in his briefly famous concession speech -- a speech that quickly brought down on his head a chorus of shocked pundits and political nannies unable to get their minds around the spectacle of a candidate who had taken it upon himself to say what was on his mind. He had done himself in with this, it would blow up in his face, this was unprecedented ...
Nothing of the sort was even remotely true, of course, as any sane viewer instinctive understood ... Combativeness is a natural fit on Mr. McCain, as it has been on any number of American politicians, Harry Truman among them. In answer to Michigan's Gov. John Engler - architect of the asbestos firewall - and his complaint that Mr. McCain had "rented" the Democrats central to his victory, Mr. McCain told the governor to "be a man."
Telling words, those - very much the kind voters identify with John McCain, and the kind they understand.
***
Heh, heh, heh. And let's not forget our own Al D, signing along with the "nannies" of political correctness.
20208. janjon - 2/25/2000 2:58:20 PM
Trial. I would be very very surprised if those words actually appear in the Journal's editorials themselves. That would represent a flipflop in attitude that would be monumental for the hardheads who write that garbage. I also would be surprised (but not overwhelmingly so) if that came from Gigot's Friday column.
In other words, would you mind specifying the source a bit more? I don't have access to the Journal right now.
20209. PincherMartin - 2/25/2000 2:58:45 PM
Al --
Do you suppose if he does not get the nomination, he will resign from the Senate and expose the graft takers? Isn't that what a real hero would do?
No. You're taking his rhetoric too literally. By exposing them, it only means he will be a in position of power to expose them in a meaningful way. Any politician worth his salt doesn't care about symbolic gestures if he really wants to change the system.
20210. CalGal - 2/25/2000 2:59:50 PM
Anyone read Krauthammer today?
He seeks to explain the root cause for the response to McCain, and hits on the reason why I originally answered "McCain" to Niner's test question, some seven months ago:
He suffered for our sins. He did not die for them, though he came very close. At a subliminal level, this suffering has become in the public imagination a kind of expiation for the war itself. It explains why even people so ideologically distant from him find his experience so moving and his appeal so powerful. That war experience sets him apart from other politicians, others of his generation, and other contenders for the presidency--most starkly from George W. Bush.
It is not that one flew combat over North Vietnam while the other was a member of the Texas Air National Guard. It is that the early release that McCain refused--the essence of his heroism--was offered to him by virtue of his parentage.
A few days after capturing him, the North Vietnamese discovered that his father was an admiral, commander of all U.S. forces in the Pacific. Releasing the son of a famous and important American officer would have been a propaganda coup for them. McCain denied them that. He then endured years of torture for renouncing the privileges of his pedigree.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, has gained nothing but advantage from his pedigree. At every turn--favor, friends, funding. This is no criticism of Bush. It is what anyone in his position would do. It is perfectly natural for a son to take advantage of whatever associations nature and chance endowed him with.
It is just singularly unfortunate for him that his opponent in his quest for the Republican nomination is a man who, offered precisely the same paternal advantage, did what so few men would do: He turned it down. Fiercely.
20211. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 3:02:04 PM
caz --
Again, what's your source?
No offense, but you're pretty clearly a Democratic partisan. If you're going to parse the senator's words for signs of hypocrisy, let's make sure you're parsing his words, not your recollection.
20212. janjon - 2/25/2000 3:02:58 PM
Wow. Trial is taking being a Republican seriously.
20213. PincherMartin - 2/25/2000 3:06:57 PM
It distresses me, Al D., that you would try to run down a conservative war hero running for President on a conservative message. What are you, a lobbyist?
20214. Indiana Jones - 2/25/2000 3:11:41 PM
Great stuff, CalGal. I agree with Krauthammer about 95% of the time. He is sharp, sharp, sharp.
And IMO that editorial nails it.
20215. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 3:13:37 PM
janjon --
"... would you mind specifying the source a bit more? I don't have access to the Journal right now."
No problem. The author is a member of the Journal's editorial board named Dorothy Rabinowitz. The column appears on page A-18, on the right-hand side of the page, above the fold.
20216. janjon - 2/25/2000 3:14:51 PM
Ah, Rabinowitz. That makes sense. She's their token rational member of the Editorial Board.
Thanks.
20217. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 3:16:10 PM
janjon --
Everyone needs one of those. [g]
20218. Angel-Five - 2/25/2000 3:20:37 PM
I think that many of the Democrats and indies who have supported McCain in the primaries will vote for him this November. But a lot won't. John McCain is a charismatic fellow and he's making a lot of right moves,he's attracting a lot of voters, but let's face it -- McCain would not be quite the sensation that he is right now if he weren't running against Bush. And in November he won't be, if he's nominated.
He'll be running against Al Gore, who is hardly the most dazzling flash in the pan to grace the American political scene -- which means that a lot of the people who are pro-McCain because they're anti-Bush will stick with him, granted. But I'm guessing that a reasonable portion of the fervor for McCain isn't going to last down the stretch. He's relatively new to most people, he sounds good and plays the press right, he talks straighter than most people running for President, the Republican machine dislikes him which is always a bonus...
but the Republican machine will be fully behind him in November, he won't be so shiny and new, Bush will have smeared him to hell and back in the interim, and he'll still be a conservative. I think that Gore will be able to come closer to center than him, and that will win back a lot of people once some of the excitement fades off. And I think that a lot of people once (if) Bush is defeated are going to reappraise the situation as it stands.
He'll still end up attracting a lot of Democrats and I'm guessing a ton of indie voters; maybe enough to win.
As far as this 'democrat hijacking' thing goes, though -- let's face it. Committed Democrats who want Gore to be elected, and are willing to sabotage the Republican bid for the Presidency really only have one choice now and that's to vote for Bush.
20219. Ronski - 2/25/2000 3:32:36 PM
The latest polls continue to show Hillary is dead in NY, politically speaking. She gets no movement up, and undecideds continue to lead towards Rudy. She also continues to do badly with white women, for reasons lots of people are speculating about.
20220. CalGal - 2/25/2000 3:37:26 PM
No need for speculation--we can't stand her.
20221. janjon - 2/25/2000 3:37:41 PM
Don't want to repeat a lot of what was been said up above, but the odds are still heavily in W's favor to win the NOMINATION (that is for CalGal's benefit.) There are enough W-friendly Republican primaries only to allow him to have some clearcut "victories" in the next few weeks. And, the GOP Establishment will look for ANY rationale to justify sticking with W. I suppose if both Calif. and NY went for McCain, big, it could be more than just a bump for W. Especially NY where only Repubs. can vote. (Anyone doubt that W will win the regular Repub. vote in Calif?)
And, even assume McCain wins the nomination. There is no question that a lot of the support he is winning from the indys and Dems. right now will stay with him on the fresh/integrity/hero/unique/not Gore criteria. But, his staunchy pro-life/pro-gun/mostly just plain conservative record and expressed beliefs will cause his aura to sour for a lot of those types. Add to this the then inevitable Buchanan surge (at McCain's expense) and you've still got President Gore.
20222. Ronski - 2/25/2000 3:37:42 PM
In an appeal to GOP conservatives in California, McCain has endorsed the contentiousness-causing Knight initiative, which will define marriage as between a man and woman. As this ballot measure is largely unnecessary (no state is about to endorse gay marriage, and Vermont has ducked the issue by creating domestic partnership legislation), most Democrats oppose it, but it will pass anyway.
No important national Democrats actually come out in favor of gay marriage in any case.
McCain's move here is no surprise, and changes little with respect to his prospects in CA or in November should he get the nod.
20223. Indiana Jones - 2/25/2000 3:38:00 PM
A5: It would be truly unthinkable for McCain to beat Gore by 24 points--greater than Reagan/Mondale--considering the general mood of the country about how things are going and Gore is the sitting Vice President. So you're probably correct that the gap will shrink. You're likely also correct the McCain is about as hot a commodity as a politician can be right now, so it's unlikely his own popularity won't slip between now and then.
But I think McCain's bigger hurdle is securing the nomination, which he hasn't yet done. After that, he needs for it to be (virtually) a two-man race and to not screw up. Without something major between now and November, I certainly like his chances in a one-on-one with Gore.
Much better than Bush's.
20224. janjon - 2/25/2000 3:39:36 PM
Ronski. You are whistling in the dark. Hillary wins in Nov., not as big as Gore will in NY, but by at least five or six percent. Call it coattails if you want.
20225. Cellar Door - 2/25/2000 3:41:28 PM
Why speculate? To white women (did you ever see marco Ferreri's "Don't Touch the White Woman"?) she's an upscale Mary Jo Buttafuoco
20226. janjon - 2/25/2000 3:44:31 PM
Indiana. One on one for McCain would be the equivalent of a political orgasm. T'aint gonna happen. Those idiots in the RR will see this as their opportunity to really show the boys in the GOP what happens when someone they hate gets the nomination. Plus, by then, they will have convinced themselves that McCain is the true anti-christ. Or that maybe there are two of them out there.
20227. OhioSTOPAS - 2/25/2000 3:46:11 PM
Yes, Hillary is disdained by some women because of her tolerance of her husband's adultery.
But is that a reason to vote for Rudy the adulterer?
20228. Ronski - 2/25/2000 3:48:35 PM
Political coat tails in New York went the same way that dinner coat tails went in New York (when the tuxedo was invited in our state).
