Well, now...

On Sep 4, 6:07*am, jeff wrote:
wrote:
OK, do I post the obvious:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

or do I post the less-so:

She was back at the bar, showered, dressed, and halfway into drinks and
dinner when the ball finally hit the ground...after going straight over
the mound and somewhere WAY past the lights...

Seriously, with a couple of missteps, Palin, if she holds, may well have
outspeeched Obama in even his most ardent fans' dreams. *At the very
least, Biden better not be sleeping.

Boys, and I use that term VERY loosely, we gots us a horserace,
R
...and I can hardly wait to hear the Tel slams...

a bit shrill...but well-delivered. of course, reports are it was written
entirely by others and she was taught how to deliver it in a 6+ hour
session. still, she had to stand up there and make it true...and i think
she did well in talking to her choir. she seems sturdy. i look forward
to seeing her without her puppetmasters...that will be the real test.
but, i agree...it's going to be interesting and close.

jeff (still...i missed the black leather boots...perhaps she has a tatoo
and a special piercing??)

I'm not usually one to throw up the sexist card, but.....

Given that Obama's only reason for being nominated is his speech-
making
ability it feels odd to hear Palin denigrated for her speech-making
ability.

Full-disclosure, I didn't actually see/hear/read either Obama or
Palin's speeches,
I'm far more interested in their substance than how they can read from
a
teleprompter.
- Ken

" wrote in message
...

I'm far more interested in their substance than how they can read from
a teleprompter.

That IS their substance.

Wolfgang
from the "THIS is the planet you live on" desk.

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 06:27:25 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Sep 4, 6:07*am, jeff wrote:
wrote:
OK, do I post the obvious:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

or do I post the less-so:

She was back at the bar, showered, dressed, and halfway into drinks and
dinner when the ball finally hit the ground...after going straight over
the mound and somewhere WAY past the lights...

Seriously, with a couple of missteps, Palin, if she holds, may well have
outspeeched Obama in even his most ardent fans' dreams. *At the very
least, Biden better not be sleeping.

Boys, and I use that term VERY loosely, we gots us a horserace,
R
...and I can hardly wait to hear the Tel slams...

a bit shrill...but well-delivered. of course, reports are it was written
entirely by others and she was taught how to deliver it in a 6+ hour
session. still, she had to stand up there and make it true...and i think
she did well in talking to her choir. she seems sturdy. i look forward
to seeing her without her puppetmasters...that will be the real test.
but, i agree...it's going to be interesting and close.

jeff (still...i missed the black leather boots...perhaps she has a tatoo
and a special piercing??)

I'm not usually one to throw up the sexist card, but.....

Given that Obama's only reason for being nominated is his speech-
making
ability it feels odd to hear Palin denigrated for her speech-making
ability.

Well, fair's fair - she's no Halle Berry...

Full-disclosure, I didn't actually see/hear/read either Obama or
Palin's speeches,
I'm far more interested in their substance than how they can read from
a
teleprompter.

Um...OK. I'm curious - do you prefer to base your
substance-of-the-candidate decision more on the spew from Rush, et al or
Huffingtonpost, et al...?

Full disclosure - I watched 'em both because I wanted to see first-hand
how they do rather than have someone tell me what I should think about
it.

youtube this helps,
R

- Ken

On Sep 4, 7:37*am, wrote:

She is on tape gushing over all the earmarked pork she got with the
help of Rep. Young (Indited) and Sen Stevens (On trial). And its a
matter of record that she did not turn back the $217 million pork pie
of Federal taxpayer money for the bridge to no-whe Fact, She kept
it and distributed to her own set of pork projects. Facts that the
vetting team did not get to the speech writing team in time to cut
from the speech. :

@)))))) What a TV ad that is going to make. Remember Richard, its not
only Texans who have trouble with that veracity thingy.

