Quantcast
CAMPAIGN 2008

Barack’s Bounce

The latest NEWSWEEK Poll shows the Democrat with a 15-point lead over McCain.

By Michael Hirsh | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jun 20, 2008 | Updated: 3:37  p.m. ET Jun 20, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/19/2008 1:11:11 AM

    Comment: The Hill July 17, 2008 @3:57 p.m. by Walter Alarkon

    Voinovich Finds Gore's Energy Speech 'Ridiculous'

    You can consider Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) as definitely not enthused by former Vice President Al Gore's speech Thursday on U.S. energy policy.
    Voinovich had an initial one-word response ??? "ridiculous" ??? to Gore's speech at Washington's Constitution Hall, in which the Democrat called for the United States to end its dependence on carbon-based fuels and begin using renewable energy to produce electricity within the next 10 years.

    Voinovich elaborated that ruling out carbon-based fuels such as coal would be unreasonable because of the country's vast energy and economic needs. Instead, he said the country should take a multi-pronged approach that includes but doesn't rely solely on nuclear, wind and solar power.

    "We could put windmills from the Atlantic to the Pacific and, yes, it will increase the amount of carbon-free energy production, but the fact of the matter is, it's not going to get the job done," Voinovich said. "What we need to do is to look at all of the various sources of energy??? We'd be much more realistic to realize that it's going to take all of these things in order for us to meet our energy demands."

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/18/2008 9:55:05 PM

    Comment: Perfect... Gore Takes Fleet of Gas Guzzlers to Global Warming Sermon

    http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/07/perfect-gore-takes...

    21 hours ago in Gateway Pundit · Authority: 1,845

    Saint Al spaketh-- The final days are upon us. The Goracle told fellow GW religionists that the US is doomed and that we must eliminate carbon-based energy sources. The end is near. ...We are a planet doomed by carbon abuse.

    It's too bad the Goracle's actions don't match his sermons. Americans for Prosperity have today's Gore hypocrisy video of the day, via Michelle Malkin:

    Americans for Prosperity reported that Gore brought a fleet of two Lincoln Town Cars and a Chevy Suburban SUV! Even worse, the driver of the Town Car that eventually whisked away Gore's wife and daughter left the engine idling and the AC cranking for 20 minutes before they finally left!

    Sacrifice for thee but not for me!
    To the Gore's sacrifice is only intended for the little people. You just can't make this stuff up.

    Bad News for the Goracle... The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change.

    Bob McCarty notes how TIME is sucking up to Gore.

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/18/2008 11:31:28 AM

    Comment: Blagojevich Says Chicago Is 'Out Of Control'

    Mayor Unaware Of Plan; Welcomes Partnership

    NBC5.com POSTED: 1:11 pm CDT July 16, 2008 UPDATED: 9:07 am CDT July 17, 2008 CHICAGO --

    As Gov. Rod Blagojevich on Wednesday signed a new law that will put in place tougher penalties for selling guns to minors, he also announced he's got a new idea to help combat the violence that Chicago is experiencing: he's talking to the Illinois State Police and the National Guard to see if they could help.

    The Chicago Sun-Times depicted Blagojevich as the "new sheriff in town" Thursday morning in its coverage of the governor's plan to form an "elite tactical team" to help the city fight crime.
    "Violent crime in the city of Chicago is out of control," Blagojevich said at the bill signing ceremony. "I'm offering resources of the state to the city to work in a constructive way with Mayor Daley to do everything we can possibly do to help stop this violence," said the governor.

    The summer of 2008 will be remembered as especially violent. Blagojevich said there's been a child shot nearly every day since June 26, with 29 Chicago Public School students shot since last fall.
    "Twenty-eight of those kids are African-American and Latino. Hard to imagine that that would be acceptable if that were, in fact, the case in other parts of the city or in a middle-class suburb somewhere," he said. "Something is wrong, and this violence has to stop."

    Bringing in state troopers -- even National Guard helicopters to high-crime areas -- is still very much in the planning stages.

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/18/2008 10:54:33 AM

    Comment: "It might be able to free up some resources that the Chicago police uses for capital needs, to be able, to maybe to, hire more police officers, or possibly ask some to come out of retirement, to put them into these violent zones, hot zones, where, clearly, I think, part of the challenge is that gangbangers outnumber police officers five to one," Blagojevich said.

    The governor said Chicago Mayor Richard Daley hasn't asked for help, but Blagojevich said he'll call the mayor once he has some concrete suggestions about what help he can provide. He didn't have many specifics, but he said it's more likely that state police will be brought in than the National Guard.

    In fact, Daley's office said the mayor did not know anything about Blagojevich's comments and did not know he was going to make them.

    "The mayor welcomes partnerships, not just on this issue but on a variety of issues," said spokeswoman Jody Kawada. "Beyond that, it is difficult to comment because we don't have any facts."

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/18/2008 11:45:08

      Comment: My commentary -

      Here we have proof that a democrat governor and a democrat mayor are blatantly unable to protect the security of the citizens of Chicago, Barack Obama???s campaign headquarter city.

      Barack Obama prides himself on his supposed past record of being a community organizer.
      Why hasn???t he bothered to work constructively to provide safety for the people who live in Chicago?
      Maybe he regards his campaign to be president as far more important than dedicating his efforts to actually help and protect the residents of Chicago.

      It is evident from the press report which I posted that the democrat governor of Illinois and the mayor of Chicago have not even realized that it would be advantageous to meet to discuss strategy to effect security.

      In November???s general election, would American society be willing to relinquish their security concerns for the whole nation to a like-minded inept federal democrat government?

      What would be the cost to the nation to redirect and burden the various State police forces and the National Guard with the added task of providing personal security for all Americans?

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/18/2008 11:40:29

      Comment: I believe that the abhorrent high murder rate in Chicago can only exist and continue due to the interplay of 2 factors.
      The first factor would be the relatively complacent attitude exhibited by the bystanders - it doesn???t affect me, so why should I even be concerned?
      The second factor would be the proliferation of street gangs and their unbridled efforts to intimidate anyone who would dare to challenge them.

      Through my posts on this political website, I have aroused the attention and ire of an admitted Obama supporter who has openly professed that he regards himself as a ???street-fighter".
      I would tend to regard him instead as a ???street-blighter???!

      This trying-to-be bully or goon rejects any call to respect other members of society who would agree to adhere to generally accepted norms of society. He prides himself in his belligerent deviant misbehaviour, somewhat mildly akin to a few of the measures employed in Iraq by the Muqtada al-Sadr militia.

      And what surprises me is the FACT that not even one blogger on this site would even meekly bother to comment on or criticize that overt display to intimidate. Maybe doing so would actually demonstrate a measure of courage. Americans once stood resolute to uphold the ideals of freedom and the right to free speech. Maybe the ???now??? generation have decided to abdicate that previously held responsibility.

      Hopefully that will not be at its own peril!

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/17/2008 1:13:09 PM

    Comment: I think the reason that the "media" does not respond to McCain and follow him arround is that we've seen it for 8yrs already, what's new, we knwo he's just gonna agree with what ever talking poiints come out of the white house and that's that...so where would the interest be? So we could dee McCain stroll through a market places un protected?...LMAO McCain does not want the media there, he gets caught in too many lies that way...come on now.

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/17/2008 12:07:33 PM

    Comment: Media stars will accompany Obama overseas

    Herald Tribune By Jim Rutenberg Published: July 17, 2008

    WASHINGTON: Senator John McCain's trip to Iraq last spring was a low-key affair:
    With his ordinary retinue of reporters following him abroad, the NBC News anchor Brian Williams reported on his arrival in Baghdad from New York, with just two sentences tacked onto the "in other political news" portion of his newscast.

