if Obama loses, it will have less to do with race, I think, than it will have to do with relying on the (historically unreliable) youth vote, many of whom have been somewhat taken aback by the choice of a 30+year senator as a running mate & the perception of sexism on the part of his campaign by Clinton supporters. If his race is a factor, I honestly think it will be negligible.
I would also like to add: if he does lose, the entire world will be told, ad nauseam that it was because of race. That won't be true, of course, but it will be repeated over and over and over and over.
Obama vs McCain: split out from the "Happy" thread
-
sultan2075
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2379
- Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
- Location: Washington, D. C.
- Contact:
--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
Jumping back a bit...
But she only cancelled the bridge because she couldn't get any more federal funding.sultan2075 wrote:due to her cancellation of some needless Federal projects in Alaska (the bridge to nowhere), small government libertarians and conservatives will now find the McCain ticket more attractive.
(Source)"Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Governor Palin added. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened."
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
Strange... Rumours are surfacing that Sarah Palin might not be baby Trig's mother, but instead his grandmother.
Source: The Palin (Grand)Baby?
Source: The Palin (Grand)Baby?
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
-
sultan2075
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2379
- Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
- Location: Washington, D. C.
- Contact:
Regardless, I'd imagine that after nearly 8 years of Bush spending money like a drunken sailor, fiscal conservatives will be happy with anything that even looks like fiscal moderation.markfiend wrote:Jumping back a bit...But she only cancelled the bridge because she couldn't get any more federal funding.sultan2075 wrote:due to her cancellation of some needless Federal projects in Alaska (the bridge to nowhere), small government libertarians and conservatives will now find the McCain ticket more attractive.(Source)"Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Governor Palin added. "Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened."
I would not take those rumours--nor much else that emanates from the Daily Kos--seriously. See your link in the moon landings thread (which cost me about an hour of work time, dammit! Funny stuff).markfiend wrote:Strange... Rumours are surfacing that Sarah Palin might not be baby Trig's mother, but instead his grandmother.
Source: The Palin (Grand)Baby?
--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
I guess that's fair enoughsultan2075 wrote:I would not take those rumours--nor much else that emanates from the Daily Kos--seriously.
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
-
nodubmanshouts
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
- Location: California
It may not be, but I seem to remember a fair amount of book banning back in the day in England, not to mention not being able to air certain Irish politicians voices on TV. May be before your time Dark, but not that long ago.That isn't an exclusively American thing.
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
Oh my. That was fcuking ridiculous. The way the BBC got round it was to overdub footage of the politicians concerned with actors saying exactly the same thing.nodubmanshouts wrote:...not being able to air certain Irish politicians voices on TV...
The Day Today had a brilliant parody of it with Steve Coogan as (generic Sinn Fein politician)* being forced to inhale helium before speaking on camera.
* or did they actually say he was someone specific? I forget. No matter.
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
Sarah Palin appears to be ignorant of US history:
Edit to add: It does look like the "fake pregnancy" story is complete bull. Clicky.
Even I know that "under God" was only added to the pledge in the 1950s; the founding fathers were long dead by then. Jeez...a [url=http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html]questionnaire [/url]in 2006 wrote:Question: Are you offended by the phrase “Under God� in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.
Edit to add: It does look like the "fake pregnancy" story is complete bull. Clicky.
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
-
sultan2075
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2379
- Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
- Location: Washington, D. C.
- Contact:
markfiend wrote:
Edit to add: It does look like the "fake pregnancy" story is complete bull. Clicky.
Yeah, that's interesting. I think if the Democrats make a big deal out of it, it will blow up in their faces. Honestly, more than anything else, it just serves to strengthen her pro-life credentials and strengthens ties with religious voters (not exactly big fans of McCain) and social conservatives (ditto).
Are you serious? That's hilarious.markfiend wrote:The way the BBC got round it was to overdub footage of the politicians concerned with actors saying exactly the same thing.
--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
-
nodubmanshouts
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
- Location: California
Pisses me off no endAre you offended by the phrase “Under God� in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
Then Miss Pallin will be getting slaves then, since having slaves was good enough for most of them.If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me
What a dip-s**t she is.
-
sultan2075
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2379
- Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
- Location: Washington, D. C.
- Contact:
Untrue.nodubmanshouts wrote:
... having slaves was good enough for most of them.
--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
-
nodubmanshouts
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
- Location: California
Well alright, may be not most, but some. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, for sure (and they're a couple of the important ones).
-
sultan2075
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2379
- Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
- Location: Washington, D. C.
- Contact:
Since I happen to be at home, and have access to my library:nodubmanshouts wrote:Well alright, may be not most, but some. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, for sure (and they're a couple of the important ones).
George Washington: "There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it [slavery]."
