Author Topic: Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?  (Read 37407 times)

Spacey

  • w0okadactyl fo\' life
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14812
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #330 on: October 07, 2008, 03:06:13 pm »
Interesting comments, kindm\'s.

I like your style.

I\'m going to need to read this RS article.
Love many, trust few and don\'t be late.

davepeck

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14106
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #331 on: October 07, 2008, 03:36:50 pm »

Yoda

  • Smell My Finger
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3298
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #332 on: October 07, 2008, 03:57:19 pm »
I read the article and found it interesting, but am I the only one that wants to read about music when I open a RS?  I think I\'m going to have to cancel my subscription and re-up with UNCUT.  That way I\'ll get actual music information and a free cd with each issue.
The best music is essentially there to provide you something to face the world with - Bruce Springsteen

tyzack

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2153
    • http://
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #333 on: October 07, 2008, 04:08:46 pm »
Quote from: davepeck;206538


um, what are you trying to say with that post?
Apartheid: A policy of segregation and political and economic discrimination.

SlimPickens

  • just the tip
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4138
    • http://
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #334 on: October 07, 2008, 04:29:55 pm »
Quote from: Yoda;206540
I read the article and found it interesting, but am I the only one that wants to read about music when I open a RS?  I think I\'m going to have to cancel my subscription and re-up with UNCUT.  That way I\'ll get actual music information and a free cd with each issue.

skalnbyc

  • Taqueria Overexposure
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5691
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #335 on: October 07, 2008, 05:14:11 pm »
Since the mainstream media is visibly cheering for Obama/Biden and doesn\'t probe Biden like they are doing to Palin, here is the Wall Street Journal\'s response to Biden\'s debate performance:

Quote from: Wall St Journal Editorial;206540

In the popular media wisdom, Sarah Palin is the neophyte who knows nothing about foreign policy while Joe Biden is the savvy diplomatic pro. Then what are we to make of Mr. Biden\'s fantastic debate voyage last week when he made factual claims that would have got Mrs. Palin mocked from New York to Los Angeles?

Start with Lebanon, where Mr. Biden asserted that "When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, \'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don\'t know -- if you don\'t, Hezbollah will control it.\' Now what\'s happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel."

The U.S. never kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, and no one else has either. Perhaps Mr. Biden meant to say Syria, except that the U.S. also didn\'t do that. The Lebanese ousted Syria\'s military in 2005. As for NATO, Messrs. Biden and Obama may have proposed sending alliance troops in, but if they did that was also a fantasy. The U.S. has had all it can handle trying to convince NATO countries to deploy to Afghanistan.

Speaking of which, Mr. Biden also averred that "Our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan." In trying to correct him, Mrs. Palin mispronounced the general\'s name -- saying "General McClellan" instead of General David McKiernan. But Mr. Biden\'s claim was the bigger error, because General McKiernan said that while "Afghanistan is not Iraq," he also said a "sustained commitment" to counterinsurgency would be required. That is consistent with Mr. McCain\'s point that the "surge principles" of Iraq could work in Afghanistan.

Then there\'s the Senator\'s astonishing claim that Mr. Obama "did not say he\'d sit down with Ahmadinejad" without preconditions. Yet Mr. Biden himself criticized Mr. Obama on this point in 2007 at the National Press Club: "Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected President? Absolutely, positively no."

Or how about his rewriting of Bosnia history to assert that John McCain didn\'t support President Clinton in the 1990s. "My recommendations on Bosnia, I admit I was the first one to recommend it. They saved tens of thousands of lives. And initially John McCain opposed it along with a lot of other people. But the end result was it worked." Mr. Biden\'s immodesty aside, Mr. McCain supported Mr. Clinton on Bosnia, as did Bob Dole even as he was running against him for President in 1996 -- in contrast to the way Mr. Biden and facistic leaders have tried to undermine President Bush on Iraq.

Closer to home, the Delaware blarney stone also invited Americans to join him at "Katie\'s restaurant" in Wilmington to witness middle-class struggles. Just one problem: Katie\'s closed in the 1980s. The mistake is more than a memory lapse because it exposes how phony is Mr. Biden\'s attempt to pose for this campaign as Lunchbucket Joe.

We think the word "lie" is overused in politics today, having become a favorite of the blogosphere and at the New York Times. So we won\'t say Mr. Biden was deliberately making events up when he made these and other false statements. Perhaps he merely misspoke. In any case, Mrs. Palin may not know as much about the world as Mr. Biden does, but at least most of what she knows is true.

Lobbying for a Kote>Beer Jubilee>Gypsy Girl>Prom 97>Vortex

Spacey

  • w0okadactyl fo\' life
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14812
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #336 on: October 07, 2008, 05:30:32 pm »
Thanks for the post.

Biden is a natural born liar.
Love many, trust few and don\'t be late.

skalnbyc

  • Taqueria Overexposure
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5691
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #337 on: October 07, 2008, 05:57:31 pm »
Quote from: Spacey;206559
Thanks for the post.

Biden is a natural born liar.


Yeah, I just wish he didn\'t get a free pass from most of the media - he should get the same scrutiny the others are getting.
Lobbying for a Kote>Beer Jubilee>Gypsy Girl>Prom 97>Vortex

Spacey

  • w0okadactyl fo\' life
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14812
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #338 on: October 07, 2008, 06:01:40 pm »
Quote from: alexanderzurflu;206570
Quote from: Spacey;206559
Thanks for the post.

Biden is a natural born liar.


Yeah, I just wish he didn\'t get a free pass from most of the media - he should get the same scrutiny the others are getting.


I agree. It seems that his name is hardly ever mentioned.

Biden\'s past definitely has some blemishes on his record. I think you would have to question his integrity.
Love many, trust few and don\'t be late.

Gordo

  • Nicky Cheesecake
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=515917765
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #339 on: October 07, 2008, 06:46:19 pm »
I\'m wondering when FOX lost its status as mainstream media?
The crickets and the rust-beetles scuttled among the nettles of the sagethicket. "Vamanos amigos," he whispered, and threw the busted leather flintscraw over the loose weave of the saddlecock. And they rode on in the friscalating dusklight.  --Eli Cash

skalnbyc

  • Taqueria Overexposure
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5691
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #340 on: October 07, 2008, 06:51:43 pm »
Quote from: Gordo;206584
I\'m wondering when FOX lost its status as mainstream media?


I personally would consider Fox an exception rather than the rule in general.
Lobbying for a Kote>Beer Jubilee>Gypsy Girl>Prom 97>Vortex

kindm's

  • Who Runs Barter Town...
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3119
    • blueberrydreams
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #341 on: October 07, 2008, 07:26:02 pm »
Quote from: Yoda;206540
I read the article and found it interesting, but am I the only one that wants to read about music when I open a RS?  I think I\'m going to have to cancel my subscription and re-up with UNCUT.  That way I\'ll get actual music information and a free cd with each issue.


Rolling Stone has always covered politics. I am not sure why you were under the impression that they were solely a music magazine.

RS got it start as a political magazine. Hunter S Thompson rarely wrote about music and RS was his major outlet for most of his career. They were always critical of Nixon etc.
"You can bet everything will come to an end. It's going to be ugly and it's going to be a mess, and it's going to be something that somebody did in the name of God...."

    Frank Zappa, Artist as Genetic Design Flaw,
    Ecolibrium Interviews, Vol #19

Igziabeher

  • ser gravel eater
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5149
    • http://www.phantasytour.com/moe/boards.cgi
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #342 on: October 07, 2008, 07:36:09 pm »
Quote from: kindm\'s;206594
Quote from: Yoda;206540
I read the article and found it interesting, but am I the only one that wants to read about music when I open a RS?  I think I\'m going to have to cancel my subscription and re-up with UNCUT.  That way I\'ll get actual music information and a free cd with each issue.


Rolling Stone has always covered politics. I am not sure why you were under the impression that they were solely a music magazine.

RS got it start as a political magazine. Hunter S Thompson rarely wrote about music and RS was his major outlet for most of his career. They were always critical of Nixon etc.


OMG OWNED!

Gordo

  • Nicky Cheesecake
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3260
    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=515917765
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #343 on: October 07, 2008, 07:38:13 pm »
:lol:
The crickets and the rust-beetles scuttled among the nettles of the sagethicket. "Vamanos amigos," he whispered, and threw the busted leather flintscraw over the loose weave of the saddlecock. And they rode on in the friscalating dusklight.  --Eli Cash

kindm's

  • Who Runs Barter Town...
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3119
    • blueberrydreams
Is there an offical pointless election banter thread anywhere?
« Reply #344 on: October 07, 2008, 07:38:22 pm »
Quote from: alexanderzurflu;206554
Since the mainstream media is visibly cheering for Obama/Biden and doesn\'t probe Biden like they are doing to Palin, here is the Wall Street Journal\'s response to Biden\'s debate performance:

Quote from: Wall St Journal Editorial;206540

In the popular media wisdom, Sarah Palin is the neophyte who knows nothing about foreign policy while Joe Biden is the savvy diplomatic pro. Then what are we to make of Mr. Biden\'s fantastic debate voyage last week when he made factual claims that would have got Mrs. Palin mocked from New York to Los Angeles?