    But when Obama heads for Iraq and other locations overseas this summer, Williams is planning to catch up with him in person, as are the other two evening news anchors, Charles Gibson of ABC and Katie Couric of CBS, who, like Williams, are far along in discussions to interview Obama on successive nights.

    And while the anchors are jockeying for interviews with Obama at stops along his route, the regulars on the Obama campaign plane will have new seat mates: star political reporters from the major newspapers and magazines who are flocking to catch Obama's first overseas trip since becoming the presumptive nominee of his party.

    The extraordinary coverage of Obama's trip reflects how the candidate remains an object of fascination in the news media, a built-in feature of being the first African-American presidential nominee for a major political party and a relative newcomer to the national stage.

    But the coverage also feeds into concerns in McCain's campaign, and among Republicans in general, that the media is imbalanced in their coverage of the candidates, just as aides to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton felt during the primary season.

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/16/2008 10:12:21 PM

    Comment: For the first time since the whole run has begun, John McCain was FORCED to talk about Afghanistan, and he simply repeated Obama, it was awesome. But for about a year now McCain, like BUSH has been silient on Afghanistan, no comments not plans, just divert to Iran. Obama has been ALL ALONG from day one talking about Afghnistan, and Bin Laden...you know the guy Bush does'nt even spend much time thinking about now and in turn niether does McCain since they share a brain.

    We need to do as the Iraqis ask and get out, NO perminant bases there, and FOCUS on those who actually ATTACKED us on 911, you all remember that day right, when BIN LADEN attacked us, not SADAM, BIN LADEN. He lives, and breathes, and Bush and McCain are fine with that fact...how do you feel about it?

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/16/2008 9:58:57 PM

    Comment: Surge meets Purge

    Politico Jonathan Martin July 15, 2008
    The McCain campaign is poking fun at Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) for a report in today's New York Daily News that he had cleansed BarackObama.com of past criticism of the surge strategy in Iraq.

    "BARACK OBAMA "REFINING" IRAQ POSITION ON OWN WEBSITE," blares the McCain release, which helpfully links to the former versions of the site.

    The Daily News report by James Gordon Meek says: "Barack Obama's campaign scrubbed his presidential Web site over the weekend to remove criticism of the U.S. troop ???surge??? in Iraq, the Daily News has learned. The presumed Democratic nominee replaced his Iraq issue Web page, which had described the surge as a ???problem??? that had barely reduced violence. ???The surge is not working,??? Obama's old plan stated, citing a lack of Iraqi political cooperation but crediting Sunni sheiks - not U.S. military muscle - for quelling violence in Anbar Province. ???

    "Obama's campaign posted a new Iraq plan Sunday night, which cites an "improved security situation" paid for with the blood of U.S. troops since the surge began in February 2007. It praises G.I.s' ???hard work, improved counterinsurgency tactics and enormous sacrifice.???

    Campaign aide Wendy Morigi said Obama is ???not softening his criticism of the surge. We regularly update the Web site to reflect changes in current events.??? ???

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/16/2008 9:50:38 PM

    Comment: McCain hits Obama on Iraq, outlines Afghanistan Plan

    By Klaus Marre - The Hill Posted 07/15/08 12:50 p.m. [ET]

    Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain slammed his Democratic counterpart Sen. Barack Obama on Tuesday for coming up with an Iraq policy without having observed the situation on the ground.

    ???I note that he is speaking today about his plans for Iraq and Afghanistan before he has even left, before he has talked to Gen. Petraeus, before he has seen the progress in Iraq, and before he has set foot in Afghanistan for the first time,??? McCain said, referencing the Illinois Democrat???s speech on national security earlier in the day. ???In my experience, fact-finding missions usually work best the other way around: first you assess the facts on the ground, then you present a new strategy.???

    The Arizona Republican noted that he and Obama both agreed with President Bush at the start of the Iraq war but added that Obama was wrong in opposing the troop surge.

    ???Because of its success, the next president will inherit a situation in Iraq in which America???s enemies are on the run, and our soldiers are beginning to come home,??? McCain said.

    The GOP standard-bearer also discussed his plans for Afghanistan, where, he said, ???the status quo is not acceptable??? and security has ???deteriorated.???

    ???Sen. Obama will tell you we can???t win in Afghanistan without losing in Iraq,??? McCain claimed, adding, ???With the right strategy and the right forces, we can succeed in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I know how to win wars. And if I???m elected president, I will turn around the war in Afghanistan, just as we have turned around the war in Iraq, with a comprehensive strategy for victory.???

    McCain criticized the way the Afghanistan campaign is being conducted and vowed to send additional troops.

    ???One of the reasons there is no comprehensive campaign plan for Afghanistan is because we have violated one of the cardinal rules of any military operation: unity of command,??? McCain stated in New Mexico. ???Today there are no less than three different American military combatant commands operating in Afghanistan, as well as NATO, some of whose members have national restrictions on where their troops can go and what they can do. This is no way to run a war.???

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/16/2008 8:44:30 PM

    Comment: Let the OIL companies DRILL on the 68,000,000 acres they already hold the leases on...WOW there's and idea...or maybe the 27,000,000 acres in the Naval Reserve....OMG theat's almost 90million acres, what will we do where will we DRILL, mention that Mrs Bush, see how far the gas prices "drop", oh wait Gas did NOT drop, only oil prices, and it had NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU.

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/16/2008 6:57:36 PM

    Comment: Gore???s Activism less welcome when gas costs 4 Bucks

    by Alexander Bolton The Hill Posted 07/16/08 04:33 p.m.

    Al Gore hopes to put global warming back at the top of Washington???s agenda Thursday, but some Democrats in Congress are questioning his timing when they are getting pummeled by Republicans over record gas prices.

    Gore hopes to deliver a major speech on the environment at Constitution Hall in Washington Thursday that will ???press the reset button on how people are looking at the energy crisis and the climate crisis,??? said Brian Hardwick, spokesman for Gore???s Alliance for Climate Protection.

    The former vice president-turned-elder statesman has achieved rock-star status within his party, not to mention a Nobel Prize, for his environmental activism. But Democrats??? political troubles over the issue of gas prices and domestic drilling prompt some lawmakers to wonder about Gore???s timing.

    The question some Democrats have is whether a high-profile speech about the importance of protecting the environment might be exploited by Republicans who want to portray their ideological opponents as caring more about polar bears than Americans who have had to pay record prices for gasoline.

    ???It depends on how it???s presented,??? said Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who emphasized he did not want to ???pre-empt??? Gore???s speech by telling him what to say.

    ???I think the American public will be much more receptive to arguments about climate change when gas prices aren???t so critical,??? said Rep. Zack Space, a freshman Democrat who represents a mostly rural district in Ohio.

    Space and other Democrats say that gas prices have begun to overwhelm other issues.

    Republicans are pouncing on Gore???s re-emergence, holding it up as proof that Democrats favor environmental policies that further escalate energy costs.

    ???Mr. Gore will yet again call attention to the policies called for by radical environmentalists that would result in even higher gas prices,??? said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio).

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/16/2008 3:18:01 PM

    Comment: Bush say's drill and oil dropped 6$ not 9, yet gas....holding strong, not below 4$ a gal? You gotta know there'ssomething off when 'BUSH" is being considered the voice of reason. Oh yeah why don't the oil companies drill on the 68million acres they hold the leases to now?

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/15/2008 8:56:14 PM

    Comment: Bush Says Drill, Drill, Drill ??? and Oil Drops $9!

    National Review Online Kudlow???s Money Politics Tuesday, July 15, 2008 1:07 p.m.

    In a dramatic move yesterday President Bush removed the executive-branch moratorium on offshore drilling. Today, at a news conference, Bush repeated his new position, and slammed the Democratic Congress for not removing the congressional moratorium on the Outer Continental Shelf and elsewhere. Crude-oil futures for August delivery plunged $9.26, or 6.3 percent, almost immediately as Bush was speaking, bringing the barrel price down to $136.

    Now isn???t this interesting?

    Democrats keep saying that it will take 10 years or longer to produce oil from the offshore areas. And they say that oil prices won???t decline for at least that long. And they, along with Obama and McCain, bash so-called oil speculators. And today we had a real-world example as to why they are wrong. All of them. Reid, Pelosi, Obama, McCain ??? all of them.

    Traders took a look at a feisty and aggressive George Bush and started selling the market well before a single new drop of oil has been lifted. What does this tell us? Well, if Congress moves to seal the deal, oil prices will probably keep on falling. That???s the way traders work. They discount the future. Psychology and expectations can turn on a dime.

    The congressional ban on offshore drilling expires September 30, so that becomes a key date. A new report from Wall Street research house Sanford C. Bernstein says that California actually could start producing new oil within one year if the moratorium were lifted. The California oil is under shallow water and already has been explored. Drilling platforms have been in place since before the moratorium. They???re talking about 10 billion barrels worth off the coast of California.

    There???s also a ???gang of 10??? in the Senate, five Republicans and five Democrats, that is trying to work a compromise deal on lifting the moratorium. So it???s possible a lot of action on this front could occur much sooner than people seem to think.

    So I repeat: Drill, drill, drill. Deregulate, decontrol, and unleash the American energy industry. Those hated traders will then keep selling oil as the laws of supply and demand and free markets keep working.

    Bravo for Bush. Bravo for the traders.

  • Posted By: thewonk46 @ 07/15/2008 5:09:35 PM

    Comment: While I am a Obama supporter, I don't believe in any of the polls...National polls do not indicate what is going on in individual states and this is after all (remember 2000/2004) an electoral contest!...WBBJ!!!

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/15/2008 9:15:13 AM

    Comment: McCain Closes the Gap (Dick Morris)

    July 14, 2008 @ 11:08 am

    Issues don't always flow from the top down ??? from the campaign hierarchy to the voters.
    Sometimes they flow the other way, from an angered public upward.

    This is the case with the oil drilling and energy issue.
    Every time Americans gas up, they are reminded that the Democrats' refusal to allow oil drilling virtually anyplace has caused the long-term escalation in oil prices in the United States.

    Democrats don't say they oppose all drilling, but they do.
    You can drill, but not in Alaska, not offshore, not in the shale, etc.

    McCain is benefiting and Obama suffering because of the drilling issue.
    It is most likely this issue that is driving the closing of the race.
    Rasmussen has the race tied for two days in a row in his tracking and Newsweek has the Obama lead collapsing from 15 points to three.

    And it may be oil that is driving the difference.

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/15/2008 4:36:59 AM

    Comment: And Davole has STILL not answered any issue offered up, typical Republiscam, You go ahead with your "rules" I am not a "ring fighter" I am a "street fighter" I will present FACTS, oppinion, and emotion. I make NO false claims of McCain and bare no FALSE hope for Obama. The FACTS are what they are, and I get that it leaves some who hope to continue this reign of terror of the last 8yrs into the next 4yrs, not feeling so hopeful, and for good reason, you're time has come and gone, you had your chance and you have sost this country 4500 lives and brought it to it's knees economically and spiritially. NOW it's our turn, and again we will fix it, it will take time, but it WILL be done.

    I have stated my feelings, oppinions, and the FACTS. good evening ;)

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/15/2008 10:12:01

      Comment: HDavidson -

      Good morning!

      You claim that I have not ???answered any issue offered up??? - I have answered most of your topics and rants, but you prefer to dismiss and deride them by your term ???typical Republiscam???.
      That???s not respectful discussion - that???s dogmatic obstinacy.

      You claim to be a ???street fighter??? - some people would interpret that term to mean that you are trying to be a bully. That approach won???t work here - I???m not intimidated.

      Whenever I see a bully on the street, I just cautiously prepare to defend myself if that need should arise, and then I walk on by, or else cross the street and continue on.

      You classify the last 8 years as a ???reign of terror???. Get real!
      It hasn???t been a reign of terror in the US.
      But yes, the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan have attempted to institute a reign of terror there.
      And quite often, they seem to be failing.

      You do definitely have a problem expressing yourself competently.
      In your relatively short post, consider the following words which you have used - ???oppinion ...., sost ...., spiritially ...., oppinions .....???

      Within the span of a mere 8 lines, you have made 4 spelling errors.
      That indicates a lack of attention to detail, possibly resulting from an abbreviated education.
      And since you are inhibited by that lack of attention to detail, I can understand why you have formed many of your opinions.

      Lastly, just because you choose to try to disguise your opinions by using the capitalized word ???FACTS???, that doesn???t really make them facts.

      But maybe that narrow-minded modus operandi does restrict your ability to discuss the issues impartially and intelligently.

      HDavidson - are you one member of that ???troop??? of bloggers which the Obama camp claim to have at their disposal to spew its propaganda?

      • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/15/2008 16:56:25

        Comment: You are not very lady like ,a dnYOU"RE AN IDIOT! street fighter = bully, are were you picked on as a kid...still? It means There are no rules, especiually not set forth by some *** repug. Go on spreading your crap, I'll go on calling you out on it, fair and balanced ;)

        • Posted By: Davole @ 07/15/2008 20:31:54

          Comment: HDavidson -

          You have demonstrated to the bloggers on this political website that you are incapable of engaging in respectful intelligent discourse.

          You obviously do have some serious health or maturity issues, and I hope that you will manage to get some help in that regard.

          I believe that you have done a disservice to the Obama camp by your posts - I expect that some of their supporters are actually capable of respectful rational discussion.

          For the reason which I have previously stated, I will not bother responding to any of your rants, tirades, and posts.

          I have no animosity toward you - rather, I think that you are quite pitiful.

          I wish you a speedy recovery!

          • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/16/2008 02:33:27

            Comment: See last word junkie ;)

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/15/2008 1:27:09 AM

    Comment: To the Viewers and Bloggers of this Newsweek Website

    As you have all probably noticed, a specific blogger and I have engaged in some critical opposing commentary. You have witnessed my manner of discussion, and his.
    I hope that we can both reconcile our differences, respectfully.

    Although this political website has been in existence for quite a while, I have never seen a specific code of behaviour displayed to regulate conduct and interactive discussion.

    These are my own rules of engagement:
    1. I will show respect for any opposing blogger by using his or her screen name.
    2. I will show respect for any opposing blogger by refraining from infantile name-calling, such as a$$hole, idiot, imbecile, moron, retard, etc.
    3. I will also refrain from profanity and swearing.
    4. I will challenge any blogger who engages in name-calling, profanity, or swearing, in the hope that he or she will decide and agree to refrain from those objectionable practices.
    5. I will expect other bloggers to adhere to the same standard of decency, and to challenge any blogger who engages in such misbehaviour.
    6. If any other blogger states his or her gender, I will accept that, and refer to that individual appropriately as either he or she.
    7. If any other blogger asks me what my gender is, I will respond honestly.
    8. By using the COMMENT button, I will post what I believe to be interesting news or topics.
    9. I will welcome other bloggers to either comment positively or negatively to my post.
    10. I would appreciate that any comments which are posted by myself and other bloggers reflect factual thought, as opposed to mere conjecture or conspiracy theory.
    11. I will respond to another blogger???s post by using the REPLY button.
    12. I am willing to reply to any other blogger???s reply, and I will even check comments and replies which I have made during the past 2 days, in order to reply to more recent replies from others.
    13. If I have mistakenly posted any incorrect information, I will apologize, and correct it.
    14. I will refrain from attempts to harass anyone else by repeated intimidating posts.

    I believe that adoption of this code of behaviour would benefit us all.

    I ask you, all the other bloggers and viewers on this political site, are these rules of engagement acceptable, would they facilitate a more civil discourse on this site, and would you support their adoption?

    Please respond with your own individual viewpoints!

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/14/2008 8:53:23 PM

    Comment: At no point in time did I direct any words to ms. davole, however her ego can't let it go with out comment and still no answer to thet FACTS, just silly attempts at insults, believe me, there is nothing more offensive than the last 8yrs of BUSH", so nothing she can say truly bothers me, nore amusing than anything alese at this point, it is evident that she is a "last word" girl....so please do go on sweetie ;)

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/15/2008 01:14:24

      Comment: HDavidson -

      I don't bear any ill will or intent toward you.

      I have honestly and forthrightly mentioned to you that, by the tone of your conversation with me, I thought that you are a female. I admit that I could have been wrong in my perception of you. You have stated that you are male - and I do accept that.

      I wonder why you are unwilling to accept that I also am a male. Hopefully that reluctance does not indicate a self identity crisis on your part. That is up for you to reconcile.

      I would prefer to continue discussing political views with you, but in a mutually more respectful manner.
      Do you accept that overture?

      Let's advance together in being receptive to opposing perceptions and viewpoints.
      Are you willing to do that, and to thereby demonstrate respect for each other?
      That decision is yours!

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/14/2008 23:00:54

      Comment: HDavidson -

      I truly hope that you can get some competent advice and assistance to resolve your evident issues!

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/14/2008 5:23:52 PM

    Comment: As expected not one intelligent response, just a bunch of "nuh uh" and "i'm not, you are" evn a few "OH YEAHs" in there. I provided links to ms davole, and yet she is unable to see the vast ammount of PROOF, on McCain, WAR FOR OIL, BOMBING IRAN (as if that won't start a war, they'll just take it...lol), GI BILL "no vote", In stead ms davole desides to discus the way my posts move her "you do seem to exhibit an effeminate disposition. And you seem to be preoccupied with using terms such as ???honey, and sweetie???."(what's with the ????s) The honey /sweetie is in reference to Obama calling a reporter sweetie, but she has not been following that long, obviously ;)
    If Davole is a "man" I simply say this to "it", I'm a guy, you're a guy, just because YOU are turned on by me, does NOT make me "Gay"...k sweetie? That's your dragon to slay...




    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/14/2008 18:37:39

      Comment: HDavidson -

      In your previous post @ 07/14/2008 12:37:55 AM, you stated "this is just the last direct response you will get."

      And then you broke that promise by sending this rant.

      It appears as though you just can't understand the concepts of truth, reality, and honesty!

      Goodbye!

    • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/14/2008 17:27:53

      Comment: Continued ;)

      Then "it" speaks of going after BIN LADEN is a bad thing????? last time I checked he was the one who attacked us on 9/11, right?...so you're problem with getting him is?
      We Obama supporters know full well his intent to capture and bring to justice BIN LADEN, a far cry from anything McCain has offered to do, he just wants to bomb Iran, cause Lieberman/Bush tell him to.

      I really loved this quote, the total exposure of ignorance...read, please....

      "In answer to your question with regard to "who are we suposed to be killing in Iraq" - I believe that the answer would be any terrorist, whether Sunni, Shia, or Kurd."...ms. davole
      and then the golden response (question marks and all): "Your statement ???If it???s brown, kill it??? reveals that you are fixated, probably delusional, on race."...ms davole
      I made no statement of that kind. "..."it" had no answer still to who Sadam represented, who we're fighting against, the fact that John McCain did not know what a "Kurd" was (niether does "it"). Just said "terrorist" like a good little bushite...like I said paraphrasing "it" if it's brown kill it.

      Now the grand daddy of all rediculous statements (have to check but pretty possitive):

      "In reply to your preposterous statement that Bush is sending troops to die for oil, I disagree. No, he is sending troops to live and fight for freedom, both in America and in Iraq and Afghanistan."...WTF, what is the color of the sky in "it's" world? (and I love that it says "both" and then names 3 places...lol)
      Nearly 4500 including 9 yesterday, have not "LIVED" you a$$hole, it's not about "freedom"...think back if you can, it goes like this (approximately)...9/11 - Bin Laden - Afghanistan - then Bush says "Sadam and Bin Laden are working together"...he is proved wrong - so then Bush says "Sadam has WMDs" we go to Iraq to WAR, we search and search, NOTHING...he is proved wrong...so he keeps saying it, finally drops that sorry excuse and then it was "we need to liberate the Iraqis"...that was after almost 2yrs, lie after lie, and in the face of Dar Fur and the Congo, places where FAR worse things ARE STILL going on than in Iraq EVER, to bad for them though...no OIL, we'll get there when we get there. The whole freedom LIE is fed to the SHEEPLE of this country and they eat it up, the only freedoms that need "protected" and even restored are those which BUSH himself has destroyed...BUSH is the greatest "terrorist threat" this country has ever known. He ignored intelligence that allowed us to be attacked on 911, he took the US under FALSE claims into Iraq, and by the way can anybody tell me who owns "SEACAT-ZAPATA" an oil company that has rigs off the coast of KUWAIT, remember the first gulf war? If anybody googles that and says there is no info, you're just

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/14/2008 12:37:55 AM

    Comment: I just read your post "Posted By: Davole @ 07/13/2008 01:59:59" lol I see you have NO idea what you are talking about, you have NO answers, and are just a troll, that's fine, this is just the last direct response you will get,

    I mean look at this:

    "Why don't you ask McCain why he voted NO for the NEW GI BILL?
    He's an honest man - he'll tell you.
    Now, if you posed any question to Obama, he would probably give you one explanation today, and then another one tomorrow, and then a different one the next day..
    I TOTALLY PROVED THAT THEORY WRONG...honsest man lol
    In answer to your question with regard to "who are we suposed to be killing in Iraq" - I believe that the answer would be any terrorist, whether Sunni, Shia, or Kurd.
    REALLY, TERRORIST? SO YOU DON'T KKKNOW EITHER, IF IT'S BROWN KILL IT....LMAO
    Which "US weapons inspectors said there were NO weapons, expolsives (did you mean explosives?),
    or weapons from Iran? There are others who deny what you have said. "
    AND THEN THERE IS MAJOR GENERAL KEVIN BERGNER,..GOOGLE HIM ;)

    Stick to picking on women, even thought they destroy you also, YOU, at least feel you stand a better chance...do not embarass yourself by trying me again...and I'm taking it easy on you...sweetie.

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/14/2008 09:20:48

      Comment: HDavidson -

      Thanks for your very revealing posts.

      Regarding - your rant - ???I see you have NO idea what you are talking about, you have NO answers, and are just a troll, that's fine, this is just the last direct response you will get???.
      That???s fine - you???re merely expressing your opinion, but it does show how narrow-minded it is.
      Actually your comments seem to reflect the empirical opinions of another poster on this site - I wouldn???t be surprised if you 2 were closely related.

      Let???s see whether you are true to your word that ???this is just the last direct response you will get???.
      That would be just fine with me!

      With regard to McCain voting ???no??? to the new GI bill, and Obama???s numerous (almost daily) flip-flops - no, you have not proved that wrong. And besides, it???s a statement, not a theory.
      Also, ???honsest man??? doesn???t make sense, just like most of your opinions.

      Your statement ???If it???s brown, kill it??? reveals that you are fixated, probably delusional, on race.
      I made no statement of that kind.

      In response to your allegation that US weapons inspectors said there were no weapons, explosives, or weapons from Iran, Major General Kevin Bergner confirmed the capture of Mahmoud Farhadi, the commander of one of the three Iranian commands inside Iraq. I couldn???t find any statement by this individual regarding the presence of Iranian weapons in Iraq, but Kevin Bergner has unequivocally stated that Iranian militia are present and active in Iraq.

      I don???t selectively pick on women - I attempt to discuss statements posted by either male or female bloggers which appear to be incorrect, and I state my reason for doubting their validity.

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/14/2008 09:15:38

      Comment: Obviously you are ???caught up with your own perceived self-importance??? by your warning for me to avoid embarrassing myself - I don???t worry about embarrassment - I prefer to concentrate on accuracy, validity, and integrity instead.

      With regard to your gender, now you are claiming that you are male. Somehow, from the content and style of your posts, you do seem to exhibit an effeminate disposition. And you seem to be preoccupied with using terms such as ???honey, and sweetie???.

      And no, my intention is not to spank you - it appears as though your mother and / or father thought that would just be a waste of time. Are you trying to say that you???re ......... - no, forget it!

      Then you attempt to link the issue of Roe vs. Wade vs. McCain with what you allege to be a war for oil.
      Are you one of those bicyclists who refuse to wear a helmet?

      In reply to your preposterous statement that Bush is sending troops to die for oil, I disagree. No, he is sending troops to live and fight for freedom, both in America and in Iraq and Afghanistan.
      In your naivete regarding YouTube, you ask whether I have heard the saying "straight from the horses mouth". Yes I have, now have you heard the corollary "straight from the horse???s ass"? Maybe that???s your source material!

      And yes, ???feel free??? to post as many videos as you would care to do. At least it keeps you occupied.

      I???m a non-smoker, probably unlike you. I am careful as to what I put in my mouth.

      With regard to Obama stating that he would invade Pakistan to apprehend Osama bin Laden, that is verifiable fact - (in your case) - you might be enlightened (but maybe not) if you decided to google it, or even search on YouTube, which appears to be your prime news source. Maybe you were ???whooping it up??? or ???sobering up??? in Mexico when that news item was broadcast. Also, Obama has stated that he would try to apprehend Osama, and he does favour extending citizen rights to terrorists to be tried in civilian court. And the rest is sarcasm - a speech tool which is obviously foreign to you.

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/14/2008 08:56:36

      Comment: In reference to the 32 VC propaganda films - you assert that they were sealed in his military file. Wow, you must be really ???connected??? to peer into his sealed file.
      Did you share an intimate relationship with John Kerry?

      The link which you provided led nowhere - exactly the same destination to which your opinions lead. By the way, do you even know the meaning of the word ???propaganda????

      Your ???Songbird??? allegation - unfounded. Were you there when McCain regained consciousness?
      Also that link failed to lead anywhere.
      I guess that you are one of the democrats that anyone can fool all the time!

      Your false corroborating evidence does not support your assertion that John McCain intends to start a third war for oil. None of those individuals have stated that - they may have opined that the US could successfully fight a war against Iran, but that is far from stating that the US intends to declare war. And there was no mention of oil. Have I lost you there?

      I???m glad to see that you used the word ???DUH??? - good, finally you???re actually TRYING to think!

      And in conclusion, I notice that you pathetically resort to using a Mexican swear expression.
      I just dismiss it as indicative of a wanna-be biker who has fallen off his bicycle on way too many occasions!

      p.s. - Don???t remove those ???trainer wheels???, both actually and figuratively - you sure do need them.

      Way too Easy, rider!

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/14/2008 12:20:56 AM

    Comment: Your rant starts here:
    As you may notice - I saved you for the last - my dessert! - You claim to be male yet want a man for desert?
    What's "with" this "Ms. Davole" - I'm 100% male - are you, or are you at conflict with the true you?
    Otherwise, I don't "swing" that way, and I won't "take it" as easy on you!! - SO what now you're gonna spank me?

    Yes, in regard to "the issue of Roe vs. Wade vs. McCain" - I think that it is quite noble of John McCain -Yeah McCain would prefer to do it for them with 100yrs of "WAR FOR OIL" See the bible does not say "Abortion is wrong", it says "life it sacred" ALL life for ALL time, not just when it's convenient, and then send it to die for oil.

    I "take it" that you spend a lot of time on youtube - go ahead, enjoy, if that's "where you're at"! Ever heard the saying "straight from the horses mouth"?...McCain's words, and contradictions, straight form his mouth, no he said he said...lol I know it's hard for you to watch...
    So, you like calling McCain quite a few names - go ahead, he can take that. He can?- should I post a few videos of him in Congress cussing and blowing up because he can't?

    With regard to your statement that he is "eager for war" - wow, are you mistaken - it is Obama that has stated (if he would ever manage to steal the election) that he would invade a sovereign country, Pakistan, to search for and apprehend Osama bin Laden, and then extend to him all rights to be tried as an American citizen by a civilian court. Maybe Obama would even dare to have him charged with mischief, and then grant him probation. - WOW what do you smoke for breakfast, provide one link that show Obama saying those EXACT WORDS...please ;) Heaven Forbid we go after Bin Laden???

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/14/2008 10:53:16

      Comment: HDavidson -

      By your choice of a screen name, and linking it to the shallowness of your posts, you have defamed the excellent reputation of a great bike!

    • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/14/2008 00:27:08

      Comment: So big I had to continue it here:

      I imagine that you probably have all 32 of those alleged VC propaganda films - did you also find those on youtube? Maybe you might care to post links to those items. They were recently sealed in his military file, as I have said IF McCain is such a "hero" why seal his records...rhetorical, we all know that answer lol ;)

      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=John+McCain+propaganda+films&btnG=Google+Search here ya go...this could help you see beyond FOX

      I notice that you failed to mention that he refused early release???the VC offered it to him after they realized that he was the son of a US admiral. They did not "realize" it was the first thing he said when he regained consciousness...he was quite the "Songbird"

      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=%22SongBird%22+McCain&spell=1 here ya go ;)???Songbird information

      Would you care to supply any corroborating evidence to support your claim regarding your assertion that he intends to start a third war for oil"? How do you know his intentions? Joe Lieberman, dick Cheney, George bush, don rumsfeld, how is Pat Tillman anyway?
      05/03/08 John McCain states, if we can win in Iraq...we would never again have to fight "WAR FOR OIL" then tried in the coming hours to retract or mislead, but the cat was out of the bag ;) And he sings of Bombing Iran...3rd war DUH.

      Also, please "feel free" to explain your reference to "our previous deabte". Is that a Mexican word? OMG! a typo...That's not a "mexican word" but this is, "chinga tu"...sweetie

      • Posted By: Davole @ 07/14/2008 11:01:13

        Comment: HDavidson -

        The fact that you resort to swearing is probably an indication that you immaturely lack the education, integrity, discipline, and ability to express yourself effectively!

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/13/2008 3:35:46 PM

    Comment: Schwarzenegger Blasts Bush on Global Warming
    July 11, 2008 5:32 PM

    ABC News' Mary Bruce Reports: Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif., spoke out against President Bush this morning attacking his administration for its failure to counter global warming emissions.

    "This administration did not believe in global warming," Schwarzenegger told ABC News' George Stephanopoulos in an exclusive interview that will air Sunday on ABC's "This Week."
    "They just didn't believe in it or they didn't believe that they should do anything about it, since China is not doing anything about it and since India is not willing to do the same thing, so why should we do the same thing?" Schwarzenegger said.

    "We don't wait for other countries to do the same thing. That's what makes America number one... And I think we have a good opportunity to do the same thing, also, with fighting global warming," he said.

    I???m glad that Arnie actually believes that America shouldn???t wait for other countries to act to reduce global warming.

    Would that California governor honestly divulge what percentage of the total US carbon emissions released into the atmosphere can be attributed annually to his own state, mainly as a result of the vast number of forest fires in California?

    Now, since we have identified probably the main source of the US carbon emissions, what is he willing and prepared to do to greatly reduce those emissions?

  • Posted By: joe1022joe @ 07/13/2008 8:26:06 AM

    Comment: This is old news. As of July 12, 2008 it's a dead heat.

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/12/2008 7:57:09 PM

    Comment: Ms. Davole...on the issue of Roe vs. Wade vs. McCain:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q8obHEULLg

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqtsdIjSEQ4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXNSa_xCpzk

    To site but a few, he is incompentent, arrogant, confused, angry, untrustworthy, misleading, sheepish(to bush) eager for war, has serious "daddy issues", and looks to right what he feels he wronged in the eyes of his late father, by turning coat while held by the VC and doing 32 propaganda films. He believes, if he can start a third war FOR OIL, and be the confuser and thief, I mean commander in chief, he will have made his daddy proud, at the cost of thousands of American lives, much like his daddy did in Viet Nam, and billions of dollars, far outspending his daddy, what a "hero". He has shown his true collors and when the time comes and all is exposed, for ALL to really see, there will be nothing you, FOX Noise, or any of the GOP can do, but hey, keep up the flip flop claims on Obama, lol, and pastor stuff, call him hussein, whatever you think will keep your 28% strong...good day.

    PS please do refresh me on our previous deabte, I will gladly answer any question you think you have...as long as it is yours and not Sean Hannity's ;) don't be a CornHolyO..., k?

    c-ya

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/13/2008 03:44:49

      Comment: HDavidson -

      As you may notice - I saved you for the last - my dessert!

      What's "with" this "Ms. Davole" - I'm 100% male - can you "live" with that?
      I hope so, because generally I do like your saucy style, provided that you are female.
      Otherwise, I don't "swing" that way, and I won't "take it" as easy on you!!

      Yes, in regard to "the issue of Roe vs. Wade vs. McCain" - I think that it is quite noble of John McCain to actually oppose democrat mothers who would choose to obliterate their young children.

      I "take it" that you spend a lot of time on youtube - go ahead, enjoy, if that's "where you're at"!

      So, you like calling McCain quite a few names - go ahead, he can take that.

      With regard to your statement that he is "eager for war" - wow, are you mistaken - it is Obama that has stated (if he would ever manage to steal the election) that he would invade a sovereign country, Pakistan, to search for and apprehend Osama bin Laden, and then extend to him all rights to be tried as an American citizen by a civilian court. Maybe Obama would even dare to have him charged with mischief, and then grant him probation.

      I imagine that you probably have all 32 of those alleged VC propaganda films - did you also find those on youtube? Maybe you might care to post links to those items.

      I notice that you failed to mention that he refused early release from captivity when the VC offered it to him after they realized that he was the son of a US admiral.

      Now if that were Obama, he probably would have begged the VC to stop pointing to his face and laughing, and if he were to be offered early release, he would probably have replied - I'm outta here".

      Would you care to supply any corraborating evidence to support your claim regarding your assertion that he intends to start a third war for oil"? How do you know his intentions? Maybe you have been indulging much too liberally in the democrat kool-aid. Stay clear of that stuff - it can play nasty tricks on your mind!
      Look at what it has done to Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid!

      HDavidson - you're not Michael Moore's sister , are you?
      Any relation to (Gorgeous) George Soros?

      I don't understand your reference to "FOX Noise" - is that a new kind of biker muffler?

      Also, please "feel free" to explain your reference to "our previous deabte". Is that a Mexican word?

      Since you stated that you "will gladly answer any question" that I have, please answer the ones which I have asked in this reply. And then enumerate on your term "CornHolyO..., k". Is that also a Mexican word?

      c-ya - I hope so!

  • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/12/2008 7:33:50 PM

    Comment: Davole Honey, hate you burst your bubble, but I was in Mexico...lol Hope you did'nt hurt your shoulder patting yourself on the back ;) nibble on this for a bit...

    Yeah judgment, experience, like voting NO for the NEW GI BILL, Hey Mr. McCain who are we suposed to be killing in Iraq, sunni or shia? What's a Kurd? And even though the US weapons inspectors said there were NO weapons, expolsives, or ammunition from Iran, and the latest NIE said Iran had backed away from uranium enrichment...why are you deterimined to take this country into another, a third war? Is it because of your "experience" and "Judgment"?

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/13/2008 01:59:59

      Comment: HDavidson -

      Wow - you're calling me "Honey" already - we hardly know each other, and here you are "hitting" on me.
      Gee, you biker babes are sure forward, but I like it - I can handle that!

      But it's only fair to let you know that I'm already interested in someone else - I've been "smitten", as Rod Stewart would say.

      So, you were in Mexico. Were you already registering to emigrate?
      And Obama hasn't even lost the election yet - give him time - he'll do it.
      At least give him some confidence to flip, and then flop.
      I have heard that the Disney network wants to introduce a new character based on Obama, but it is wondering whether to call it "Flipper" or "Flopper". I think that the first name has already been assigned.

      I see that you enjoyed the tequila - Hopefully that wasn't what got you in the fighting mood.

      What's with this "hate you burst your bubble" expression which you regularly like to use?
      Were you searching the want ad columns in Mexico for any bubble burster employment opportunities?
      Chances are slim this time of year.

      No, my shoulder is fine, but I probably would appreciate a good massage if you are offering.
      And would you please clarify your "nibble on this" comment?

      Why don't you ask McCain why he voted NO for the NEW GI BILL?
      He's an honest man - he'll tell you.
      Now, if you posed any question to Obama, he would probably give you one explanation today, and then another one tomorrow, and then a different one the next day..

      In answer to your question with regard to "who are we suposed to be killing in Iraq" - I believe that the answer would be any terrorist, whether Sunni, Shia, or Kurd.

      Which "US weapons inspectors said there were NO weapons, expolsives (did you mean explosives?),
      or weapons from Iran? There are others who deny what you have said.

      What leads you to believe that McCain is deterimined (do you mean determined?) to take this country into another, a third war? Has he said that? I'm not aware of him ever having made this statement? If it was in a bar in Mexico, that sure wasn't McCain, honey (if I can use that term of endearment). Be wary of that tequila, - it can do strange things to your mind - and definitely do not mix it with the cerveza.

      Ride on!

  • Posted By: cowen123456 @ 07/12/2008 9:41:58 AM

    Comment: NOBOUNCE...NOBAMA

  • Posted By: Micky Marsh @ 07/12/2008 5:57:39 AM

    Comment: The United States Economy and global issues are looking a bit dark; a blow - out or so called landslide victory by either parties would suggest that voters are not concerned and so let this one be a close call and the end result will be more justified.

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/13/2008 02:30:23

      Comment: Yo Micky Marsh -

      I really admire that pair of "Air Jordan's" which you wore in our (h)oops match yesterday.
      Were they imported from the middle east?
      They seemed to have that Obama "bounce-not" built into them.

      We definitely agree that "The United States Economy and global issues are looking a bit dark".
      Those pesky democrats that have tipped the balance in the House and Senate have sure managed to "nosedive" the economy with their partisam obstructionist motions aimed at your President George W. Bush.

      I believe that the American public realize that it was ridiculous to give them control, and will be determined to vote for a Republican President and a Republican majority in both House and Senate to achieve a sane return to recovery and progress.

      Do I detect a migration on your behalf toward the Right side of the political spectrum?
      Even Obama is realizing that is the way to go. I guess that he is merely chasing after the vast number of his former supporters who have already begun that shift.

      Whereas the Republicans have the Right policies, Obama and the democrats just promise change and hope - daily change in their policies, and hope that they are not elected.

  • Posted By: Micky Marsh @ 07/12/2008 5:24:41 AM

    Comment: Statistically John McCain and Barack Obama according to the newsweek polls are in a dead heat, having Obama ahead by 3 points. Back to One - on - One - hoops; look like Mccain has been shooting those three pointers well, this could spell trouble for barack, maybe Barack could use a little defensive help from former Secretary of state Colin Powell.

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/12/2008 11:47:08

      Comment: Micky Marsh -

      It???s a real pleasure to see you posting again.
      I appreciate the good natured interaction in which we both have engaged in both your previous posts and my replies.
      To any bloggers who may be viewing our comments - our repartee is merely a good-natured, (admittedly possibly macho) friendly exchange, with no malice intended.

      OK, getting down to basics - you acknowledge that I have ???skunked??? you in our 2 previous ???one-on-one??? matches on your court.

      Now, you are answering my challenge to play the next game of (h)oops - this one - here on my court. I have even promised to extend a high-5 point advantage to you in this match.

      Let the game begin!

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/12/2008 11:43:23

      Comment: I observe that you have been very diligent in your recent practice sessions. You are much more guarded in your maneuvers, and I compliment you in that regard.

      But your tactic to play a defensive game in my court might lead to an ???0 and 3" record for you.

      We each trade a few points for your recognizing that John McCain and Barack Obama are in a statistical dead heat.

      And I think that your acknowledgment that McCain has been quite successful shooting those ???three-pointers??? garners 3 points in my favour.

      The fact that you recognize that ???this could spell trouble for Barack earns me another 3 points.

      Now this game is about to be ???blown wide open???.
      Although I agree that Barack Obama could definitely use ???a little defensive help from former Secretary of state Colin Powell???, I doubt that remarkable player would surrender to the opposing team. After all, he does have ethics and integrity.

      In lieu of Obama???s past associations with, well let???s say, less than capable, honest, and reputable supporters, I believe that Obama???s promised new vision would resort to the past by enlisting Dennis Rodman to shore up his defense.

      And that would be a pitiful offence to the American taxpayers, in more ways than one.

      As the scoreboard blows ???a fuse??? displaying McCain???s surge in points against a defenseless Obama, it is now - Game Over!

      I think that Obama needs a new coach, general manager, team, publicity agent, player, and water carrier!

      • Posted By: Micky Marsh @ 07/12/2008 15:44:04

        Comment: Irie man, Davole

        I'll spar with you tomorrow.

        • Posted By: Davole @ 07/13/2008 00:59:56

          Comment: Micky Marsh -

          Loved our game yesterday.- have you recuperated?

          I can't quite understand your greeting - "Irie man" - that doesn't quite "register".

          Did you mean Iron Man? If so, OK, I'll take it as a compliment.

          Looking forward to sparring with you today.

          To try to even the odds - I'll give you a bit of useful information - watch out for my left hook.

          I hope that you're not "all footwork". Give me your best shot!

  • Posted By: sharenews @ 07/11/2008 5:12:15 PM

    Comment: Barack Obounceless:

    Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

    Friday, July 11, 2008 Email to a FriendAdvertisement

    Obama 43%
    McCain 42%

    2 points difference if leanders included.


    The race for the White House is getting a bit closer. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Barack Obama???s lead over John McCain down to a statistically insignificant single percentage point, 43% to 42%.

    Prior to today, Obama had enjoyed at least a four-point advantage every day since Hillary Clinton dropped out of the race over a month ago. This is the first time his support has fallen below the 45% level since May 31.


  • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 07/11/2008 10:37:46 AM

    Comment: Bounce becomes Bust........................................

    Friday, July 11, 2008
    The race for the White House is getting a bit closer. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Barack Obama???s lead over John McCain down to a statistically insignificant single percentage point, 43% to 42%. Prior to today, Obama had enjoyed at least a four-point advantage every day since Hillary Clinton dropped out of the race over a month ago. This is the first time his support has fallen below the 45% level since May 31.

    NOBAMA!!!

    • Posted By: HDavidson @ 07/12/2008 19:36:52

      Comment: Hey CornHolyO, still waiting to hear all the dirty little secrets you and sinclair shared while together in you hotel room, or was it just a crisco fest?

    • Posted By: cowen123456 @ 07/11/2008 11:43:22

      Comment: Like I said....3 weeks in counting and still NOBOUNCE!

  • Posted By: Nins @ 07/11/2008 3:46:27 AM

    Comment: Know why McCain wants to distance himself from former Senator Phil Gramm? It is not just because of Gramm's recent obnoxious remarks calling Americans "a nation of whiners" and that unemployed Americans are in "a mental recession." In fact, those remarks were so obnoxious that I wonder if they were engineered just to provide McCain an excuse for publicly distancing himself from Gramm. This issue is a lot deeper than it looks on the surface.

    When Gramm was a Senator he was chair of the Committee on Banking, and in that capacity he was able to push through the legislation now known as the "Enron Loophole." This loophole allowed US investment banks to bypass the Federal regulations governing futures trading, and is the reason why the investment banks were able to falsely inflate the prices of oil, wheat, corn and other commodities through massive futures trading, causing your costs of gas, heating oil and food to go through the roof.

    Gramm was a member of McCain's campaign team, but now Gramms' name is turning to mud. In addition to the Enron loophole, Gramm pushed through the Gramm-Leach-Biley Act in 1999, which got rid of the laws that seperate banking, insurance and brokerage activities in America. Essentially, this Act did away with all of the good laws written after the Great Depression to protect us from another Wall Street/Banking Industry collapse. That's right, Gramm stripped the system of it's safe guards nine years ago, and guess what? The value of the dollar has nose-dived, Wall Street is highly unstable, and we are in the midst of a recession.

    Now you could say that this is not Gramm's fault, that he didn't know what the outcome of his actions would be. However, it turns out that the same investment banks that benefited from the Enron loophole and from the Gramm Act gave more than a million dollars to Gramm's campaign. Uh oh. A Congressional hearing is going to be convened to investigate this. And McCain wants to have noting to do with Gramm, wants us to forget that Gramm has been a key player on McCain's campaign team. Gramm was McCain's campaign CO-CHAIR and LEADING ECONOMIC ADVISER.

    With Gramm in the driver's seat as his leading economic adviser, now you know why economists and analysts are saying that McCain's economic policy plans are untenable.

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/11/2008 20:58:30

      Comment: nins -

      Gee, you???re sure making this a ???fun day??? for me!

      You ???lead off??? your post by asking - ???Know why McCain wants to distance himself from former Senator Phil Gramm????

      And wow - you definitely have the answer. No nins, that is merely your opinion, and not necessarily fact. You just can???t accept the fact that there could ever be any valid unknown explanation beyond your possibly biased perception and conclusion.

      I find it difficult to believe that you are actually a doctor - most doctors that I know interpret facts and test results to state the probable cause of a particular ailment or its remedy, but they openly admit that there might possibly be one or several factors of which they are not aware.
      But not you - you infallibly know everything!

      You deride Senator Phil Gramm???s remarks as ???obnoxious???. Have you ever thought to consider that opinion is merely yours, and that it just might not be true?
      Nins, consider showing at least the tiniest iota of humility and humanity once in a while.

      Should the Guinness Book of Records present you with an award for spewing the greatest number of conspiracy theories in any given time frame?

      You claim that ??? Gramms' name is turning to mud???. Maybe in your estimation.
      I???m sure that other advisers have been fired or retired by other presidents for various reasons.
      You state that ???we are in the midst of a recession???. Several economists refute that.

      And lastly, you state that ???economists and analysts are saying that McCain's economic policy plans are untenable???. Yet probably others support his plan.

      Haven???t more economists and analysts said that Barack Obama???s economic policy would be disastrous for the nation due to the effects of:
      - Ending the Bush tax reductions.
      - Almost doubling the tax rate on Capital Gains.
      - Redistributing wealth, thereby providing a disincentive for success and prosperity.
      - Nationalizing the oil industry, or confiscating its profits.
      - Introducing universal health care.
      - Introducing a carbon tax.
      - Increasing the cost of oil and gasoline by proposing no practical alternatives to these fuels?

      If Barack Obama were ever able to steal the general election, the US might become a fourth rate banana-less republic, with a standard of living even below that of Cu

    • Posted By: loriw @ 07/11/2008 17:09:54

      Comment: oh, please.... Gramm didn't just call the unemployed whiners he called all Americans whiners and I believe he stated that the problem was the media which inflates and perpetuates every possible hint of a downturn in the economy

    • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 07/11/2008 10:35:48

      Comment: Once in a blue-moon, the ninny, actually speaks some truth. Now...still ain't close to Hussein's good buddy, and real estae fairy, Tony "The Syrian" Rezko. Witness Protection Program, anyone???? Gonna be hilarious.

      NOBAMA!!!

  • Posted By: sharenews @ 07/11/2008 12:03:08 AM

    Comment:
    Obama has talked about - for months - a SECOND stimulus plan he wants passed.

    OBAMA says:
    We need to do what I called for months ago and pass a second stimulus package that provides energy-rebate checks for working families, a fund to help families avoid foreclosure, and increased assistance for states that have been hard-hit by the economic downturn, the Illinois senator said in remarks prepared for delivery in St. Louis
    Source: This is from July 07, 2008:
    ( http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/obama-tries-drum-up-support/story.aspx?guid=%7B03EC38AD-BAD4-4B80-8210-8E4F3E178FD5%7D&dist=msr_1


    SOUNDS LIKE OBAMA handlers need to get Michelle Obama IN SYNC with what Obama toots to audiences:


    MICHELLE on the campaign trail is speaking again (oh, oh. . .):

    PONTIAC, Mich -- In response to a question about the economic stimulus checks administered by the U.S. government earlier this year, Michelle Obama said her husband believes that short-term fixes don't solve economic problems.

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/07/09/1190066.aspx

  • Posted By: sharenews @ 07/10/2008 10:16:23 PM

    Comment:


    New PRO-HILLARY website launched.

    Sign the Pledge of Togetherness and forward the site link onto others.

    http://www.together4us.com/


  • Posted By: sharenews @ 07/10/2008 10:06:50 PM

    Comment: New PRO-HILLARY website launched. Sign the Pledge of Togetherness and forward the site link onto others. http:/: www.together4us.com/

  • Posted By: Belker @ 07/10/2008 9:24:47 PM

    Comment:

    It is all downhill from this point on for Obama. He has peaked. Now starts his fade until he tanks in November.

    Eventually people see thru most con men.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 07/10/2008 7:27:24 PM

    Comment: Carly Fiorina is one of John McCain's chief surrogates, particularly talking him up to women. But Fiorina, who was ousted as chief of Hewlett-Packard in 2005, is not above lying to soften the edges on McCain's positions that are unpopular with women.

    On Monday, Fiorina said this to a group of reporters "Let me give you a real, live example, which I've been hearing a lot about from women. There are many health insurance plans that will cover Viagra but won't cover birth control medication. Those women would like a choice." She said. And then for emphasis, she repeated "Those women would like a choice."

    Clearly, women don't need to chose between birth control and Viagra. So by saying those women would like a choice, just what did Fiorina mean? Is she trying to make McCain look Pro-Choice?

    This is not the first time that Fiorina has taken some license with McCain's positions. She recently told women in Columbus, Ohio that McCain "has never signed on to efforts to overturn Roe vs. Wade." This is a blatant falsehood and misrepresentation of McCain's position, since McCain's own campaign website states "John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that."

    When it comes to the birth control issue, in a rebuttal to Fiorina's Monday comments, the group Pro-Choice America was happy to point out that McCain twice voted against measures that would have required insurance companies to cover birth control -- in 2003 and in 2005.

    The Republican said Wednesday that he did not recall those votes. "It's something that I had not thought much about." he added.

    Now that will make him popular with women voters.

    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/07/09/mccain-squirms-on-birth-control-question/

    • Posted By: Davole @ 07/10/2008 22:02:35

      Comment: Welcome back, Nins.

      After posting you comment, you have probably already ???vacated the building???, as is your usual response to avoid indulging in any honest meaningful discussion with any individual who does not share your, if I may use the terms, - thoughts, or indoctrination.

      Therefore I am replying to the dearly departed???s post in order to respect and address the opinion which Nins has stated.

      It appears as though you fail to notice the distinction that medical insurance companies make with regard to deciding to fund Viagra but not birth control.

      Viagra is a medication intended to treat an existing medical handicap condition - erectile disfunction.

      Birth control is not a medication intended to treat any existing medical handicap condition - it is a (regretable) choice option intended to either prevent or terminate (obliterate) a pregnancy - a human life.

      Do you understand that difference?

      So, the insurance companies respect a woman???s so-called ???right??? to choose, whereby their policy denies coverage, thereby leaving it up to the woman to choose whether or not to pay for birth control.

      That seems logical, doesn???t it?

      • Posted By: Nins @ 07/11/2008 03:38:39

        Comment: Davole, it was Fiorina who brought up the Viagra/birth control thing, not me. i was simply quoting her.

        Since you are not a doctor you would not know that birth control pills are used for MANY medical reasons other than to prevent conception, including to control acute vaginal hemorrhage, improve the debilitating symptoms of arthritis, reduce the menstrual flow in women with chronic menorrhagia, improve iron deficiency anemia in women, improve PMS symptoms and other mood disorders, reduce the scarring from severe cystic acne, etc., etc. You also probably do not know that most men who take Viagra do not even have erectile dysfunction according to the medical definition, but are simply trying to enhance their sexual pleasure and performance.

        Therefore, your arguments are specious.

        You might want to stick to posts about astronomy and black holes. That info was truly interesting.

        • Posted By: Davole @ 07/11/2008 20:12:17

          Comment: Hello Nins -

          You knew this was coming, and - Here it is!

          Thanks for ???sticking around??? this time - I believe that is definitely an improvement in your usual blogging practice of delivering a biased opinion, and then ???hightailing it??? to the nearest exit to avoid being asked any embarrassing questions.

          Yo do know, that I usually do respond to any replies to my blogs, even if they arrive 2 or 3 days after my original post or reply. Generally you do not respect your bloggers and opponents enough to extend that same courtesy. But I do congratulate you for bothering to ???break with your established tradition???.

          You try to squirm out of the fact that your post introduced what you term ???the Viagra / birth control thing???. May I compliment you on your precise medical terminology?

          Don???t dishonestly attempt to pass the blame to Fiorina - you are the one who posted that issue HERE on the Newsweek site. Nins, try to be honest, at least a few times in your life.

          Now, to actually apply logic and reason, do you recognize any fallacy with your statement -
          ???Since you are not a doctor you would not know that birth control pills are used for MANY medical reasons other than to prevent conception ...???.

          As usual, you are only partly correct - I am not a doctor, nor like you, do I portend to be one.
          But you err in assuming that I did not know that there are other uses for birth control pill - I definitely knew that. So, in effect, you are just spewing BS in this regard - so like you!

          Now, would you care to provide some factual statistical research findings?
          From a sample of 1000 women of child bearing age who had obtained a prescription for birth control pills, what percentage would be for treatment of non birth control issues - 10... 15... 25%, or anywhere in-between?
          I believe that an insurance company would ???cover the cost??? if the extenuating reason has been explained satisfactorily. If you were a doctor, couldn???t you competently do that?

        • Posted By: Davole @ 07/11/2008 20:06:43

          Comment: And then you imply that I ???also probably do not know that most men who take Viagra do not eve