It's looking more and more like Palin and The Old Dude '08 and here's a reason...

wrote:

Sure it will, but hey, that's why there's chocolate and vanilla...

Oh my God. Is there no limit to your racist innuendos?!?!

- JR

On Sep 23, 3:52*am, wrote:

We all see the problem differently. You blame the middle class, not a
failed ideology, not the cleptocracy, not Wall Street crooks. I blame
woodenheads, who hopefully are waking up now after 2 huge presidential
mistakes, and starting to smell the coffee.

Well of course you avoided the question. But I'll play along, for the
sake of others who may wonder what the hell I am referring to.
Actually one fresh new published source on just how far the rot has
spread in the GOP is a new book by a Republican dirty tricks
operative, convicted, time served and now the author of . . .

"How to Rig an Election, Confessions of a Republican Operative" (Allan
Raymond,)

Raymond describes his work over the last 8 years or so, and the
systematic illegal efforts of the RNC to undermine US democracy's
election systems. For example, deceptive robocalls to Democrats using
a scary sounding black male voice, and another operation that targeted
Democratic union men, with calls from actors using heavy Spanish
accents, threatening to take their jobs. The race themes play heavy in
many of these operations. Some of the crap you posted sounded like it
came from one of these operations targeting Black ministers supporting
Obama. Part of the operation used bogus threats of IRS subpoenas to
Iowa Ministers.

Raymond tells what he did, who paid him, who also was involved. You
might also look at the career of James Tobin (Former RNC Party Boss/
chieftain for New England) who the RNC has spent $6 million defending
for his role in various illegal activities for the RNC.

Dave
I bet this book is even available to Massachusetts readers

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 02:53:20 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sep 23, 3:52*am, wrote:

We all see the problem differently. You blame the middle class, not a
failed ideology, not the cleptocracy, not Wall Street crooks. I blame
woodenheads, who hopefully are waking up now after 2 huge presidential
mistakes, and starting to smell the coffee.

Well of course you avoided the question. But I'll play along, for the
sake of others who may wonder what the hell I am referring to.
Actually one fresh new published source on just how far the rot has
spread in the GOP is a new book by a Republican dirty tricks
operative, convicted, time served and now the author of . . .

"How to Rig an Election, Confessions of a Republican Operative" (Allan
Raymond,)

Raymond describes his work over the last 8 years or so, and the
systematic illegal efforts of the RNC to undermine US democracy's
election systems. For example, deceptive robocalls to Democrats using
a scary sounding black male voice, and another operation that targeted
Democratic union men, with calls from actors using heavy Spanish
accents, threatening to take their jobs. The race themes play heavy in
many of these operations. Some of the crap you posted sounded like it
came from one of these operations targeting Black ministers supporting
Obama. Part of the operation used bogus threats of IRS subpoenas to
Iowa Ministers.

Raymond tells what he did, who paid him, who also was involved. You
might also look at the career of James Tobin (Former RNC Party Boss/
chieftain for New England) who the RNC has spent $6 million defending
for his role in various illegal activities for the RNC.

Dave
I bet this book is even available to Massachusetts readers

Oh, well, if it's in a book...

Sheesh,
R
....so what's next on your to-read list, "Chariots of the Gods"...? The
collected works of David Icke?

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:17:40 -0400, daytripper
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:33:52 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:22:50 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:

Oh, I doubt she would or could influence the election very much if at
all, but other more visible and "mainstream" celebs can and will. ...

You repeat the same silly piffle here over and over in a
variety of different ways but it all comes down to the same
thing, "American voters are stupid but if you guys actually
call them stupid they're gonna vote GOP, so take *that*,
neener, neener, neener."

The GOP has put up a crazy old warmonger who chose a category
five moron from the snake-handling wing of the Republican party
as his running mate and all you want to do is gloat because the
American voter is so goddamn stupid they'll probably get elected.

Why do you hate America so much ?

To generally quote a little-known white Mississippi Dem, Gene Taylor, we
have some 225 million adults in the US, a goodly percentage of which are
eligible for the office, and these 4 are the best we could come up
with...? (And yep, he did say specifically and emphatically "4")

Again, it's not a matter of picking the best person for the job, it's a
matter of picking from the four ya got. It has been apparent for some
time that Obama ain't nothing special - just another pol trying to get
to the show any way he can. Trust me or don't, should the "real thing"
ever come along, they'll need to be begged and pleaded with to get
within 100 miles of a modern campaign, and in the end, will probably
wind up saying, ala Bradley, Romney, etc., "oh, just **** it..."

TC,
R

You put "real thing" in the same sentence with "Romney"?!?

/daytripper (ahahahahahahahahahaha!)

Yes, I did, although I didn't call him (or Bradley) that. I simply used
them as references of seemingly good, qualified people who have largely
walked away from politics. Bradley was probably closer to "the real
thing," and I'm not convinced Romney is _gone_, but ??? IMO, of the
major party candidates that had a reasonable shot, Romney appeared to be
the best of the pack on the economy and world affairs. I don't know
enough about him to make a comment about his being the "real thing" or
not, but I'd say he was probably a better choice than any of the current
four.

TC,
R

On Sep 23, 7:17 pm, daytripper wrote:

You put "real thing" in the same sentence with "Romney"?!?

/daytripper (ahahahahahahahahahaha!)

Maybe he was talking about *George*.


Chuck Vance

On Sep 23, 3:22 pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

American voter is so g**d*** stupid they'll probably get elected.

And jeff wrote:

I'm with Maher on this one - our voters are a scary crowd of folks
in their decision-making process.