Start with Lebanon, where Mr. Biden asserted that "When we kicked -- along with France, we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, I said and Barack said, \'Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don\'t know -- if you don\'t, Hezbollah will control it.\' Now what\'s happened? Hezbollah is a legitimate part of the government in the country immediately to the north of Israel."

The U.S. never kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, and no one else has either. Perhaps Mr. Biden meant to say Syria, except that the U.S. also didn\'t do that. The Lebanese ousted Syria\'s military in 2005. As for NATO, Messrs. Biden and Obama may have proposed sending alliance troops in, but if they did that was also a fantasy. The U.S. has had all it can handle trying to convince NATO countries to deploy to Afghanistan.

Speaking of which, Mr. Biden also averred that "Our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan." In trying to correct him, Mrs. Palin mispronounced the general\'s name -- saying "General McClellan" instead of General David McKiernan. But Mr. Biden\'s claim was the bigger error, because General McKiernan said that while "Afghanistan is not Iraq," he also said a "sustained commitment" to counterinsurgency would be required. That is consistent with Mr. McCain\'s point that the "surge principles" of Iraq could work in Afghanistan.

Then there\'s the Senator\'s astonishing claim that Mr. Obama "did not say he\'d sit down with Ahmadinejad" without preconditions. Yet Mr. Biden himself criticized Mr. Obama on this point in 2007 at the National Press Club: "Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected President? Absolutely, positively no."

Or how about his rewriting of Bosnia history to assert that John McCain didn\'t support President Clinton in the 1990s. "My recommendations on Bosnia, I admit I was the first one to recommend it. They saved tens of thousands of lives. And initially John McCain opposed it along with a lot of other people. But the end result was it worked." Mr. Biden\'s immodesty aside, Mr. McCain supported Mr. Clinton on Bosnia, as did Bob Dole even as he was running against him for President in 1996 -- in contrast to the way Mr. Biden and facistic leaders have tried to undermine President Bush on Iraq.

Closer to home, the Delaware blarney stone also invited Americans to join him at "Katie\'s restaurant" in Wilmington to witness middle-class struggles. Just one problem: Katie\'s closed in the 1980s. The mistake is more than a memory lapse because it exposes how phony is Mr. Biden\'s attempt to pose for this campaign as Lunchbucket Joe.

We think the word "lie" is overused in politics today, having become a favorite of the blogosphere and at the New York Times. So we won\'t say Mr. Biden was deliberately making events up when he made these and other false statements. Perhaps he merely misspoke. In any case, Mrs. Palin may not know as much about the world as Mr. Biden does, but at least most of what she knows is true.



that is an OpED piece from the WSJ not the paper correcting anything.

Also Biden has been in the Senate for 30+ years. He has been vetted as a Presidential candidate multiple times. There isn\'t much out there that people do not know about him. Palin on the other hand has only been around for a few eeks and no one knows anything about her. So it makes sense that the media is highlighting her. Also she brings a lot of attention to herself as she has numerous extreme positions, continues to make an ass out of herself, and is generally unprepared to be VP or hold any office IMHO.

The WSJ OPeD offers no specifics other than to make a claim that Hezbollah was never kicked out of Lebannon, they then go on to play a semantics game about Bosnia and then of course bring up the closed restaurant.

See if Palin knew anything about foriegn policy, McCains postions or anything, she could have raised the points during the debate. She didn\'t because she has absolutely no clue about it. She obviously had no personal interests in affairs of state outside of Alaska until a few weeks ago and is trying to cram for the big exam. Hell I know more about world affairs and foreign policy then she does and I am not a Governor.

Lets just put it this way. she attended 5 or 6 colleges in as many years in order to get a degree in communications. Nuff said.
"You can bet everything will come to an end. It's going to be ugly and it's going to be a mess, and it's going to be something that somebody did in the name of God...."

    Frank Zappa, Artist as Genetic Design Flaw,
    Ecolibrium Interviews, Vol #19