Dave

wrote:
On Sep 4, 7:37 am, wrote:

She is on tape gushing over all the earmarked pork she got with the
help of Rep. Young (Indited) and Sen Stevens (On trial). And its a
matter of record that she did not turn back the $217 million pork pie
of Federal taxpayer money for the bridge to no-whe Fact, She kept
it and distributed to her own set of pork projects. Facts that the
vetting team did not get to the speech writing team in time to cut
from the speech. :

@)))))) What a TV ad that is going to make. Remember Richard, its not
only Texans who have trouble with that veracity thingy.

Dave

....your inability to spell simple words does not help your veracity and
your rabid political BS is further proof that
education does not confer common sense. Those liberal profs apparently
poked a lot of bull**** in your mush brains.

Frank Sr.

"Frank Church" wrote in message
news:aQSvk.407$Af3.126@trnddc06...
wrote:
On Sep 4, 7:37 am, wrote:

She is on tape gushing over all the earmarked pork she got with the
help of Rep. Young (Indited) and Sen Stevens (On trial). And its a
matter of record that she did not turn back the $217 million pork pie
of Federal taxpayer money for the bridge to no-whe Fact, She kept
it and distributed to her own set of pork projects. Facts that the
vetting team did not get to the speech writing team in time to cut
from the speech. :

@)))))) What a TV ad that is going to make. Remember Richard, its not
only Texans who have trouble with that veracity thingy.

Dave

...your inability to spell simple words does not help your veracity and
your rabid political BS is further proof that
education does not confer common sense. Those liberal profs apparently
poked a lot of bull**** in your mush brains.

Still, it's encouraging that this time around, as always, everyone here
remains single-mindedly focused on all of the large real issues, about which
they continue to display their characteristic breadth and depth of
knowledge.

Wolfgang
who knows that it ain't just everywhere a boy can go to find such a firm
grasp on the world geopolitical and economic scenes.......let alone such a
stellar selection of foolproof solutions to problems that escape everyone
else in the world.

On Sep 4, 8:06*am, Frank Church wrote:
wrote:

...your inability to spell simple words does not help your veracity and
your rabid political BS is further proof that
education does not confer common sense. Those liberal profs apparently
poked a lot of bull**** in your mush brains.

Frank Sr.

But of course you cannot dispute anything in my post. Can you?
Put up or shut up time. Or just **** into the wind like you just did.
Im going fishing for a few days. Lets see if you can actually learn
what happened in that time frame, given your superiority thingy.

We know a bit more about Alaskan politics up here in the Pacific NW.
Our papers and media actually cover Alaska. Do yours? Ive worked in
Alaskan and really like Alaskans in general. But their taste for
getting others to pay the bills is notorious. Claiming she and
Alaskans decry pork is hilarious. Just does not fly. As you are about
to learn.

Dave
BYU and Utah professors as liberals? Earth to Frank, Earth to Frank.

On Sep 4, 10:58*am, wrote:
On Sep 4, 8:06*am, Frank Church wrote:

wrote:

...your inability to spell simple words does not help your veracity and
your rabid political BS is further proof that
education does not confer common sense. Those liberal profs apparently
poked a lot of bull**** in your mush brains.

Frank Sr.

But of course you cannot dispute anything in my post. Can you?
Put up or shut up time. Or just **** into the wind like you just did.
Im going fishing for a few days. Lets see if you can actually learn
what happened in that time frame, given your superiority thingy.

We know a bit more about Alaskan politics up here in the Pacific NW.
Our papers and media actually cover Alaska. Do yours? Ive worked *in
Alaskan and really like Alaskans in general. But their taste for
getting others to pay the bills is notorious. Claiming she and
Alaskans decry pork is hilarious. *Just does not fly. As you are about
to learn.