As I said before, we split tickets.
The last time a coat tail effect was noticed was in 1964, when mammoths still roamed the state.
20229. Toenails - 2/25/2000 3:49:06 PM
Anybody have a view on whether Perot has enough clout in his party to wipe the slate clean and cancel out Pat Buchanan? Could he engineer an endorsement of McCain as the Reform (as well as the reform) nominee?
20230. Ronski - 2/25/2000 3:49:36 PM
It was reported this very morning that Rudy is no longer wearing a wedding ring, but Donna still is.
20231. Toenails - 2/25/2000 3:50:30 PM
I heard it was really Buchanan who disrupted Perot's daughter's wedding.
20232. Ronski - 2/25/2000 3:51:37 PM
Toenails,
Unlikely. He might be able to get the nomination for himself, but not for a surrogate.
And McCain wouldn't take it.
20233. janjon - 2/25/2000 3:51:44 PM
Indiana. Rudy has gotten a free ride so far about his personal life. First marriage was annulled. No big deal. Open secret that this current one with Donna Hanover has been kaput for years. Open secret about various lady friends.
No big deal. But, it all will come out in some sort of roundabout ways. Not because of his morality, but because it will make him go bonkers (based on his more than curt refusals to discuss any of this to date). And, Rody gone bonkers is not a pretty sight. Even when he is cross-dressing as he likes to do.
20234. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 3:52:12 PM
I agree that Governor Bush has a lot going for him -- institutional support, infrastructure, and the ability to raise large sums of money as needed (though apparently not the discipline to spend that money wisely).
He's still the odds-on favorite to win the nomination. But to do so, he must do away with an extremely charismatic contender whose supporters will not be happy about the character assassination their man is enduring. Many of those folks won't under any circumstance be able to cast their ballots for Vice President "No Controling Authority," but I strongly suspect that damn few, if any, will be bothered to vote for the man with John McCain's political blood on his hands.
Some will look back at the shit-storm in South Carolina --and the stuff that's likely to follow -- and vote for Gore in November just for the sheer pleasure of watching George W. lose a national election just like his daddy did. Payback is a bitch ... and the governor seems determined to earn his share.
20235. Indiana Jones - 2/25/2000 3:52:20 PM
Perot has made it clear whose party that is. If McCain is the Republican nominee, I don't think Perot will back Buchanan.
20236. Ronski - 2/25/2000 3:52:46 PM
(...invented in our state)
20237. CalGal - 2/25/2000 3:54:31 PM
Ohio,
What makes you think women hate her because she tolerated her husband's infidelity?
We just can't stand her.
20238. Ronski - 2/25/2000 3:55:08 PM
New Yorkers could give a crap about Rudy's personal life.
If he were running for vice-president, then it would be a problem.
20239. CalGal - 2/25/2000 3:56:22 PM
TS nails it. If Bush wins the election, then figure that voter participation will plummet. He won't have enthusiasm on his side. And while some of the McCain Dems might vote for Gore against McCain in the fall, all of them will vote for Gore against Bush.
20240. janjon - 2/25/2000 3:58:58 PM
Ronski. You are correct. New Yorkers could give a crap about Rudy's personal life. That wasn't my point. Rudy has given extremely clear evidence (curt refusals to respond to questions, followed by petty retaliations against the particular newspaper etc. that dared to ask) that HE cares a lot. When it comes out, as it will in such a benign way, he'll go bonkers.
20241. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:01:39 PM
janjon,
It's been out for years. There's no marriage. Rudy has actually handled this problem well with the press.
20242. PincherMartin - 2/25/2000 4:02:14 PM
I largely agree with Angel's Message # 20218
I also am not surprised with Ronski's Message # 20222. As these decisions by McCain -- should he win the nomination -- are put out by the Gore campaign, many Democrats will lose their infatuation with him as a candidate.
20243. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 4:02:45 PM
This has been an interesting discussion. If you'll all excuse me now, though, I think I'll go to lunch.
In Senator McCain's honor, I think I'll get Vietnamese.
20244. janjon - 2/25/2000 4:04:24 PM
ronski. He's handled it to date by refusing to comment. Period. Which in an ideal world is the way it should be. But from now until Nov. ain't the real world. He's given every sign of being more than just a bit touchy about being prodded on this topic. (True for other topics as well.) OF COURSE, "they" are going to try to make him lose his cool. And, they will.
20245. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:04:33 PM
Just watch your language.(g)
20246. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:05:04 PM
...45 to TS
20247. OhioSTOPAS - 2/25/2000 4:05:07 PM
Cal: I've read articles containing comments from women voters expressing that sentiment.
Why can't YOU stand her?
20248. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:06:34 PM
janjon,
I really think he's going to be able to continue ducking this one. But I kinda hope you're right, because it would be wonderfully entertaining.
20249. CalGal - 2/25/2000 4:07:38 PM
As these decisions by McCain -- should he win the nomination -- are put out by the Gore campaign, many Democrats will lose their infatuation with him as a candidate.
Dems voted for Clinton after he signed DOMA. It doesn't take a Republican to sell out gays.
And as I've mentioned a few times, Dems already know of McCain's abortion stance, which is a critical area for far more Dems than gay marriage.
20250. CalGal - 2/25/2000 4:09:38 PM
Ohio,
She's a gender feminist, she subordinated her career to her husband's because she knew it'd be easier, and if she were my manager I know for sure she'd be the type that emphasized whether or not she could look good over the quality of the work done.
That's off the top of my head.
20251. janjon - 2/25/2000 4:11:09 PM
ronski. Well, on nothing more than a hunch, I suspect that he'll be hit with at least a double whammy. The wife not really a wife/girl friend(s) while married bit will probably be first, then there will be more of what we've already had a bit of recently - charges that Rudy's biggest contributors (ala that hassidic contractor in Brooklyn one of whose buildings collapsed recently killing one worker) have gotten "special" treatment from city authorities.) Then, of course, the city council will start passing all sorts of red-meat Demo. bills that Rudy will feel compelled to veto.
Its gonna be a fun summer.
20252. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:12:56 PM
When I informed a gay activist, Democrat-partisan friend of mine that then-NYC mayoral candidate David Dinkins had come out against gay marriage, he swore he would withdraw his endorsement of Dinkins. I knew he wouldn't, and he didn't.
Only the most liberal Dems in the safest districts will tarry with that issue, like NYC's Rep. Nadler (who despite being a real lefty, is actually someone I respect a lot).
20253. Toenails - 2/25/2000 4:13:10 PM
I don't like Hillary, and I think Rudy has bad hair, but a decent-enough leadership record.
But if I lived in N.Y., I'd vote for Hillary.
'Cause I'm a YELLOW DOG!
20254. janjon - 2/25/2000 4:15:10 PM
If you think his hair is bad, you oughta get a load of his teeth. Scarry, up close.
20255. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:17:09 PM
The NYC council is brain-dead. It's practically a requirement, written into the new city charter.
As for special treatment, that is a way of life in NYC, and no one cares about that either.
Still, I do hope for some pyrotechnics. I pray for debates. I'd probably skip the presidential ones (Where's Harry Browne, he fumed), but I'd watch the Hillary-Rudy Show with delight.
20256. janjon - 2/25/2000 4:18:42 PM
Ronski. Me too.
20257. Cellar Door - 2/25/2000 4:20:54 PM
Special treatment for who, Ronski?
20258. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:28:54 PM
Cellar,
Everybody in NYC seeks favors. It's Tammany Hall, alive and well.
20259. OhioSTOPAS - 2/25/2000 4:29:09 PM
CalGal (Message # 20250): ". . . she subordinated her career to her husband's . . ." Well, the guy WAS the Governor. What would you have her do?
20260. andy - 2/25/2000 4:33:36 PM
Dow Closes Below 10,000
NEW YORK (AP) -- The Dow Jones industrial average today closed below the 10,000-level for the first time since last April as investors dumped old blue chips in favor of newer, fast-growing companies. The Dow fell 223.61 points, or 2.2 percent, to end at 9,869.02, bringing its drop for the year to 1,627 points, or 14.2 percent. Investors hammered Dow stalwarts such as GE, IBM, 3M and Hewlett Packard. The Nasdaq, which closed yesterday at a record high, fell 27.65 today to 4,590.00. Charles Pradilla, chief investment strategist at SG Cowen Securities, said: "People are moving out of the Old Economy into the New Economy."
20261. andy - 2/25/2000 4:35:15 PM
Albright: U.S. Will Watch Chechnya, China
WASHINGTON (AP) --Secretary of State Madeleine Albright used the occasion of the annual State Department report on human rights to ask Russia again "to launch full and open investigations into credible reports of massacres and other human rights violations in Chechnya." Albright also said the United States "will continue to speak out on behalf of those in China who are systematically denied basic political and religious freedoms." She also endorsed China's proposed entry into the World Trade Organization, saying it would set in motion changes that "will add to the pressures welling up from within China for greater personal and political freedom.
20262. OhioSTOPAS - 2/25/2000 4:35:32 PM
Conservative economists are now preparing the argument that the effect of the Ronald Reagan tax cuts wore off on February 25, 2000.