John Adams: "Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States... I have, through my whole life, held the practice of slavery in ...abhorrence."
Benjamin Franklin: "Slavery is... an atrocious debasement of human nature."
James Madison: "We have seen the mere distinction of color made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man."
James Otis: "The colonists are by the law of nature freeborn, as indeed all men are, white or black."
Thomas Jefferson, in fact, cites the existence of slavery in the colonies as a justification for the American revolution in the first draft of the Declaration of Independence: "He [the King of Britain] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce." In 1807, while president, Jefferson urged Congress to abolish the slave trade, to "withdraw the citizens of the United States from all further participation in those violations of human rights which have been so long continued on the unoffending inhabitants of Africa."
In his Notes on the State of Virginia, on the subject of slavery, Jefferson writes "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever."
The Founders, by and large, did not approve of the institution of slavery, viewing it as a violation of the natural law. The more interesting question is why, knowing full well that it was a moral evil, they chose not to abolish it at the Founding. There is an answer to that question, but "hypocrisy" isn't it.
--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
-
nodubmanshouts
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
- Location: California
And I have access to Wikipedia!
Seriously, just google "George Washington slaves" or "Thomas Jefferson slaves". They may have treated them well, and spoken out against slavery, but they still owned slaves. I don't think you'll find a serious historian who will debate that.
Seriously, just google "George Washington slaves" or "Thomas Jefferson slaves". They may have treated them well, and spoken out against slavery, but they still owned slaves. I don't think you'll find a serious historian who will debate that.
-
nodubmanshouts
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
- Location: California
And anybody who can tell me the link between my profile picutre, Thomas Jefferson and Christies wins a fat cigar
-
sultan2075
- Overbomber
- Posts: 2379
- Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
- Location: Washington, D. C.
- Contact:
I didn't debate it. I'm not debating it. I'm saying that they knew it was wrong, and that the interesting question is why they didn't abolish it at the founding.nodubmanshouts wrote:And I have access to Wikipedia!
Seriously, just google "George Washington slaves" or "Thomas Jefferson slaves". They may have treated them well, and spoken out against slavery, but they still owned slaves. I don't think you'll find a serious historian who will debate that.
--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
-
nodubmanshouts
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
- Location: California
Because they would have lost support from some supporters of the new country, I guess. Fighting a war (somewhat) based on taxation is one thing, loosing your cheap labor force is something else.
There were less 'southern states' at the time of Independence, but I think it would still have been an issue that would have threatened to divide the young country.
There were less 'southern states' at the time of Independence, but I think it would still have been an issue that would have threatened to divide the young country.
-
nodubmanshouts
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 06:50
- Location: California
Now Palin's 17 (*) year old daughter is pregnant and is going to keep it.... wonder how that's gonna stir things up?
Hopefully not at all, if everyone has some decency...
(*) age of sexual consent is generally 18 in the USA
Hopefully not at all, if everyone has some decency...
(*) age of sexual consent is generally 18 in the USA
-
markfiend
- goriller of form 3b
- Posts: 21181
- Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
- Location: st custards
- Contact:
Totally serious. The BBC are very good at finding ways around censorship rules though: Here's a link about the six years (:eek:) the ban was in place.sultan2075 wrote:Are you serious? That's hilarious.markfiend wrote:The way the BBC got round it was to overdub footage of the politicians concerned with actors saying exactly the same thing.
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
—Bertrand Russell
-
EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
I remember that - there would be a warning before the article saying "Because we cannot broadcast [this person's] words, they will be read by someone else." Always thought that was a bit weird.markfiend wrote:Totally serious. The BBC are very good at finding ways around censorship rules though: Here's a link about the six years (:eek:) the ban was in place.sultan2075 wrote:Are you serious? That's hilarious.markfiend wrote:The way the BBC got round it was to overdub footage of the politicians concerned with actors saying exactly the same thing.
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
-
EvilBastard
- Overbomber
- Posts: 3934
- Joined: 01 Feb 2006, 17:48
- Location: Where the Ruined Tower shouts
Hey, they're a lot more tasteful than I would have thought. "Obama is arabic for Carter" is a new twist, though. Surprised that they haven't made one showing a silhouette of a figure dangling by a noose from a tree with the caption "Obama lynchmob - ask me for details" or something equally crass.msm67 wrote:Has anyone else seen the Hate Obama stickers on ebay?
"I won't go down in history, but I probably will go down on your sister."
Hank Moody
Hank Moody
-
nowayjose
- Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
- Posts: 539
- Joined: 19 Mar 2006, 02:15
- Location: Berlin
Probably because the target group would have difficulties reading that many words in one goEvilBastard wrote: Surprised that they haven't made one showing a silhouette of a figure dangling by a noose from a tree with the caption "Obama lynchmob - ask me for details" or something equally crass.