Since you are informed about Alaska fiscal details, perhaps you can
expand on the information that, in the agreement preceding statehood,
the Alaskans said they didn't want to become wards of the federal
government, but couldn't see any way to avoid it, given their
industrial status. The Feds promised to unlock the land to allow for
the extraction of the resources that would allow the state to take
care of itself. You saw what it took to get the pipeline.
So far, other than that and some token teeth-pulling, it hasn't
happened. Unlock the land and AK will pay it all back, with interest.

cheers

oz, who understands that there is a reason the Forest Service is under
the Dept. of Agriculture

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 07:59:59 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sep 4, 7:37*am, wrote:

She is on tape gushing over all the earmarked pork she got with the
help of Rep. Young (Indited) and Sen Stevens (On trial). And its a
matter of record that she did not turn back the $217 million pork pie
of Federal taxpayer money for the bridge to no-whe Fact, She kept
it and distributed to her own set of pork projects. Facts that the
vetting team did not get to the speech writing team in time to cut
from the speech. :

@)))))) What a TV ad that is going to make.

Yeah - boring. I'm not talking about reality or truth, I'm talking
about what the very small relative number of voters who are gonna decide
thing are going to believe (and/or want to believe). And 217 mil of
pork that she didn't initiate and came out of Congress isn't gonna make
one iota of difference. Heck, McCain, Obama, and Biden are more
responsible for it than she is, and "THE FACT" (cue music) that she took
what fell into her lap and spent on her state isn't going to get too
many folks all a-tizzy. Yet another thing the Dems, with two Senators
on the ticket, need to be VERY careful about shouting from the rooftops.
IAC, the Dems put up some shtick about pork and bridges and Alaskan
Senators and house remodels and the GOP puts up pictures of her and her
family and Cindy McCain, and the heartland of the US, where corn and
farm subsidies pay for vacations, votes Sarah/Cindy '08...and oh, yeah,
for that old guy, whathisname, the war hero dude, too...

Remember Richard, its not
only Texans who have trouble with that veracity thingy.

Right. It's most all politicians and "liberals"...

Dave

HTH,
R

On Sep 4, 7:37*am, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 06:27:25 -0700 (PDT), "



wrote:
On Sep 4, 6:07*am, jeff wrote:
wrote:
OK, do I post the obvious:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

or do I post the less-so:

She was back at the bar, showered, dressed, and halfway into drinks and
dinner when the ball finally hit the ground...after going straight over
the mound and somewhere WAY past the lights...

Seriously, with a couple of missteps, Palin, if she holds, may well have
outspeeched Obama in even his most ardent fans' dreams. *At the very
least, Biden better not be sleeping.

Boys, and I use that term VERY loosely, we gots us a horserace,
R
...and I can hardly wait to hear the Tel slams...

a bit shrill...but well-delivered. of course, reports are it was written
entirely by others and she was taught how to deliver it in a 6+ hour
session. still, she had to stand up there and make it true...and i think
she did well in talking to her choir. she seems sturdy. i look forward
to seeing her without her puppetmasters...that will be the real test.
but, i agree...it's going to be interesting and close.

jeff (still...i missed the black leather boots...perhaps she has a tatoo
and a special piercing??)

I'm not usually one to throw up the sexist card, but.....

Given that Obama's only reason for being nominated is his speech-
making
ability it feels odd to hear Palin denigrated for her speech-making
ability.

Well, fair's fair - she's no Halle Berry...



Full-disclosure, I didn't actually see/hear/read either Obama or
Palin's speeches,
I'm far more interested in their substance than how they can read from
a
teleprompter.

Um...OK. *I'm curious - do you prefer to base your
substance-of-the-candidate decision more on the spew from Rush, et al or
Huffingtonpost, et al...?

I prefer looking at past behavior.....which is difficult because in
this case
one candidate hasn't done anything.

Generally I look at who has been closest to the center before they
started
campaigning for President. This should make me an obvious McCain
voter.
Unfortunately he's been trying to make up to the far-right ever since
2000
and that's making me sick to my stomach. Picking an anti-abortion
person
for VP may push me completely over the edge. Still not sure I can
vote
for Obama since he's a completely unknown/inexperienced quantity and
seems
totally naive (read: way too far left) for my tastes.

Looks like I'm leaning towards throwing my vote away again to a 3rd
party
candidate.
- Ken