20263. JudithAtHome - 2/25/2000 4:36:34 PM
Diallo verdict to be announced on CNN in about 5 minutes.
20264. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:39:08 PM
No one will care about the Dow unless it sinks to 7K.
20265. Toenails - 2/25/2000 4:42:54 PM
Ronski..
Speak for yourself. I'll sure as hell care!
20266. PsychProf - 2/25/2000 4:44:06 PM
Ronski...say what?
20267. Ronski - 2/25/2000 4:53:48 PM
Pardon my exaggeration.
But a drop of another thousand points, though more than just a correction (which we've obviously already had), is still not going to spook most voters. There wouldn't be enough time for severe repercussions to be felt.
20268. Ronski - 2/25/2000 5:05:46 PM
(I do express condolences to everyone's portfolios, including my own, small as it is.)
20269. andy - 2/25/2000 5:29:49 PM
10% of a $ 450,000 account is not a small change.
20270. andy - 2/25/2000 5:30:43 PM
Doug Goddard,
Are you on board ?
Got news for you.
20271. andy - 2/25/2000 5:32:07 PM
20272. andy - 2/25/2000 5:32:51 PM
Not guilty ?
20273. robertjayb - 2/25/2000 6:11:51 PM
.
WEEKEND'S TRAIL, per the AP:
"Alan Keyes attends an anti-abortion rally in St. Louis and campaigns in Richmond, Va. Bush is back in Texas until he flies to Washington state Sunday evening. McCain campaigns in Ohio on Saturday and Virginia on Sunday before returning to the West Coast.
"Bradley campaigns in Washington state all weekend. Gore will campaign in California and Washington state Saturday and Colorado and Arizona on Sunday."
20274. andy - 2/25/2000 6:22:13 PM
20275. arkymalarky - 2/25/2000 6:26:43 PM
While Clinton was gov, Hillary was a very respected and successful lawyer. But though I don't really like her either and I can't say exactly why, I do think people have been unreasonably hostile toward her, both in AR and nationwide.
20276. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 6:31:58 PM
"While Clinton was gov, Hillary was a very respected and successful lawyer"
Wow-- you mean to say that when Clinton was the Attorney General and Governor, Hillary was a "respected and successful" lawyer in the state her husband ran???!
How'd she managed that?
20277. arkymalarky - 2/25/2000 6:33:25 PM
By being very competent in a large private firm in LR. You really have a suspicious nature, don't you?
20278. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 6:36:31 PM
Arky:
Do you know what a "Rainmaker" is? It's a person -- whose talent is either lacking or irrelevant -- taken on by a firm, often made partner at a very young age not due to any talent but because of a family connection to an important client. Or, say, the Attorney General and then Governor of the state you practice in.
"By being very competent in a large private firm in LR."
Oh? Proof of this?
Word is that Hillary did nearly no legal work at all. Except for Madison Guarantee, of course.
20279. arkymalarky - 2/25/2000 6:40:16 PM
"Word is that Hillary did nearly no legal work at all. Except for Madison Guarantee, of course."
Oh really? "Word" from where? Hillary has never been accused of incompetence that I know of.
20280. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 6:43:04 PM
"Hillary has never been accused of incompetence that I know of."|
Of, for god's sake. Incompetence is her DEFENSE in the Madison Guarantee fraudulent option case.
Were she competent, it would prove she knew what she was doing and therefore acted criminally.
20281. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 6:44:00 PM
Jesus Christ. You're just a Rootin'-Tootin' Robot on anything to do with the Clintons, ain't ya?
20282. arkymalarky - 2/25/2000 6:46:49 PM
"Were she competent, it would prove she knew what she was doing and therefore acted criminally."
Hahaha. OK, it took me a minute to get that you were spoofing, but I see it now. Very funny.
"Jesus Christ. You're just a Rootin'-Tootin' Robot on anything to do with the Clintons, ain't ya?"
Take out "to do with" and replace it with "against" in the above quote and you've got you pegged. I already said I don't care for Hillary, and I don't think a lot of Bill either, but having a balanced, unbiased view of all things political, I can see that they're both very competent in their chosen fields.
20283. AceofSpades - 2/25/2000 6:48:27 PM
"but having a balanced, unbiased view of all things political"
Good one.
20284. OhioSTOPAS - 2/25/2000 6:56:13 PM
20285. OhioSTOPAS - 2/25/2000 6:57:11 PM I was referring to Message # 20234. 20286. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 10:24:17 PM 20287. Kitty~ - 2/25/2000 11:47:54 PM Hi everybody! I couldn't read it all so I'm jumping in here. Hope that's OK. Anybody talking about what those nasty old legislators did to our open primary initiative out here in California? What's up with those guys? 20288. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 11:50:24 PM 20289. CalGal - 2/25/2000 11:52:52 PM I'm the official greeter? What's up with your fingers, pal? You could at least say hi to newbies in this thread. (did you know we have others?) 20290. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 11:53:51 PM 20291. CalGal - 2/25/2000 11:55:59 PM I can't think of the conservative guy on Lehrer News Hour right now (Paul Gigot, maybe?) but he said that a Bush adviser told him that they are behind in several major Virginia counties. Haven't found a link yet. 20292. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 11:58:04 PM 20293. TrialShark - 2/25/2000 11:59:50 PM 20294. Indiana Jones - 2/26/2000 12:01:29 AM Isn't Pat Robertson from Virginia? Isn't that where the 700 Club is based? 20295. CalGal - 2/26/2000 12:02:26 AM No, I mean say hi to Kitty, silly, instead of telling me to. 20296. CalGal - 2/26/2000 12:03:32 AM TS, 20297. Indiana Jones - 2/26/2000 12:11:57 AM I don't know that much about Poindexter, but he never made a bad impression on me to begin with. I thought he stoically took the fall to protect the higher ups. And as I remember it, he wasn't like North in that he didn't try to make the whole thing seem like he should be getting another medal pinned on his chest. 20298. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:14:51 AM 20299. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:20:39 AM 20300. Angel-Five - 2/26/2000 12:22:19 AM And what's the first symbol you see when you go to this page? 20301. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:45:25 AM 20302. Angel-Five - 2/26/2000 12:47:31 AM Too bad the tank's only lit in daylight; we should make the tank cam a permanent link. 20303. ee - 2/26/2000 12:50:52 AM The Shark Tank. 20304. Kitty~ - 2/26/2000 1:20:26 AM Hi Trialshark. What a name! Should I be afraid of pending feeding frenzies? 20305. CalGal - 2/26/2000 1:23:46 AM TS, 20306. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 2:22:10 AM 20307. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 2:22:51 AM 20308. CalGal - 2/26/2000 2:58:13 AM Dearheart, if you're going to be cheap, it's possible that maybe you know someone who owns a copy. 20309. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 8:32:30 AM Great 0p-ed columns on negative campaigning in Saturday's NYT by Anthony Lewis entitled "Willie Horton Redux" and Frank Rich entitled "Everybody into the Mudfight!" 20310. Toenails - 2/26/2000 9:32:03 AM 20311. LadyChaos - 2/26/2000 11:00:01 AM 20312. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 11:09:39 AM 20313. Absensia - 2/26/2000 11:30:01 AM Toenails: 20314. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 11:57:58 AM I've never been a supporter of baby Bush, TS. My favorites are Alan Keyes, Bill Bradley, Pat Buchanan and, if I'm forced to, the MadDog. 20315. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:04:22 PM 20316. Cellar Door - 2/26/2000 12:05:57 PM That analogy doesn't quite work, Rosie. Darth Maul had no dialogue, whereas you couldn't shut Al up if you tried. 20317. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:09:23 PM 20318. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 12:13:32 PM Okay, Darth Sidious. 20319. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:21:56 PM 20320. robertjayb - 2/26/2000 12:24:03 PM . 20321. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:24:58 PM 20322. CalGal - 2/26/2000 12:26:46 PM Hey, LadyC! Welcome back! 20323. TheWizardofWhimsy - 2/26/2000 12:40:08 PM Watch yourself around here Kitty~...some of them bite! 20324. Toenails - 2/26/2000 12:44:04 PM 20325. joezan - 2/26/2000 12:45:30 PM 20326. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 12:48:52 PM 20327. Absensia - 2/26/2000 12:49:05 PM Hope so, Nails. I hadn't seen that site, but I may be able to find the out of print Hunter S. Thompson book one of my brothers covets. 20328. Toenails - 2/26/2000 12:50:10 PM 20329. JudithAtHome - 2/26/2000 1:01:14 PM Absenia: 20330. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 1:03:26 PM 20331. Absensia - 2/26/2000 1:23:43 PM oops..posted this in sports by mistake: 20332. robertjayb - 2/26/2000 2:05:18 PM . 20333. robertjayb - 2/26/2000 3:59:58 PM . 20334. joezan - 2/26/2000 4:02:00 PM 20335. joezan - 2/26/2000 4:06:02 PM 20336. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 4:19:46 PM Trillan only looks good after drinking a bottle of cheap red wine. 20337. JudithAtHome - 2/26/2000 4:36:13 PM Well, don't judge his meter... 20338. robertjayb - 2/26/2000 4:50:34 PM . 