I've said this before, but it's worth saying again. If this is the
typical Dem's view of the average American public, then they deserve
not to get elected. It's been this exact attitude that's lost them the
last two elections, which they should have both easily won, and if
they make it three in a row, maybe they'll finally do some navel
gazing. But if they persist in blaming the American voter as being to
stupid to vote for them, they deserve what they get.

Take care,

Jon.

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
American voter is so g**d*** stupid they'll probably get elected.

And jeff wrote:

I'm with Maher on this one - our voters are a scary crowd of folks
in their decision-making process.

I've said this before, but it's worth saying again.

Say it all you want but it wasn't worth saying before and it's
still not.

If this is the
typical Dem's view of the average American public, then they deserve
not to get elected. It's been this exact attitude that's lost them the
last two elections, which they should have both easily won, and if
they make it three in a row, maybe they'll finally do some navel
gazing. But if they persist in blaming the American voter as being to
stupid to vote for them, they deserve what they get.

Most Americans believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11
attacks. Most Americans believe that god created humans in their
present form less than 10,000 years ago. Most Americans cannot
name *ANY* current US Supreme Court justices. Most Americans
cannot name the three branches of government and more than one
in three believes that the three branches of government are
Republican, Democrat and Independent.

The American voter is stupid alright, dumber than a box of rocks.
And the Republicans, starting with Nixon's "southern strategy",
have perfected the fine art of exploiting the stupid.

But you're right about one thing, the American voter gets the
government they deserve.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
American voter is so g**d*** stupid they'll probably get elected.

And jeff wrote:

I'm with Maher on this one - our voters are a scary crowd of folks
in their decision-making process.

I've said this before, but it's worth saying again.

Say it all you want but it wasn't worth saying before and it's
still not.

If this is the
typical Dem's view of the average American public, then they deserve
not to get elected. It's been this exact attitude that's lost them the
last two elections, which they should have both easily won, and if
they make it three in a row, maybe they'll finally do some navel
gazing. But if they persist in blaming the American voter as being to
stupid to vote for them, they deserve what they get.

Most Americans believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11
attacks. Most Americans believe that god created humans in their
present form less than 10,000 years ago. Most Americans cannot
name *ANY* current US Supreme Court justices. Most Americans
cannot name the three branches of government and more than one
in three believes that the three branches of government are
Republican, Democrat and Independent.

The American voter is stupid alright, dumber than a box of rocks.
And the Republicans, starting with Nixon's "southern strategy",
have perfected the fine art of exploiting the stupid.

But you're right about one thing, the American voter gets the
government they deserve.

What could possibly be more heart-warming and enlightening than the American
electorate calling itself stupid and then proceeding to prove it, rebutted
by the American electorate calling itself stupid and then proceeding to
prove it, iterate, iterate, iterate........

People everywhere deserve good government. Perhaps if more people gave at
least a perfunctory nod to the notion of thinking about what constitutes
good government and how to achieve it, we wouldn't be blessed with endless
(and endlessly entertaining) repetitions of the American electorate calling
itself stupid and then proceeding to prove it, rebutted by the American
electorate calling itself stupid and then proceeding to prove it, iterate,
iterate, iterate........

Probably not......but what have we got to lose by trying?

Meanwhile, what could possibly be more hilarious than the kennies, davies,
stevies, predators, etc......and dicklet.....seeing themselves as rising
above the intellectual and moral level of the general run of the American
electorate?

Wolfgang

On Sep 24, 8:04*am, wrote:

I've said this before, but it's worth saying again. If this is the
typical Dem's view of the average American public, then they deserve
not to get elected. It's been this exact attitude that's lost them the
last two elections, which they should have both easily won, and if
they make it three in a row, maybe they'll finally do some navel
gazing. But if they persist in blaming the American voter as being to
stupid to vote for them, they deserve what they get.

Take care,

Jon.

Jon, so let me understand this. Are you saying that the Ds lost the
last 2 elections because some "typical Dem's" said that the average
voter is not fully informed?

I thought it had something to do with the fact that a large percent of
the voters said the believed that Iraq was behind 9/11 or maybe Iran,
that fundamentalist voters believed that God wanted Shrub to lead
America as their pastors told them, that Kerry was swishy, that global
warming was a Gore fantasy, that Wall Street was safer than Social
Security as their President told them, that stem cell research somehow
was related to murder, and that the "hydrogen economy" was the answer
to peak oil, just like their President told them. But I could be
wrong.

How does your analysis account for the fact that the a large
proportion of the average voters . . . do not even vote in most
elections? Are the "typical Dems" also responsible? Why did you vote
for Shrub? Because some "typical Dem" spoke in an irritating way? Will
you use the same decision criteria a third time? ;-))

Dave

wrote:
On Sep 24, 8:04 am, wrote:
I've said this before, but it's worth saying again. If this is the
typical Dem's view of the average American public, then they deserve
not to get elected. It's been this exact attitude that's lost them the
last two elections, which they should have both easily won, and if
they make it three in a row, maybe they'll finally do some navel
gazing. But if they persist in blaming the American voter as being to
stupid to vote for them, they deserve what they get.

Jon, so let me understand this. Are you saying that the Ds lost the
last 2 elections because some "typical Dem's" said that the average
voter is not fully informed?

Jon blamed it on the "typical Dem" having a bad attitude.

If anything the Dems give the American voter too much credit.
I mean they nominate people who write books instead of buffoons
who can barely read them and trust that the American voter can
recognize the lies, smears and character assassination which has
become the modus operandi of the Republican party. Kerry lost
because he could not believe the American voter was so goddamn
stupid as to believe the Swiftboat lies. And really who would
have thought that the GOP could get away with smearing an actual
war hero ? Unbelievable, but then I have a bad attitude. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry