Eavesdropping
HuffPost’s OffTheBus has just launched “OffTheBus Listening Post.”
We are now recording and uploading the daily Obama and McCain media conference calls so anyone –including you– can now hear firsthand how each 2008 presidential campaign interacts with the media to deliver (and spin) information.
These calls are usually posted 60-90 minutes after they end. If you want to subscribe to the feature, here are three easy options –
A) Receive e-mail alerts about new uploads by visiting http://www.huffingtonpost.com
B) Subscribe to the OffTheBus Listening Post podcast by plugging http://www.gcast.com/u/OffTheBu
C) Check the OffTheBus Listening Post Homepage for a full directory of recordings: http://www.huffingtonpost.com
June 18th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Marc: …so anyone –including you– can now hear firsthand how each 2008 presidential campaign interacts with the media….
I’ll check to see if the Obama campaign reports this anti-Muslim incident/a> to the media.
I could call the Obama campaign bigoted, like the Democrats would do if this happened with McCain, but instead it’s just Obama continuing to play typical politics while pretending to offer “change.”
June 18th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
omg…..double yawn, Woody.
First, if they were in the picture, you would be talking about what an Islamophile terrorist appeaser he is, with the dark suggestion, that as far as you know, he’s not a Muslim. But now that they are not in the picture, he’s a bigot. There is no course of action that would satisfy you, since your only objective is to find fault, and if that’s what you’re looking for, surprise! you’ll find it.
Of course, I don’t hear any complaining when McCain cynically stacks the joke of a town hall forum with veterans all within view of the camera to give the appearance of a hall full of veterans where none such existed.
I’m not saying what the Obama campaign did was right (although if he allows that image on the platform, you can certainly imagine the howls from the right-wing blogpound which will simply be repeated ad nauseum by the MSM), but you just marginalize yourself by being a relentless partisan with no room for individual thought.
And I thought the lefties were bad. Sheeesh. But I do think you can be funny….so you got that going for you.
June 18th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
If Woody wants to be a champion for tolerance, by all means let him!
June 18th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Okay, in fairness (and I do want to be fair and balanced), I did find a picture where Obama allowed Muslim garb in a photo with him.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
If Obama gets elected, let’s hope that he doesn’t pursue the hiring and discrimination policies of Britain. How I nearly lost my business after refusing to hire a Muslim hair stylist who wouldn’t show her hair
June 18th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Yeah, Woody. Right. I’ll click on your link as soon as you check out the whitey video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCQTZIo-6hQ&feature=related
June 18th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Parick (Patrick?), that was incredible! I completely discounted the whitey video by Michele Obama, but that gives it new life. Thanks for sharing it.
Now, if “Off the Bus Listening Post” wants to do a candidate comparison, they should consider what these recordings reveal about the candidates.
Obama or McCain
June 18th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Last comment, and then I’m hanging it up for the night. I promise.
This video brings into question whether or not Obama has Presidential coolness like Bush. (Spanish version for the English impaired.)
June 18th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
“Last comment, and then I’m hanging it up for the night.”
Off to populate the woodchipper, Woody?
June 18th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Woody is beginning to post like reg!
June 18th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Woody wins the video round by linking to the dancing duo. I think your disappointment with Bush is starting to come out by acknowledging it, though. It’s time for a President with some moves. Obama by a landslide!
June 18th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
I think Woody’s a closet Obama supporter.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:12 am
your posts are very much informative and useful. I like to spend ample time with your blog..
June 19th, 2008 at 6:41 am
Second part
- – -
For oil solutions, let’s compare the Democrats and Republicans.
Democrats: http://www.foxnews.com/urgent_queue/index.html#a54ef44,2008-06-18” rel=”nofollow”>House Democrats call for nationalization of refineries
Republicans: Four Western oil companies are in the final stages of negotiations this month on contracts that will return them to Iraq, 36 years after losing their oil concession to nationalization as Saddam Hussein rose to power.
June 19th, 2008 at 6:43 am
off topic, but KPFK is being jammed with a signal from someone claiming to be Christine Blaisdale. She is peddling Christian videos that claim that the neocons, the British Royal family, the Illuminati, and the Masons are all followers of an ancient pagan religion that is trying to rule to world through water flouridation.
OK, Marc, you weren’t exactly right about Pacifica, but the current crew is just as bad in their whacked out way as the Berry crew was.
June 19th, 2008 at 6:58 am
oh, did I mention that the pagans brainwashed Sirhan Sirhan?
June 19th, 2008 at 7:42 am
No reptilians?
On another note CNN.Com slow newsday has one of Canada’s big stories as their lead….some severed feet have been found off the coast of British Columbia. The headlines read “Shock on Canadian shore” or something, which could mean anything from the Gaspe’ to the Great Bear Lake. Are Americans so unaware of Canada that they can’t just headline it “Shock on British Columbia coast”…I mean half their favorite movies are filmed here.
June 19th, 2008 at 8:17 am
>Are Americans so unaware of Canada
>that they can’t just headline it “Shock
>on British Columbia coastâ€â€¦I mean half
>their favorite movies are filmed here.
My estimate is that about one one American is 20 could correctly identify British Columbia. Most would guess that it is either a university with a perpetually bad football team, a town in Ohio, or a country in South America.
However, you hit a sore point with us, too. My wife’s an assistant film editor in Hollywood and you durned furners are stealing all her work. Right after John McCain’s inauguration, when we invade, Woody and I will split up your belongings and feed all that terrible bacon to the dogs.
June 19th, 2008 at 10:16 am
JC, feet are the last part to go through the woodchipper and you don’t want to get your fingers too close to those blades. It’s possible those were just thrown away.
Let’s remember that Marc was encouraging us to listen to HuffPost’s “OffTheBus Listening Post.” Any comments about what you learned there?
June 19th, 2008 at 10:33 am
“Let’s remember that Marc was encouraging us to listen to HuffPost’s “OffTheBus Listening Post.†Any comments about what you learned there?”
What is this fetish of yours for incessantly derailing topics and then suggesting everyone return to topic? You seem to do this every other thread.
June 19th, 2008 at 10:58 am
You’re off topic, Vitter.
June 19th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Okay, I’ll start.
From OtBLP: Offshore Drilling Summary – This call examines McCain’s recent policy switch supporting offshore drilling for oil, and criticizes the claim that it would provide short term relief for American families. In the words of former Governor Graham “It takes the focus off what we should be looking at, and that is in the short term, conservation and efficiency, and [in the] long term…alternative energy. Its a distraction, it is selling a quick fix that doesn’t exist.”
It boils down to the fact that Democrats and their leftist buddies use words like “conservation and efficiency” to starve American businesses and consumers of needed energy–which is effectively putting the government in the business of rationing fuel. Their “solutions” solve nothing but their quest for control.
As Ross Perot would say, let’s look at the chart to see who causes problems with our gas prices.
June 19th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
It appears that people do want change – change from the energy policies of Democrats and Obama.
Rasmussen Poll: 67% Support Offshore Drilling, 64% Expect it Will Lower Prices.
Also, consider:
Over the past 30 years:
Democrats have blocked the development of new sources of petroleum.
Democrats have blocked drilling in ANWR.
Democrats have blocked drilling off the coast of Florida.
Democrats have blocked drilling off of the east coast.
Democrats have blocked drilling off of the west coast.
Democrats have blocked drilling off the Alaskan coast.
Democrats have blocked building oil refineries.
Democrats have blocked clean nuclear energy production.
Democrats have blocked clean coal production.
It doesn’t take 30 years to get these sources on line. Many just take 3-5 years. Think where we would be if we had these additional supplies and weren’t so dependent on Mideastern oil.
I’m tired of Democrats hamstringing American business and American citizens. Is their envy and power more important than our nation?
June 19th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Speaking of going off topic, this whole damn oil conversation is designed to distract everyone from Bush’s miserably failed policy in Iraq, and the potential for him to land in the hoosegow for sanctioning torture.
And don’t be surpirsed if he tries to change the topic yet again by bombing Iran sometime before, oh, January 20, 2009.
Don’t let Woody let Bush change the topic.
June 19th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Democrats have blocked the development of new sources of petroleum.
Democrats have blocked drilling in ANWR.
Democrats have blocked drilling off the coast of Florida.
Democrats have blocked drilling off of the east coast.
Democrats have blocked drilling off of the west coast.
Democrats have blocked drilling off the Alaskan coast.
Democrats have blocked building oil refineries.
Democrats have blocked clean nuclear energy production.
Democrats have blocked clean coal production.
For the last eight years the Republicans have controlled the White House. For 6 of the last eight years, the Republicans have controlled Congress. If the Democrats have been so powerful as to do all the things you claim (without a shred of supporting evidence) that they have done, then the problem must be that the Republicans are a bunch of incompetent wussies.
June 19th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
“Rasmussen Poll: 67% Support Offshore Drilling, 64% Expect it Will Lower Prices.”
Given supply and demand are more or less equal, why would the oil companies drill for more oil just to make less money on the refined products?
It would seem that the only people that have blocked drilling are the oil companies themselves.
June 19th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Will someone explain how filibusters work to Randy?
June 19th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Last session the GOP Senators set a record rfor threatening to filibuster. Not a realone, mind you, but “Cloture votes where Harry (the thin) Reid accepted the notion that 60 votes would be needed for ANYTHING. Course he could have sent the Senate into all night session a few times and I think that would have cured the Republicans but it will probably be moot after this Fall anyway.
Hillary for Majority Leader!
June 19th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Since Dan O wants to discuss Iraq, today the Democrats have agreed to a funding bill for Iraq without any conditions for withdrawal. Even Obama has moderated his position on that. So, where is the outrage about this Congress and candidate for change?
June 19th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Memo to Woody: The NYT reports that Obama called the two Muslim women to apologize for their being barred from the stage. See Diary section of http://www.dailykos.com for a copy of the letter sent.
June 20th, 2008 at 4:09 am
I didn’t see it. Did Obama call or send a letter? He only did for political purposes, and it took him long enough.
June 20th, 2008 at 6:47 am
Woody, on ANWR, yes, but in 2006 both senators from Florida threatened a filibuster. In case you didn’t know, one of them, Mel Martinez is a Republican. He only dropped his opposition when the bill was altered to ban drilling within 125 miles of the Florida Coast. Arnold Schwarzenegger has also opposed drilling off the coast of California. Perhaps you need to find out what party he is from.
As for the rest of your claims, prove them. I found nothing. “Clean coal,” by the way is a buzzword. It’s not a fact.
Republicans, by the way in February Republicans successfully blocked via filibuster, a one year extension of the production tax credit for wind energy. That’s the problem when you let your party became a subsidiary of the petroleum industry.
June 20th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Randy, that is so pathetic. “On ANWR, yes, but” two isolated and special circumtances Republicans…. – as if this disproved that Democrats are behind blocking all drilling in America. And, isn’t ANWR worth a little bit more than “yes, but?”
Then, the “wind energy” extension is so minor, don’t you think that it was tied to something else? Also, I can think of a senator from Massachusetts who blocked wind generators off the coast of his home, even though he couldn’t see them, because they would be where he went sailing.
Why don’t you admit that Democrats have put us in a worse energy situation by their obstructionism to drilling? They are thrilled when people are forced to cut back, because it advances their power and alternative causes–like that phony global warming.
June 20th, 2008 at 7:43 am
Why don’t you admit that Democrats have put us in a worse energy situation by their obstructionism to drilling?
Because in order to do that I would have to accept your premises and I don’t It would be somewhat similar to my asking you “Why don’t you just admit that you have been beating your wife.”
ANWR, according to the DOE estimates, the mean oil reserves there would produce 4,210,000,000 and the high estimate is 7,480,000,000 by 2030. The US uses 19.6 million barrels per day.
Since word problems give you problems, I’ll do the math: that would provide us – under best case scenarios – of between 215 to 382 days worth of supplies.
Why don’t you just admit you are just spotuing off without a shred of knowledge of the facts?
Ted Kennedy was an idiot for opposing windmills off the coast of Massachusetts. The Republicans are bigger idiots for filibustering tax credits for wind energy.
June 20th, 2008 at 8:28 am
The reason American films are often filmed in Canada (except when they are actually Canadian films that play well in the US market- Cronenberg’s work, Juno) is the remnant Keynesianism and strong unions up north, giving production compnies incentives to film in Canada. One can’t really call it outsourcing when our industry workers are paid better than yours.
June 20th, 2008 at 8:47 am
we’re pretty far off topic here, JC, but I think the boom was more related to the strong dollar, which bought a lot of Canadian labor in the 90s. I don’t know for sure, but I would guess the volume is way down this year.
You’re basically right about “remnant Keynesianism”-the same thing is happening in the auto industry. Since the state is far more efficient at delivering basic services than the private sector is, it’s cheaper for employers to pay for health care in taxes than in private insurance premiums. However, this is not just an effect of stronger unions in Canada which are able to defend government benefits. It only happens in sectors that are also strongly unionized here in the US, because it only works if the alternatives are as stated above. If the alternative is a) pay for no benefits here or b) pay higher taxes for health care in Canada, it’s a different game.
Interestingly, most unions down here are not really in favor of government health insurance. This is partly because of their centrist political orientation, but they also see medical benefits as a value added that they deliver for their members. For a Hollywood film craftperson, the issue is stark: work union and get health insurance and a pension, or work in the nonunion sector and get no benefits at all.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:02 am
There’s alsothis from the DOE:
Keep spouting off Woody. I’ll stick to the facts.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Randy, those estimates are bureaucratic numbers, conservative, and come from old data. The best average estimate for oil in ANWR is 10 billion barrels, which can produce 1.1 million barrels a day for about 25 years and valued at well over a trillion dollars at today’s prices and will save up to ten million jobs. You guys put together willing scientists wanting grants with dishonest politicians, just like with global warming, and href=”http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_22_17/ai_75435167″>expect people to buy into phony conclusions.
But, even if you were remotely close with the data, we need ANY oil that we can get.
You guys were telling us that we would run out of oil completely in the 1970′s and that the Prudoe Bay wouldn’t help either. Just admit it. You’re against anything that will provide oil to our country and you hide behind misleading data and environmental causes as the excuse. There’s always more than you claim.
Also, 75% of Alaskans support it, and we purchased Alaska from the Russians for its raw materials. So, why don’t you people in New York quit trying to tell the rest of the country what we should do in our own states? Get off my lawn!
June 20th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Nuts. Here’s the link from above hopefully properly formatted: Environmentalists Play Slick With Statistics About ANWR Oil Reserves
June 20th, 2008 at 11:08 am
The volume is down a bit, but for location shooting its up i.e. I’m Not There. See my friend Mike Gasher’s book Hollywood North.
June 20th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Woody,
My numbers are from the Department of Energy from May 2008. The article you link to is from a former member of National Petroleum Council and is from 2001.
I’ll let the others judge whose data is “old.”
Get off my lawn!
You don’t live in Alaska, Goober.
June 20th, 2008 at 11:29 am
Your numbers are from a report that references numbers from years earlier. They were not updated nor reviewed. My article was not about the actual numbers but about how people play with statistics–which is not time sensitive.
Georgia is right next to Alabama geographically and Alabama is right next to Alaska alphabetically, so I’m practically in Alaska.
June 20th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Cummings…what’s the latest on the bill your government is trying to pass that will deny government funding to films it deems critical of government policy?
June 20th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Goober, Randy? Oh come on….
June 20th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
They were not updated nor reviewed.
And you know this how? Apparently you ignored the fact that this study was requested by Senator Stevens in December 2007. Stevens requested that the analysis develop “plausible scenarios for development of the Coast Plain consistent with the most recent USGS resource assessments and oil price situation.” (page 5).
The numbers you claim are based on a 5% probability of the actual. You may like those odds, but they’re pretty low.
They were not updated nor reviewed. My article was not about the actual numbers but about how people play with statistics–which is not time sensitive.
But it was not relevant to the discussion. We’re in Shakespeare territory here: “A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.”
June 20th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Michael Crosby,
Georgia is peanut country and a name for peanuts down south is goober peas. Woody lives in Georgia.
if I were insulting him I’d call him Gomer.
June 20th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
I read the footnotes.
My brother knows Jim Nabors–only as a sports fan.
June 20th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Since I won that last discussion, let’s move to another one from Bus – Obama rejecting federal money.
Here’s how the article starts.
“Barack Obama’s decision to reject public financing for the general election was the right decision. It’s not only the best way for him to win. It’s also the most progressive stand to take, and the best way to help reform the campaign finance system. This is a broken system, and Obama will actually reduce the influence of big money in politics by refusing public financing. Obama is not breaking a promise to take public financing because he never made such a promise.
Do you have any problems with that? I do.
June 20th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Oh, yes. There are a couple of Off the Bus Listening Post audios on Obama’s financing scheme.
Obama Campaign Press Call 6.19 AUDIO: General Counsel Bob Bauer on Obama’s Withdrawal from Public Financing
McCain Campaign Press Call 6.19 AUDIO: Rogers, Potter on Obama’s Withdrawal from Public Financing
June 20th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Since I won that last discussion, let’s move to another one from Bus – Obama rejecting federal money.
En sus sueños! You didn’t read anything and now you’re squirming away.
June 20th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
You couldn’t even manufacture an answer to my refutation of your claims on the OCS drilling. You got nothing. Typical.
June 20th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
I understand the “goober” derivation. I was once lectured on the peanut by Miz Lillian Carter. It was her position, as I understand it, that since I was from Indiana I was not qualified to express my belief that the peanut was a legume.
But as for “Goober,” I believe its connotation is: dumb Southern bumpkin.
June 20th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Randy, I said that Democrats have blocked drilling in the U.S. and you “counter” that by arguing the size of reserves in ANWR. Brilliant.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
The bill is gonna be reversed, since its reviled and Canada’s cultural community is too strong and the cosnervatives are gonna lose big in the fall now tht it turns out – quel scandal! – that the foreign minister had a girlfriend affiliated with the Hell’s Angels (who are as powerful as Hezbollah in Quebec!)
June 21st, 2008 at 7:49 am
Don’t you just love Obama’s new “Presidential Seal?” First, he accuses the Republicans of planning to use race against him but, next, on that seal, he includes the word “possumus.” Is this a set-up?
June 21st, 2008 at 8:26 am
What do you think? Obama apology to Muslim Women
June 21st, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Actually, Woody you made the following comment: “Why don’t you admit that Democrats have put us in a worse energy situation by their obstructionism to drilling?” If you’re making an argument that Democrats “have put us in a worse energy situation by their obstructionism to drilling” and I point out that whatever drilling that will take place there will have a negligible impact, I’m responding appropriately.
BTW,
If 64% believe that allowing for the drilling will lower prices, all that shows is how precious little they understand about the infrastructure of oil production and the time involved in pulling it out of the ground.
Michael Crosby,
My mother’s side is pure Alabama hillbilly from Clay County. We just made a point of trying to learn about the world beyond our own noses. You may remember I took jcummings to task for using the term redneck, but Woody’s exceedingly solipsistic, inane comments certainly make the Goober argument easy IMHO. In any event, you’re right and I apologize.
June 21st, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Randy, you picked just one area to discuss, and understated it’s value at that. What about all the off shore drilling locations? If that’s an appropriate response, then you have narrow blinders.
And concerning your view on the poll that I provided, then it stands to reason that if 64% support Obama, then they must not know much, either.
June 21st, 2008 at 3:29 pm
its not it’s
June 21st, 2008 at 5:42 pm
“…..how precious little they understand about the infrastructure of oil production and the time involved in pulling it out of the ground.”
This could have been said, and probably has been, for 30 years. Why get started now? Because adding supply to a scarce resource won’t effect the price?
Can you agree it will effect the rate of price increases Randy? Your side is not making sense in saying increased production in the US will make no difference. It in the longer term in both in raw price, speculator price, and will show the middle east we are willing to drill in our own back yard. Not just theirs.
We also need to increase mandatory fuel efficiency standards on new vehicles, subsidies for mass transit costs, subsidies for fuel efficient hybrid cars to make them price competitive………and I know this is going to scare the hell out you, but we need new Nuclear Plants started now. If the weenies in France can do it, why can’t the weenies in the US let us do it here?
Finally, if you like the idea of an Obama Presidency, and continued liberal majorities in both Houses, you guys better get on board with a plan of you own soon. This is another war your side seems bent on losing.
June 21st, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Randy, your apology was not needed. But it is a tribute to your self-consciousness and grace that you did. I knew what you were talking about, as did anyone with an IQ higher than a box of hair. Crosby, you are really using a lot of imagination here. Shame on you.
June 21st, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Jim R., I agree with your support for mandatory fuel efficiency standards, mass transit funds, and subsidies for fuel efficient cars…kudos to you.
However, even though production of oil is finite – therefore making conservation a necessity – the current price of oil is not a reflection of low supply, because despite the world’s present willingness to use this precious resource to a maddeningly moronic frenzy, supply of crude oil is still reasonably strong. In the words of Hossein Kazempour Ardebili, Iran’s oil governor, “there are simply no buyers because the market has more than enough oil.†According to the Wall Street Journal, “traders of physical crude oil say their market is suffering from too much supply, not too little.†Mike Wittner, head of oil research at Societe Generale, says: “There’s various signals out there saying for right now, the markets are well supplied with crude.â€
In fact, from sources that I personally have talked to, exploration in Alaska is not something that frankly interests oil companies that much. Tapping into it would require so much investment on the part of oil companies that this would in essence be passed on to the consumers.
No, the real reason for why oil is so high is because our dollar bills are little more than pieces of paper in the global economy. The Reagan, Bush, and Bush Jr. years – along with Bill Clinton – have seen the U.S. frittering away its spending on luxury consumption, corporate subsidies, bailouts, defense kickbacks, swindles, and other yuppie fun-and-games concocted by Republicans who have the audacity to label themselves as “conservative.” We are now in a position where we owe – counting not only present debts, but future obligations as well – 53 trillion dollars. Our word or dollars mean nothing, Jim, and the fact that your vote (as well as Woody’s, and GM’s) has enabled this corruption should justifiably rest on your conscience for the rest of your life. Your grandchildren/nieces/nephews/ will be so in debt to the rest of the world that they will be lucky to have the cash to rent a video or two each week.
June 22nd, 2008 at 6:52 am
And thanks to liberals like David, “the children” will be paying exhorbitant taxes for Democratic give-away programs that never end and just grow and grow because Democrats learned from Roosevelt that you can buy votes with taxpayer money. ($53 trillion? You sure are creative.)
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:54 am
From another blogger doing word plays on Obama’s name, I got the idea that Obama should make a Big O song the theme song of his campaign but revise it to “Shout O-bamalama.”
Otis Redding – Shout Bamalama
I still support “Big John” for McCain. Surely, Jimmy Dean wouldn’t object.
June 22nd, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Because adding supply to a scarce resource won’t effect the price?
Jim,
Think for a minute. It will take years before a drop of that oil will rise to the surface even if all the leases were sold and construction of platforms started today. How will that affect the price today?
It is a finite resource, so even by the time it does start rising up, how will that make for an increase in actual supply, say from the amount of available oil today.
All this does is delay the inevitable.
Actually, Woody I picked two. I didn’t understate; I used the most realistic scenario, a 95% chance, you chose a 5% chance. I’m realistic, you’re pie in the sky.
June 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm
I might add, Jim, not only will it delay the inevitable, but it will also divert valuable resources from the development of alternatives.
June 22nd, 2008 at 7:21 pm
You and David, Randy, are alot more like Woody, except on the opposite side politically of course, than I know you can see or want to believe. Uncompromising.
Senator Obama made a comment in Jacksonville, and played on CNN, to the effect(paraphrased): “Republican strategy will be to make you afraid of me. They will say he’s too young, too inexperienced, that he’s got a funny name………..and did I mention he’s black and he’s got a fiesty wifeâ€
No Senator. It’s not Republicans that have made many voters afraid of you. And it is not your age, inexperience or color. You did very will with most voters, the majority of them white, until choices ‘you’ made in ‘your’ past became known.
It is the choices and judgements you have made in the last 20 years that have changed minds and made many afraid of you. Your frightening choice of a racist centric church you were loyal to for 20 years, and only left after huge political pressure, that has made many suspicious it is ‘you’ that may be the racist.
It was your frightening association with radical leftist terrorists and odd ducks in your past that has made many suspicious you are not that middle-of-the-road congenial uniter you portray yourself as.
It is your statements and your party that has raised the race issue, over and over and over again, that has put this non-problem in peoples minds. No one else.
And finally, it is your own wife’s political speeches and silly statements in them that have made people suspicious she may be more of a political activist, than a first lady. It has nothing to do with fiesty………..or color Senator.
Nice try at……..uh, uniting us……….again.
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Randy: It will take years before a drop of that oil will rise to the surface….
Uh huh. That’s what the Democrats were saying over ten years ago when Clinton blocked ANWR drilling. We’d have that oil today if not for that, but I sure want it as soon as possible without any more delays.
- – -
Good one, Jim R.
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:42 pm
“a racist centric church”
I can’t believe how willfully ignorant and dishonest this shit is…
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Woody, I support Obama not because I am a “liberal” (I don’t know what that term even means, since it is overused constantly by people like you), but like neo-con Andrew Sullivan, my support for Obama is based on competence. Decades upon decades of Republican mismanagement has turned off conservatives who believe that Obama represents those principals better than McCain, whose stances change with the wind.
On his near death bed, Barry Goldwater made one request, and it was not for a priest, not for last rites, not for a bible. Instead, he said that once he was gone, he didn’t want his name associated with the Republican Party. He felt like the Democrats of today represented his conservative views much more than the GOP.
Face it, Jim R. and Woody, conservatism is as dead as fish bait. For years now, although the name hasn’t changed, “reactionary jingoism” would probably have been a much better term for your corrupt ilk. There have been honorable conservatives in the past – Robert Taft, Mark Hatfield, etc. – and some in the present (like Andrew Bracevich), but your kind isn’t any different than the so-called “liberals” of which you bloviate. I would vote for Bob Barr before I would vote for John McCain.
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:30 pm
The 53 trillion dollar figure was repeated by the Rutherford Institute, of all sources, Woody. Smoke on that, “conservative” wanna be.
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:40 pm
One more thing: the 2002 takeover of the congress and the presidency by the Republicans began a four year period that saw the biggest growth of government spending in history. YOUR Republican congress sent the pork to the Republican president’s desk, and YOUR President McNumbnuts signed all of that pork into law.
Your baseless lies and half-truths have gotten a lot of traction over the last several years on the AM radio dial, but it is dwindling away as fast as the GOP grip on power. It is about freaking time.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Oooo…was it Marc or someone else who mentioned George Carlin the other day? He passed away tonight.
Never considered myself a hardcore fan (he was too gross), but I watched a couple of recent standup performances of his, and found myself nodding my head to much of his commentary on the political system.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:58 pm
“Republicans began a four year period that saw the biggest growth of government spending in history. YOUR Republican congress sent the pork to the Republican president’s desk, and YOUR President McNumbnuts signed all of that pork into law.”
And one big reason we are in deep shit and don’t deserve a third chance David. I wish I could think Obama would bring ‘change’ to DCs porky pig ways. Alas, no.
“a racist centric churchâ€
Sorry reg. I meant that to be “a race centric church”.
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:28 pm
I saw him live 11 times, from 1983 to 2002.
George Carlin.
…as he would say,
“Go fuck yourself!”
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:48 am
You should have more faith in Obama, Jim. People can say what they want about Obama (funny sounding name, unusual upbringing in a family that didn’t go to any kind of church, crazy pastor), but he is not a leftist, as much as leftists would like for him to be. Not only does he pooh pooh the notion of universal health care, but he regularly derides the concept of requiring each individual in the U.S. to have health care, saying that it is a “choice.” (which puts him squarely at odds with me…). Most recently, he has come out in squarely in favor of NAFTA, admitting that his earlier statements against it during his primary fight were smoke and mirrors. But, nevertheless, I will vote for him, because our country is in such a crap can now that this doesn’t matter now given the crisis we are in. As Ariana Huffington put it, “when the house is on fire, you don’t worry about the interior decorating.”
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:29 am
David: Obama “is not a leftist.”
Well, doesn’t that say it all for David’s credibility.
David, by old standards, I would be considered a liberal today. I just wish that today’s liberals, leftists, wackos would quit messing with the system. You always want change at the point of a government gun because most like you fail personally at self-sufficiency.
On the $53 trillion, I don’t care who came up with it, it’s wrong. I picked apart a study by PwC that was supposedly authoritative–and, built on many false assumptions or “best information.”
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:22 am
“most like you fail personally at self-sufficiency.”
I can tell I have pushed your buttons – now the personal (not to mention baseless and bizaare) insults are coming out. Again, Woody, you have nothing.
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:54 am
I didn’t say “all” or “you specifically,” David. You must be feeling some sense of guilt or identification with the description.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:28 am
“…because most like you fail personally at self-sufficiency.”
Most of the time you are entertaining and humorous Woody. Sometimes not. As Carlin would say “What the f–K, man!”
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:47 am
Jim R, I’m tired. Really. This past week I went to a lousy sleep clinic where they hooked what must have been a couple hundred wires and straps to me. In the morning, they told me that they didn’t get enough data and that I might have to come back again. Why? Because I didn’t sleep enough.
Maybe I should go to an awake clinic to find out why I stay awake rather than a sleep clinic to find out why I can’t sleep. At least the awake clinic wouldn’t say that I slept too much.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:08 am
Wow, I think we’ve reached a record! 30 Wood-”pecker” posts! That’s an incredible 37.5% of the total! Another crazy pecking job by that loco woodpecker. And another of Marc’s fine blog posts pockmarked with ugly, vacuous holes.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:10 am
Correction, as of June 23, 9:47 AM, 31!!
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Don’t like it. Don’t read it. Marc determines who can and cannot post here.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:40 pm
And now breaking 38%!!! Zowie! Such woodpecking prowess is sure to leave a rotted tree. Well done!
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Talk about gay.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Been away for a couple of days and see nothing has changed. BTW oil companies are sitting on 6,000 unused offshore permits RIGHT NOW. Maybe that’s because there is a five year backlog on drilling ships. But thanks for playing!
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:29 pm
“Talk about gay.”
We were? Huh?
In other news, 33 comments is the new standard-bearer–an ever-inflating record of hot air!