20339. JudithAtHome - 2/26/2000 5:35:59 PM Sorry, Robert...I forgot where I was for a minute. Must have been the "barf" and all that "sucking". I'm in awe. 20340. robertjayb - 2/26/2000 5:43:18 PM . 20341. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 6:24:47 PM 20342. robertjayb - 2/26/2000 6:49:50 PM . 20343. robertjayb - 2/26/2000 7:40:13 PM 20344. jexster - 2/26/2000 8:35:55 PM With the Newsweek Poll still showing Bush with a 2 to 1 lead among Republicans, it looks like the GOP would rather lose with Bush than win an election. Too bad. 20345. jexster - 2/26/2000 8:42:58 PM How The Moron Managed to Burn $60 Million in a Manure Pile - WP 20346. jexster - 2/26/2000 8:43:23 PM Bush still has a double digit lead in CA 20347. Indiana Jones - 2/26/2000 8:48:37 PM rjb (20343): First-rate article. Thanks for linking it in. 20348. jexster - 2/26/2000 8:51:59 PM Indy - If that isn't the Kiss of Death. Too bad TS, your poor battered karma sacrificed for what? 20349. jexster - 2/26/2000 9:11:23 PM GOP Leaders Blast Moronic Campaign 20350. LadyChaos - 2/26/2000 9:22:01 PM jexter, 20351. jexster - 2/26/2000 9:28:37 PM In 1978, I think it was, a local political consultant surprised the pundits with a new phenom in campaigning, the colored mail brochure. His tactic was widely credited with the election to congress of dark horse, Barbara Boxer. 20352. TrialShark - 2/26/2000 9:32:40 PM 20353. Goddard - 2/26/2000 9:36:24 PM Maybe Bush should do some more speeches at racist universities and put a few more people to death to try and jack up his lagging popularity. 20354. EricCartman - 2/26/2000 9:39:05 PM The execution of Betty Lou Beets won't come back to haunt Bush, but you can bet his catering to the BJU claque, and the Robertson loony wing of the GOP, will bite him in the ass but hard, should he seize the nomination from McCain (which he probably will). 20355. LadyChaos - 2/26/2000 9:43:16 PM jex, 20356. Goddard - 2/26/2000 9:44:29 PM I'm sure there are a large number of Demo strategists praying Bush does get the nomination. 20357. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 9:58:06 PM One of the problems the Bushes always have is that they think they can switch from Lee Atwater imitiations to compassionate conservatism without anybody noticing. 20358. Goddard - 2/26/2000 10:04:20 PM I won't be voting for either of them but Gore seems to be the pick of the litter. 20359. Greystoke - 2/26/2000 10:05:42 PM Goddard 20360. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 10:06:06 PM For the record, even after all this negative Bush coverage from John McCain's friends in the liberal media, Algore retains a 43% negative rating, far above Bush's in the low-30s. 20361. Goddard - 2/26/2000 10:09:55 PM >Who are you voting for? 20362. Goddard - 2/26/2000 10:12:36 PM >If the stock market poops out, WJC is going to slide into a black memory hole that only Jexster will want to fondly remember, and MadDog McCain will clean out the temple of the money-changers. 20363. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 10:13:20 PM Grey: In case Doug Goddard is somewhere else in cyberspace, I'll tell. He's Canadian and is an unhappy denizen of TT's Politics folder. 20364. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 10:15:01 PM Political Reality: The President takes the heat for the economy. 20365. Goddard - 2/26/2000 10:19:58 PM >I'm trying to encourage him to spend more time here. 20366. joezan - 2/26/2000 10:21:11 PM 20367. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 10:21:25 PM The rules here are whatever CalGal says they are, Doug. 20368. Goddard - 2/26/2000 10:23:25 PM Oh Oh I don't think CalGal and I hit it off all that well over of TT. 20369. RosettaStone - 2/26/2000 10:26:22 PM Niner is also someone to worry about. A couple of weeks ago he didn't like what cazart was saying here and decided to delete 10 posts. He mistakenly deleted 100. 20370. Greystoke - 2/26/2000 10:29:30 PM Goddard 20371. Greystoke - 2/26/2000 10:31:36 PM Niner is not either "someone to worry about." Heck, he hardly ever shows up anymore. 20372. Goddard - 2/26/2000 10:34:40 PM >Really, the rules are simple and you are unlikely to run afoul of them in normal conversation. 20373. Greystoke - 2/26/2000 10:37:00 PM "Are political discussions permitted in the politics thread?" 20374. joezan - 2/26/2000 10:47:38 PM 20375. Goddard - 2/26/2000 10:53:09 PM >But you'd never know it, because he hasn't thrown anyone out yet. 20376. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 10:58:38 PM robertayb, thanks for posting the news poem by Calvin Trillin. Contrary to joezan, who never got beyond Humpty Dumpty, he's quite a good poet. I posted several of his poems from "Deadline Poet" to the Fray last year. 20377. joezan - 2/26/2000 11:06:31 PM 20378. Indiana Jones - 2/26/2000 11:13:04 PM Sorry, joezan, but wabbit is the sysop (and you're right that she's apparently never thrown anyone out). I just help people get accounts when the automatic system fails. 20379. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 11:14:13 PM Your problem is that he has a sense of humor and you don't. 20380. joezan - 2/26/2000 11:21:03 PM 20381. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 11:21:31 PM Speaking of humor, I saw a pretty funny Michigan play tonight--"Escanaba in da Moonlight" by Jeff Daniels. It's about the Upper Peninsula deer hunting Soady family, father Albert, sons Reuben Soady and Remnar Soady, Jimmer Negamnanee, Ranger Tom Treado, a cross-dresser from the Department of Natural Resources and Wolf Moon Dance Soady, Remnar's Potawatamie wife. 20382. arkymalarky - 2/26/2000 11:23:36 PM "The allies said they still believe Bush will prevail in upcoming primaries. ``When it comes down to it, and they actually have to choose a nominee and a president, voters are going to be looking for the guy who had done stuff and not just look at the slogans and a lot of rah,'' Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said. ``That's when Governor Bush will prevail.''" 20383. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 11:39:06 PM ON DAVID DUKE AS REPUBLONAZI 20384. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 11:45:08 PM GRAY AREA 20385. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 11:51:55 PM EUREKA! 20386. wonkers2 - 2/26/2000 11:53:52 PM THE PICKED UP BY THE LOS ANGELES 20387. joezan - 2/27/2000 12:11:03 AM 20388. RosettaStone - 2/27/2000 8:46:42 AM Another item from Lucianne.com, a new web site for highbrow freepers: 20389. Cellar Door - 2/27/2000 10:22:19 AM I wonder why the freepers and their allies dislike McCain so. 20390. JudithAtHome - 2/27/2000 10:55:59 AM GW sure knows how to spend that money...$288.00 a minute so far. I hope when he stumbles into the White House, he doesn't continue in this reckless way. I don't care if throws his own money away; just keep his paws off mine. 20391. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 11:08:09 AM 20392. RosettaStone - 2/27/2000 11:09:51 AM Right, JuDY, where is Noami Wolfe when you need her? Ever since I've read about her makeover of Algore, I've been checking out his attire. 20393. CalGal - 2/27/2000 11:14:53 AM TS, 20394. Toenails - 2/27/2000 11:21:52 AM 20395. jexster - 2/27/2000 12:25:49 PM A Murphian Slip??? 20396. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 12:26:54 PM 20397. jexster - 2/27/2000 12:34:10 PM Haley Barbour reacting to McCain's Catholic Voter Alerts says "We shouldn't be injecting religion in political campaigns"! 20398. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 12:40:45 PM 20399. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 12:47:36 PM 20400. jexster - 2/27/2000 12:48:34 PM Not to mention the 70 million downpayment on influence peddling. 20401. bubbaette - 2/27/2000 1:02:26 PM Hey Niner -- I saw yer letter to the editor. Good letter and good response. 20402. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 1:14:56 PM 20403. jexster - 2/27/2000 1:20:22 PM Haley Barbour is such a fuckin fat joke. On CNN he was dismissing as "liberal media hype" the idea that McCain is electable and the Moron a born loser. 20404. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 1:22:46 PM 20405. Jonesy - 2/27/2000 3:09:45 PM Shark- Bennet's been suspect ever since the date with Janis Joplin. 20406. AceofSpades - 2/27/2000 3:12:08 PM 20407. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 3:47:44 PM 20408. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 3:51:31 PM 20409. jexster - 2/27/2000 4:18:46 PM Sounds like another Tejas Two Step to me. 20410. jexster - 2/27/2000 4:20:02 PM Look for GWB to attend Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament at St. Paddie's before joining the parade on 3/17. 20411. robertjayb - 2/27/2000 4:22:04 PM . 20412. RosettaStone - 2/27/2000 4:23:33 PM Jex: It's not that easy being a Catholic. Let me tell you from experience. 20413. Cellar Door - 2/27/2000 5:52:37 PM No, Rosie, let me tell YOu from MY experience. 20414. TheWizardofWhimsy - 2/27/2000 6:36:22 PM 20415. CalGal - 2/27/2000 6:45:46 PM Caught in the Switch, which is technically an article about Bradley's woes, has some interesting registration numbers: 20416. jexster - 2/27/2000 7:48:30 PM BJU: If the Shit Sticks, Wear It 20417. arkymalarky - 2/27/2000 8:50:16 PM I was told that's where Tim and Asa Hutchinson went to school. 20418. jexster - 2/27/2000 9:15:08 PM Arky: 20419. arkymalarky - 2/27/2000 9:16:28 PM Gee thanks. They're very popular fellas here, too. 20420. jexster - 2/27/2000 9:19:05 PM So much for the Theory of Negativity: 20421. robertjayb - 2/27/2000 10:11:27 PM . 20422. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 10:53:11 PM 20423. CalGal - 2/27/2000 11:33:29 PM TS, 20424. TrialShark - 2/27/2000 11:54:36 PM 20425. EricCartman - 2/28/2000 1:48:58 AM Message # 20416: 20426. JudithAtHome - 2/28/2000 9:32:12 AM Robert: 20427. cazart - 2/28/2000 9:49:26 AM One has to chuckle at the GOP frontrunners accuse each other of bigotry. It's a bit like CalGal tweaking Larry Fine for having 'bad hair.' 20428. cazart - 2/28/2000 9:49:57 AM 'reacist' is of course 'racist' 20429. cazart - 2/28/2000 9:54:46 AM From the above cite: 20430. robertjayb - 2/28/2000 10:18:17 AM . 20431. Ronski - 2/28/2000 10:19:37 AM 20432. robertjayb - 2/28/2000 10:23:42 AM . 20433. cazart - 2/28/2000 10:26:14 AM It is amazing. 20434. Ronski - 2/28/2000 10:45:36 AM 20435. stostosto - 2/28/2000 11:04:09 AM rjb 20436. Cellar Door - 2/28/2000 11:10:16 AM Denouncing an extreme element in your base. 20437. Dantheman - 2/28/2000 11:12:32 AM sto-cubed, 20438. Dantheman - 2/28/2000 11:12:54 AM cross post with Cellar Door. 20439. stostosto - 2/28/2000 11:16:07 AM Thank you CellarDoor and DanTM. 20440. CalGal - 2/28/2000 12:54:17 PM "Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Lewis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton, on the left, or Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell on the right," McCain said in speech to about 1,500 people at Cox High School. 20441. TheWizardofWhimsy - 2/28/2000 1:00:32 PM 20442. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:01:13 PM Haha! That's a good one. 20443. Dantheman - 2/28/2000 1:05:19 PM WoW, 20444. TrialShark - 2/28/2000 1:10:55 PM 20445. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:14:26 PM Yeah, but isn't it cool that someone is finally doing the equivalency game on these two groups? 20446. PincherMartin - 2/28/2000 1:25:08 PM McCain is a gutsy politician. It takes some balls to attack one of the pillars of your party. It also appears that McCain is abandoning California to focus on the states he can win; He will not debate Bush in Los Angeles as previously planned (he claims Bush took too long to work out the details of the debate). 20447. Ronski - 2/28/2000 1:27:09 PM 20448. Ronski - 2/28/2000 1:30:26 PM 20449. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:34:09 PM Bush is no bigot and if he panders to the RR, he is doing nothing different than any Republican candidates has done since Reagan in 80. If he aint courageous, he surely aint anything worse either. 20450. TrialShark - 2/28/2000 1:34:38 PM 20451. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:35:50 PM But why do you say that McCain has been unfair in ripping Bush? Bush did indeed call out the zealots--or allowed them to be called out in his name. It got him the SC primary. Now he's paying the price. I see nothing unfair about that--I can't think of any other Republican in recent years who has won with such a reliance on that demographic. 20452. TrialShark - 2/28/2000 1:38:52 PM 20453. TrialShark - 2/28/2000 1:41:15 PM 20454. Ronski - 2/28/2000 1:41:26 PM I should add that I used to think Bush was a simple opportunist when it came to political and rhetorical gay-bashing, but I now entertain the belief that he is sincere in his prejudice against gay people. I could be wrong now, however, and perhaps was right the first time. 20455. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:42:01 PM I agree--and that's what makes this period so alternately exciting and frustrating. 20456. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:42:43 PM I was agreeing with TS. I don't think Bush has ever given gay folks a second thought, frankly. Neither for nor agin, just, "huh?" 20457. Ronski - 2/28/2000 1:42:50 PM 20458. TrialShark - 2/28/2000 1:44:27 PM 20459. Ronski - 2/28/2000 1:44:57 PM 20460. CalGal - 2/28/2000 1:46:49 PM Ronski, 20461. PincherMartin - 2/28/2000 1:47:06 PM Ronski -- 20462. PincherMartin - 2/28/2000 1:49:52 PM TS --
Stick to the courtroom and stay away from racetracks!
Shark doesn't know his odds, but at least HE'S computer-literate!
Ohio --
There are three GOP candidates, not two.
And, er, I really admire your typing skills.
Cal, I believe you're the Mote's Official Greeter ... wanna say something nice to Kitty~ to make her/him feel at home before everyone else in the thread rips him/her to shreds?
And wasn't it Dems who screwed up the primary in California? I know it was political maneuvering, that it was originally intended to be open. But I can't remember which party messed with it.
Someone was asking about polls in Washington state ...
AP is reporting an ARG poll conducted on Wednesday and Thursday of this week. It shows a dead heat:
–George W. Bush, 43 per cent
–John McCain, 43 per cent
–Alan Keyes, 4 per cent
–Undecided, 10 per cent
Margin of error is 4 per cent.
Cal --
No, I missed the newbies. Were they here this afternoon? Did they say anything worth paging back a couple hundred posts to read?
FWIW, I stopped in at the Crown Books in San Ramon to pick up a copy of John McCain's book, "Faith of my Fathers." The two people ahead of me at the checkout line also bought copies. The cashier volunteered that it was the fastest-moving book they had on sale there.
So far it's a good read.
Hmmm ... the polls I've seen show Bush leading by 8-10 points or so in Virginia. Given the strength of the Christian right there, I'd be surprised if the governor doesn't pull off a South Carolina-sized win.
Have you read The Nightingale's Song, by Robert Timberg? It's the story of five US Naval Academy grads--McCain, James Webb, Oliver North, Bud McFarlane, and John Poindexter. Great read. You'll come out liking McCain a lot--but the weird thing is, you'll come out thinking a lot more highly of Poindexter, too.
It was only particular counties, and it was latebreaking stuff. Gigot was astounded at how nervous Bush's staff was, given how certain Virginia was supposed to be.
Those are just impressions, though. Iran-Contra isn't something I've read about in depth.
Cal --
Dunno. I don't have any bad thoughts about Poindexter. I'll see if I can find the book, though.
Indy --
"[Poindexter] wasn't like North in that he didn't try to make the whole thing seem like he should be getting another medal pinned on his chest."
A reason to like him right there.
Oh, and I really suppose I should say this:
Hello Kitty~
Coincidence?
I think not.
It's another conspiracy.
And now we'll have to kill you and eat you.
Nothing personal, you understand.
Sounds better to me than The Inferno
Unless you've got a problem with Amazon, the link is right there, waiting for you to buy!
My favorite Poindexter story:
He was not a right-wing zealot. His worldview was the standard cold-warrior variety, his position on social issues moderate to liberal. He didn't talk gender equity; he lived it. In 1985, Reagan was resisting intense pressure from COngress to impose economic sanctions on South African. [His wife] Linda, who was studying for the ministry, told him she was going to join friends from church in picketing the South African embassy. She didn't exactly ask his permission, but she let him know she was willing to reconsider her participation if he felt it might prove embarrassing to him. He told her to go ahead. She did, was arrested, handcuffed, put in a paddy wagon, booked, and released. No news organization connected the name Linda Poindexter on the daily arrest record to Ronald Reagan's deputy national secruity adviser. Knowing Poindexter--more accurately, not knowing him--no one made the connection.
Explained Linda, "John would always say, 'Do what you want to do, go where you want to go, my career can take care of itself.' It was sort of like John lived his life the way he wanted to and I would live mine the way I wanted to and we'd negotiate out the rest."
Of course, Timberg goes on to say that this was one of Poindexter's problems--he tended to assume that men and women would act like grownups. This was fine with his wife, but a dangerous tendency when dealing with colleagues in the Reagan administration.
Anyway, I just love that story. It is so completely at odds with the image I got from the guy in the hearings.
Kitty~
"Should I be afraid of pending feeding frenzies?"
No, we're all relatively well-fed. Sometimes we get a little rambunctious and like to chew on things, though. Fair warning.
Every now and then people get their feelings hurt.
Cal --
The link worked, but I'll check the local used bookstores first.
Is there a good used-book website someone can pass on to me?
Expense aside, I'm looking for something that's out of print.
Hello, everybody. I haven't been able to check in for quite awhile.
Is anybody still making the now utterly discredited argument that George W. isn't pandering to the Religious Right?
Ace?
Welcome back, LC!
Don't be hard on Ace -- he's been relatively sensible about the GOP race thus far. The true Bush hacks in the thread are Al D, Rosie, and, to a lesser extent, JJ.
I've found Amazon a fairly decent source for out of print books.
Also, elephantbooks.net has had some too. They have a lot of out of print books in stock, so if they have it, you get it faster than if you go through Amazon.
But Algore is the Darth Maul of the 2000 race.
Rosie --
"I've never been a supporter of baby Bush, TS."
Hmmm. I must have been confused by your tendency to sneer at Senator McCain every chance you get.
Still, since none of the people you listed have any chance whatsoever of winning the GOP nomination except the senator ... welcome aboard!
And speaking of welcoming aboard, Seattle's largest newspaper, the Post-Intelligencer, is endorsing Senator McCain in the Washington GOP primary. The endorsement appears in an editorial to be published tomorrow.
Here's something that I found at another website:
THIS SHOULD MAKE YOU GO POSTAL
This item in its entirely from the front page of this morning's New York Times.
"The Census Bureau has begun mailing 120 million letters to households. The only problem is that each and every address is wrong. Page 9."
120 million letters?!? Presumably with 33 cent stamps (You do the math). But Oops! There's another problem. The story isn't on page 9 of the New York Times. It isn't anywhere in the paper we got this morning.
--Lucianne.com
Rosie --
It's a conspiracy.
It's always a conspiracy.
Toenails,
This site may be worth a try for out-of-print books:
Bookfinder
I love politico-speak. From the Associated Press:
***
Like her colleagues, New Jersey's [Governor] Christie Whitman is confident Bush will win the GOP nomination. But she worries that the visit to Bob Jones and other efforts to appeal to the most conservative voters will come back to bite Bush in the general election, when candidates will be fighting for voters in the political center.
"The most important thing is to put together a coalition that can win in the fall," Whitman said. "It can be dangerous if you start to marginalize yourself in any way." Asked if Bush has done that, she said: "I don't think that's happened in any kind of irretrievable way."
***
Translation: yes, of course he has, you idiot.
I think that Niner and Pincher are arguing that no one will remember the hard sell to the RR come Judgment Day. 
Absensia, robertjayb...
I appreciate the help re used books. Looks like Bookfinder is going to do the trick. Many thanks.
Hey - isn't that the finger she was pointing when she called those innocent police officers murderers?
(I hope Rudy's got rabies...)
Latest Marist NY poll:
Bush 43 per cent
McCain 41 per cent
Keyes 3 per cent
Undecided 12 per cent
This poll was conducted after the Michigan and Arizona primaries and has a margin of error of 5 per cent.
TS...the Seattle PI may be right, but since Monday's primary is only a beauty contest, since the caucuses meet in March, there isn't a lot of excitement here. Such an endorsement for McCain mostly means he wore Eddie Bauer campaign togs, not L.L. Bean. Gore and Bradley have been trying to "out-gortex" on another here.
In fact, it looks like "Bookfinder" is an indespensible resource. Where do I get in on the IPO?
If your brother is looking for "Hells Angels", they have tons!
Absensia --
I've noticed that the media feeding frenzy over next week's contests isn't what it was in the last round of primaries.
The rest of your message was difficult to fathom ... it seemed to suggest that there's been a lot of rain in Seattle. Surely that can't be right, can it? [g]
Judith, thanks. Don't think that's the one, but I'm
checking.
TS: Scary, as I started to remark on today's weather, the
power in the house went out for about 30 seconds, so I'll
give you the standard answer. It always rains in Seattle!
But rain has nothing to do with it...if you want to get
votes, you'd better forget the blazer or suit jacket and don
gortex..and drink a double tall, too. That's the NW
look..and it had better be Eddie Bauers or Nordies, since
both companies started here in this small town.
The AP's take on upcoming GOP primarys
A Theological
Analysis of the
South Carolina
Primary
In Kennebunk, land of the Bushes,
The men of the cloth all wore tweed.
And one didn't meet any Christians
Like Robertson, Falwell and Reed.
But politics calls for adjustments.
If right is the wing that you need,
You praise God and shout hallelujah
With Robertson, Falwell and Reed.
So Bush, the uniter from Texas,
Said, "Since you're the fellows they heed,
Do Jesus's work down and dirty,
Please, Robertson, Falwell and Reed."
They blackened McCain with their phone banks
And told all the voters that he'd
Consort with the people most hated
By Robertson, Falwell and Reed.
McCain's just too chummy with Satan,
And should he, not Bush II, succeed,
The unborn would have no protector,
Said Robertson, Falwell and Reed.
Well, W won Carolina,
For three days he had back his lead.
For this he had pledged his allegiance
To Robertson, Falwell and Reed.
Yes, he made his pact--not with Satan,
But, still, he will never be freed.
He'll always be part of a package
With Robertson, Falwell and Reed.
.......Calvin Trillin
Well that sure sucked.
...you know, come to think of it, someone posted another of Trillin's brilliant attempts at "poetry" in the Fray a long time ago, and that sucked just as bad as this one.
Before you hit the head to barf.
Pay attention to his words...
He's a good Bush beater and he
Flushed more'n birds.
Please, Judith, don't offend such sophisticated intellects with doggerel.
Polling Roundup: Bush leads McCain Nationally...the AP
RJB --
Some of those numbers would be quite encouraging for Senator McCain, were there more time in the primary season. But there isn't and they're not. Most of the rest of the numbers are pretty dismal for him; clearly, he faces an uphill battle. The Vice President is no doubt relieved.
TrialShark,
Vice President is no doubt relieved.
Yes, these is/are nervis times for us yellow-dawgs. Go, John, go! But, please God, not too far.
GOP governors meanwhile are circling the wagon waiting for the massacre:
"WASHINGTON (AP) - Rallying around one of their own, Republican governors say they're confident in their colleague from Texas, mobilizing a show of unity they hope will boost George W. Bush's struggling campaign.
Still, they're brimming with free advice.
In town for their winter meeting, GOP governors gave Bush early and
powerful backing - even before he declared he was running. That
support helped rally the Republican establishment around the Texas
governor as the party's best chance for taking back the White House.
``I'm confident we made the right decision,'' said Gov. Ed Schafer of
North Dakota, chairman of the Republican Governors Association, which gathered a dozen governors Saturday to demonstrate their unity with Bush.
Democratic governors are relishing the intense GOP fight.
``I'm just absolutely delighted that the Republicans are having the
opportunity to discuss all their shortcomings,'' said Kentucky Gov.
Paul Patton. ``I just hope they go right down to the wire. It looks like they are.''
That's a cool $400,000/day
New Republic endorses a Republican in primary for the first time: John McCain
W's spending so far comes to about $1 million per delegate.
Since then, along about election time, mailboxes are filled to overflowing with brochures that people routinely dump in the garbage along with other junk mail.
I've been wondering whether massive TV advertising may not be headed in the same direction of uselessness and offer this as food for thought:
"Rowland said Bush also relies too much on TV at the expense of grassroots organizing.
``It's voter turnout. It's contact and follow-up. It's good old-fashioned one-on-one by the candidate. I don't think there's been enough of that'' by Bush, said the governor of Connecticut, where Bush trails McCain in polls.
One Republican governor and the top political aide to another, both speaking on condition of anonymity, said Bush's team has been reluctant to ship money and resources to state GOP organizations in the March 7 states.
In one state run by a Bush-supporter, the governor helped raise more than $1 million and has received less than $5,000 from the Bush campaign to finance grassroots operations...."
jex --
"Too bad TS, your poor battered karma sacrificed for what?"
Entertainment value, if nothing else.
Don't tell me you haven't been enjoying the primaries thus far.
I think it's simpler than that: political t.v. ads are just too damned much of an insult to one's intelligence.
(By the way, it's hard for me to write that since I know I'll vote for him over Algore any day of the week.)
Who are you voting for?
Only the Chief Sexual Harasser and his Tammy Wynette manque have higher negatives than AGjunior.
If the stock market poops out, WJC is going to slide into a black memory hole that only Jexster will want to fondly remember, and MadDog McCain will clean out the temple of the money-changers.
Whoever heads up the Canadian Liberal party. Liberal isn't a bad word in Canada yet.
Rosy I thought the repubs were responsible for the good economy. I guess if it goes bad then all of a sudden it will be Clinton's economy.
Last summer he posted on 109109's Hokey thread there and got to know some of the moterheads. I'm trying to encourage him to spend more time here.
TT management is doing a very good job of determining that. However, before I go anywhere I need to know what the rules are. I might just decide to give up on discussion forums altogether because of the fucking nazis they put in charge of them.
Oh, Lord...
I guess we should be lucky it wasn't 1000.
Welcome to the Mote. Contrary to what Rosetta says, CalGal doesn't make the rules, although she sometimes tries to achieve a consensus on certain controversial issues.
The Rules of Engagement, which is linked on this page, are the gospel.
Really, the rules are simple and you are unlikely to run afoul of them in normal conversation.
At least until the site gets real popular and someone puts the photoshop experts in charge of running it. Anyway there doesn't appear to be any threads here so the whole dynamic of thread politics is absent. I'm not sure if that is good or bad. Anyway I should probably be discussing this somewhere else. Are political discussions permitted in the politics thread?
Only if we can't think of anything else to discuss.
Goddard:
Just go along as if there is no sysop, ok? Some people, for some weird reason, need to have a sysop on whom to vent their spleen. Where there is none, they invent one.
Somehow, CalGal became the Mote's default sysop through this method of selection.
But she isn't.
Indiana Jones is.
But you'd never know it, because he hasn't thrown anyone out yet.
Sounds positive.
Ha! I knew it musta been you who posted those stupid poems, wonk.
Listen - Calvin Trillin is second-rate. I read his first 1/2 paragraph, and I can almost quote the rest of his article verbatim.
I think he uses a template, and every week he just cuts and pastes different names and places, and - voila! A column is born.
Wonk gets off another zinger.
Indiana:
See. I post here nearly every day, and I didn't even know there's a sysop. If you don't go looking for trouble, it won't find you.
Thought I'd pull that from Jex's link to make sure y'all got to see our eloquent and articulate governor at his best. (blech)
The GOP denies
The slightest Dukish ties.
They're sorry that he ran.
They loathe the Ku Klux Klan.
And yet it's true that he
And they (the GOP)
When stepping to the mike
Do tend to sound alike:
"Blame middle-class defeats
On quotas, welfare cheats."
One word they both hold back
Is what they both mean: black.
The codes give them away:
He's got their DNA.
Its funny who you meet
By peeking 'neath the sheet.
Calvin Trillin
"Deadline Poet"
The White House is in disarray.
That megaklutz, C. Boyden Gray,
Can't seem to find a way to say
"We mean to keep the blacks at bay"
Without igniting quite a fray.
With such a message to convey,
A messenger can go astray.
He has to find a subtle way
To send it out--not overplay,
And sound just like the KKK.
The subtlety of all this may
Just be too much for Boyden Gray.
In which case case, they'll have to find
Somebody else to do it.
Calvin Trillin
Dubya's following in daddy's footsteps. Next month he's appearing in New Orleans with David Duke just in case anybody missed the message from Bob Jones U!
The drug trade will stop.
The hungry will feast.
And peace will break out
Throughout the Mideast.
The homeless will get
The homes of their dreams,
While Japanese ride
In Cutlass Supremes.
Our school keds will have
Einsteinian skills,
Plus bodies to match
The Buffalo Bills'.
Our cities rebuilt,
Our streets all secured,
Goodwill will return.
Oh, AIDS will be cured.
It all can be done,
The Bush Campaign maintains:
We'll just cut the tax
On capital gains.
Calvin Trillin
"Deadline Poet"
POLICE DEPARTMENT BLUES
If I done right or I done wrong,
I'd sooner be held by the Vietcong.
Calvin Trillin
"Deadline Poet"
Very original posts, wonk.
"BREAK OUT THOSE PATSY CLINE RECORDS, HE MAY BE BAAACK:
The New York Times' scariest story this a.m. carries hints (or threats) that Ross Perot and Johnny Mac may be circling each other for some kind of a deal to lure independent voters. We wonder of those naughty Ninjas are still on Perot's lawn. This could get seriously strange."
(I wonder why the freepers and their allies dislike McCain so. I do understand why the stupid party does.)
1.) Because they need enemies in order to operate. And so McCain becomes the New Clinton -- even though his voting record is indistinguishable from George Bush.
2.) They need a hysterical fantasy to keep them warm and cozy at night -- therefore their embrace of Weyerich's "Manchurian Candidate" scenario in which a McCain victory will result in his turning the government over to the Viet Cong.
3.) He's not working from the playbook, which states that Bush gets the nomination.
Whoops -- sorry about #3. That only applies to the Republican Party rank and file.
I know this is tacky but if his camapign managers taste in clothes is any indication of his intelligence, GW has hired a genuine rube. A wool tweed sports coat and cotton khaki pants in DC in February? I don't think so.....maybe GW can spare a minutes worth of campaign cash and buy Karl a decent pair of slacks.
Here's something I'll bet you didn't know.
From Newsweek via MSNBC:
***
Poll: Bush remains GOP front-runner
McCain’s victories fail to blunt lead
NEWSWEEK
Feb. 26 — The more things change, the more they stay the same. Despite winning the Michigan and Arizona primaries last week, Sen. John McCain does not seem to be picking up any speed. In a nationwide poll, he remains in about the same position as he was after Texas Gov. George W. Bush’s win in New Hampshire.
***
Hmmm ... in this dimension, Governor Bush lost New Hampshire, by a wide margin.
Grab a few large grains of salt and check out the rest of the article here. Or don't.
AGjunior looks mafia, with dark shirts and light-colored ties.
Ha, ha. I emailed them. Let's see how long it will be before they fix it.
...But. Bob Dylan IS a middle-aged Jewish cowboy.
On Face the Nation McCain strategist Mike Murphy said they'd "be competitive in California".
Realizing his mistake he later said they'd win California.
Close is fine for horseshoes but not for winner-take-all.
The Richmond Times Dispatch carries an interesting editorial in today's paper. While it refuses to endorse either GOP candidate, it has something to say about the establishment's embrace of Governor Bush:
***
In fact -- and on this you can trust us -- the race is between two conservatives. That is how McCain and Bush describe themselves; the record of each sustains the claim. To trust the testimonial of one and not the other is to plunge into an intellectual, logical, and political swamp.
Still, many conservatives believe GeorgeW is the truer, deeper, more committed conservative. And this is odd. Eight to ten months ago, when establishment Republicans and corporate types were flocking to Bush because they deemed him the inevitable nominee and a Republican who could win, the reluctant debutantes were the party's conservatives who now are hugging him so tightly. They weren't so devoted then ...
For years the Democrats have been unable to shake the monkey of an ideological Socialism that dares not speak its name. Going by Liberalism (in almost all instances with a little l), it postulates the primacy of the collectivity -- group interests and entitlements, as opposed to individuals and individual rights -- and the ability of government to Do Good. Liberalism drove the Democrats to many successes. More recently, it has driven the party to its current low estate.
Conservatism may have become liberalism's antipodal ideology -- complete with litmus tests and a skewed view of reality. Our concern is that the McCainBush contest may be saying conservatives are doing to the Republican Party what liberals did to the Democratic Party: through ideological rigidity, purity, and narrowness, rendering it unable to win ...
***
Read the entire editorial here.
Unbelievable what these Pigpilers are saying these days isn't it!
jex --
Be nice. Mr. Barbour's future earning potential as a lobbyist could be significantly impacted by the outcome of the election. So you gotta figure he'll say anything.
Cal --
MSNBC changed their web page: it now reads "... after Texas Gov. George W. Bush’s win in South Carolina."
Quinnipiac New Jersey poll of registered Republican voters, taken before the Michigan and Arizona primaries:
Bush 41%
McCain 41%
Keyes 6%
Undecided 12%
Margin of error 5.6%.
In the green room awaiting his appearance, Bill Bennett said that sucker is "talking about me!"
jex --
Come on. Bill Bennett is a well-known, dyed-in-the-wool liberal.
Pat Robertson said so on the last edition of The 700 Club, so it must be true.
Trial:
Yeah, but NJ's primary is in April, isn't it?
Ace --
I think it's one of the later ones -- April sounds right.
Took long enough ...
***
Bush 'Regrets' Bob Jones Flap
By Glen Johnson
Associated Press Writer
Sunday, Feb. 27, 2000; 1:57 p.m. EST
AUSTIN, Texas –– In a letter to the leader of New York's Catholics, Gov. George W. Bush says his campaign appearance at a South Carolina school with anti-Catholic views was a "missed opportunity causing needless offense, which I deeply regret."
Bush has come under steady criticism for his Feb. 2 visit to Bob Jones University, a Christian school whose founder has criticized the Pope and labeled the Catholic church a "Satanic cult."
Bush's opponents have assailed him for not using the appearance to speak out against the policies of the school, which also bans interracial dating. Bush spoke about his conservatism.
In a letter to Cardinal John O'Connor of New York, leader of the archdiocese's 2.4 million Roman Catholics, Bush states his "profound respect" for the Catholic Church and says criticism of him is unfair and unfounded.
"On reflection, I should have been more clear in disassociating myself from anti-Catholic sentiments and racial prejudice," he said in the letter, mailed Friday and released Sunday by his campaign. "It was a missed opportunity causing needless offense, which I deeply regret."
The letter marked an abrupt reversal for Bush, who only last week said: "I don't make any apologies for what I do in the campaign."
***
I wonder when the governor's pollsters let him know that he regretted his visit?
Read the entire article here.
Shrub doesn't follow polls...he follows his hort.
Bob Jones U = "Hymietown." 
In Massachusetts, once a hotbed of Clinton support, 21,700 Democrats have changed their registration to independent so they could vote for McCain in the March 7 primary. Another 4,000 Democrats have re-registered as Republicans, and about 2,800 independents have switched to the GOP--probably to show outraged supporters of George W. Bush that McCain can, too, bring in Republican votes. That's nearly 30,000 voters.
Even Pat Robertson, the founder of the Christian Coalition, who has had his own share of stumbles, had no sympathy. "I'd have advised him not to go," he said. "Bob Jones has been known as a rather extreme place. Those people are really far out."
But more than anything else, the Bob Jones debacle is a telling case study of the importance of symbolic politics. Candidates who are not sufficiently sensitive to symbols can cause themselves irreparable damage in one fleeting utterance or, in the case of Bush, one 45-minute appearance.
A few days earlier, Bush committed another symbolic blunder when he popped up at a rally in New Hampshire flanked by his parents. It fueled an image that he would be nowhere without his kin.
The Bob Jones visit took on an outsized importance because Bush has still been a relative blank slate ideologically...."
Mentally blank as well.
They're YOUR problem now. The rest of us disposed of them in the Great Impeachment Debacle.
Americans Interest in 2000 Campaign Up Even As They Perceive Campaign as More Negative - JFK School Vanishing Voter Project
"It was a missed opportunity causing needless offense, which I deeply regret."
But he didn't say that he is sorry. I really think that Shrub should say he is sorry. Just come right out and say it. What's so hard about that? He should say that he is sorry. He hasn't said that. I just don't think the American people can be satisfied until Shrub says that he is sorry. Why can't he say that? I'm sorry. That's all.
RJB --
Because he isn't sorry.
He is experiencing "regret."
Most politicians regret things that make them lose primaries.
You know the correction that you noted earlier? It was made after someone read my letter.
And check your email if you want to know who read my letter.
Cal --
No kidding!
Huh. If I had known, I'd have posted to him directly.
When a guy who once threatened to innundate Orlando with hurricanes because Disney World has Gay Days, refers to BJU as "....a rather extreme place. Those people are really far out.", well, you know we're talkin' 'bout some serious wackjobs here, friends n' neighbors.
Funny that Bush is just now realizing what a fuck-up that was. Oh well, like it or not, he gets to dance with them that brung him. Were it not for the loony fringe in SC, he'd only have Iowa under his belt, no? He ain't shaking free of that tar-baby that quickly.
For what it's worth, I caught what you were saying in Message # 20421 and heartily agree; sauce for the goober, so to speak.
Bush Jr's Bob Jones Excellent Adventure was a tremendous gaffe. Yet another reason why Rove isn't qualified to handle the 10PM-6AM shift at the 7-11.
And McCain isn't any better; a chief campaign manager is Richard Quinn ("a man of great integrity" according to McCain) is editor of Southern Partisan. A magazine which is a pretty reacist piece of trash.
Vol. 3 No. 2, Spring 1983, pp. 5f "A Partisan View" by Richard M. Quinn Editor-in-Chief:
Newsweek magazine celebrated its 50th anniversary this year with a 160 page "Special Edition" ,
"I So the editors selected five typical families from all regions and walks of American life ...
How does the South fit into Newsweek's vision of the American dream? .. An evil white Southern planter "took his pleasure" with a
slave girl (how Newsweek verified this is not made clear) who then gave birth to a halfbreed son. The planter ripped the babe from
his mother s arms, sold her for profit and put the boy to work. As a handsome, angry young man (shades of Mandingo), he rode the
freedom train to Ohio where he became the great grandfather to the black woman who started the civil rights movement in Ohio and
who presumably gave Newsweek this colorful family history.
In point of fact, massive evidence suggests that slave families were rarely separated. Efforts were made uniformly across the South to
keep families together (in part because good morale was good for business). The record also shows that many freed slaves stayed
South, kept close ties with their former owners and found for themselves a life altogether more satisfying than their cousins who
ended up sleeping with rats in Harlem under the shadow of Newsweek's editorial offices.
McCain is ripping Foulwell and Robertson at a rally in Virginia Beach. CNN has it.
McCain appears to be behind in California, despite polls showing he is competitive with Gore in November, while Bush would lose to Gore in CA by ten points.
McCain's speech was a Sister Souljah moment.
McCain invokes Lincoln's name at the same time that his campaign manager's magazine advertises t-shirts that celebrate Lincoln's assassination.
McCain, however, holds a slim lead in New York and the trend seems to be with him at the moment.
"a Sister Souljah moment"
What does that mean?
Since no else is answering, I'll try to explain it.
In 1992, shortly before the Democratic convention, Bill Clinton attacked a black rap star named Sister Souljah, who had been making violently racist statements. This act of attacking someone in one's own core constituency for going over the line is now referred to as a "Sister Souljah moment".
That's my boy. God, it's a total drag that he's probably not going to win the primary. 
Most excellent.
I would not have wanted to be standing nearby when Pat Robertson learned Senator McCain had just compared him to Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan.
Jerry Falwell is probably already halfway through writing the script for The McCain Chronicles.
I wonder if that speech will help draw in the other Republicans in enough numbers to offset the nine thousand tons of angry zealots who have just lined him up in their sights.
McCain made the speech in Virginia, but surely the speech was directed at New York voters. Bush sent the Catholics there a message by saying he made a mistake with his Bob Jones University speech, but McCain counters with a stronger one, showing he can go straight to the lion's den and pull its tail.
If McCain's strategy works, he could win several of the big states, including New York, Washington and Ohio. He can also claim to be a stronger candidate than Bush if he takes the California beauty contest. With Michigan already in the bag, McCain proves himself to be the tougher candidate in the general election in several big states.
Of course, he can probably kiss off the entire South. He just has to hope he can carry New England, the large central states of Ohio and Michigan, and the West.
The one bad thing out of this is that McCain has ripped Bush unfairly and made it difficult to elect Bush in November should he be the Republican nominee. Bush is no bigot and if he panders to the RR, he is doing nothing different than any Republican candidates has done since Reagan in 80. If he aint courageous, he surely aint anything worse either. Claiming to be the heir to Reagan and then, in the same speech, ripping the Religious Right borders on making McCain look like those same politicians that he seems so refreshingly distant from.
Were McCain to get the nomination under these circumstances it would mark the final end to the Reagan coalition in the GOP (most of the Reagan Democrats have already left), and it would make the party safe for social moderates again. That would be so momentous a change that I doubt it will happen, but it would be amusing if it did.
Pincher,
I certainly do not think Bush is bigoted against Catholics or blacks, but I would suspect he harbors some bigotry against gays.
No argument. McCain's actions may prove that there is a significant group in the middle willing to vote for a Republican who is willing to disassociate himself from that crowd.
But if the group isn't big enough, and if Bush wins despite their efforts, then you'll see lots of media coverage of jubilant Christians. Not a good day for Republican moderates.
It will be interesting to see if the moderate leaders start realizing what's happening. They could try their best to encourage the moderates by coming out for McCain--despite their personal dislike for him--or they could stand by and let Bush win the battle and lose the war by relying on the old standbys.
BTW, I think McCain is right to leave California alone. Apparently, a goodly number of Dems and indies reregistered to vote for him. They'll vote for him whether he debates Bush or not. But the Californian Republican party is still largely dominated by the Orange Country wing, and I'm not sure if McCain's efforts out here will do much good in the primary. I'd rather he focus on the states he has a legitimate shot of winning.
Cal --
Those nine thousand tons of angry zealots had Senator McCain in their sights anyway -- figuratively speaking, that is. Some of them may now be willing to take things a step further.
I can just imagine what his Secret Service detail leader was thinking when the senator was speaking: "Oh, shit. Better double the sniper sweeps."
PM --
"Bush is no bigot and if he panders to the RR ..."
If he panders to the bigoted elements of the Christian conservative movement without being a bigot himself, then he's a hypocrite. I'd prefer to believe that the governor is utterly sincere in his beliefs and really meant it when he said he shared the values of Bob Jones University.
Ronski --
"Were McCain to get the nomination under these circumstances it would mark the final end to the Reagan coalition in the GOP (most of the Reagan Democrats have already left), and it would make the party safe for social moderates again."
I very nearly agree.
It's not enough for the senator to get the nomination; he would actually have to win the White House, over the opposition of the Christian right, to realign the party.
TS,
Yes, you're right, he would have to win the presidency. It's just that I think he would probably do so.
Ronski --
Point taken.
Cal,
He's made enough statements supporting fining fags for the what they do in bed, and about gay adoption, and about the Pink Elephant Brigade (Log Cabinettes) that he has to have given some thought to the matter.
You may be right--and it's not like I think my interpretation is any more favorable to Bush. It's just that I see him utterly clueless on certain issues, and just saying what he's been told to say. Literally, the party line.
If I found out that Bush had ever known anyone gay, I'd then opt for either opportunism or bigotry. But for now, it sounds like sheer cluelessness.
I certainly do not think Bush is bigoted against Catholics or blacks, but I would suspect he harbors some bigotry against gays.
Well, I'm not sure that McCain is much better. In any case, McCain didn't specifically attack Bush's policies on homosexual issues (nor with his own anti-gay stands would he have had the room to do so).
CalGal --
But if the group isn't big enough, and if Bush wins despite their efforts, then you'll see lots of media coverage of jubilant Christians. Not a good day for Republican moderates.
Agreed. Gore will use it to his benefit.
Regarding your comments on McCain's California strategy: I completely agree. When the polls show you tied in Washington and New York, but twenty points behind in California, you had better not waste your time in California. Besides, McCain can still claim to be the stronger candidate in California if he takes the beauty contest.
But why do you say that McCain has been unfair in ripping Bush? Bush did indeed call out the zealots--or allowed them to be called out in his name. It got him the SC primary. Now he's paying the price.
It's not unfair to attack Bush for who he consorts with, but it is unfair to call him -- personally -- intolerant or bigoted. Bush isn't bigoted, and one article I read said that McCain had called him so. I'll see if I can find it.
If he panders to the bigoted elements of the Christian conservative movement without being a bigot himself, then he's a hypocrite.
Hypocrisy in a Politician? Surely a minor sin. Bush consorts with bigots. McCain calls himself a Reagan Republican while attacking the RR. I per