... have MORE of the 'Popular Vote' than Buh-Rack-O-Lamb.

What are you Dembos going to do?

Don't forget the mantra: "Every vote counts".

Is something bitin' you in the ass, now?

* * *

I can see it now...

Dembo Super Delegate Selected-Candidate (Clinton) Deselected by the Electoral College AND Supreme Court - McCain Wins in Hanging Chadfest!

Moral: Your vote doesn't count.

I'll vote for a blck man before Bush

Damn! Is Bush running again?

If I were you, I'd worry more about McCant's lack of funds for the duration. No matter who gets nominated (Obama) in the democratic party... McCant and the Repugnantcans are going to have to spread their meager $$s so thin to counter any democratic strategic moves.


THe Repubs are so screwed... it's hilarious.

Ya think?

But I thought the "Repugnantcans" had all the money?

So what you are saying is that after Obama takes over, all the Dembos are going to be even poorer than before (since they gave all their money to Buh-Rack-O-Lambada)?

Damn, where will the tax revenues then come from to pay for all those free handouts Buh-Rack-O-Lambada is giving away (free health insurance, free gas, free gay-marriage, free Pro Tools)?

I think you are only half right... we're ALL so screwed.

They do... that's the beauty of all this... Even the Repugnantcans with all their money aren't donating it to the McCant campaign.

And this is from a party that would eat their own young to get themselves back into office... just too funny!!!

Obama and Hillary are the only show in town... then there's McWho??

free Pro Tools? It's practically free right now.

No dude! Thats Obomanation!!!

Your not seeing where this is probably going.

First it makes no difference who is President - nothing is going to 'change'.

Hillary knows this. Her tactic is to destroy Obama and run in 2012 against either McCain (or the next Republican Candidate). Why else would she not seriously entertain the V.P. gig? She doesn't want to be anywhere near an Obama Presidency. Truth is, she wants Obama as President less than she wants McCain as President. The Clintons will smear Obama and save the Republicans the expense.

Obama will need all the money he can muster just for damage control.

If Obama does win, he'll fail miserably as did Carter. These 'positions' he spouts about have NEVER worked. His 'foreign policy' thinking is seriously flawed and completely juvenile - this'll be his undoing, it'll get very embarrassing (even for kNick). His tax proposals are horribly conceived. A complete Republican take over of BOTH houses of Congress would occur in 2010.

He's not pulling any troops out of Iraq. And, even he not stupid enough to 'meet' with the crazy Iranians.

Hillary does not want this amateur in office to ruin her 2012 campaign.

She want to destroy him ASAP.

Fortunately for all of us, the U.S. is such an enormous 'thing', that it can withstand a few years of these burps in the leadership.

A recent example is the miserable years under Carter.

Wow Zum... what a spin. You must have some real inside info on Hillary's tactics


Insofar as Obama and how miserable it will be, the only miserable thing will be the state of the country after Bush leaves office... and Obama will have to work miracles to dig ourselves out of this one.

But it's so gratifying to watch the whole Repugnican party erode to nothing. Unfortunately, it cost the country and the world dearly to learn from this colossal f#@k-up called Bush.

Did you have a fight with the wife last night??

not following the last two post...

???

My point is: Clinton does have MORE of the popular vote. Which is EXACTLY why y'all Dembos insist (til this day) that algore was elected President.

Real numbers, not 'pledged' (and probably many now regretting) and Super-Delegate votes (from backroom dealings).

The Dembos are unveiling how truly dirty and sneaky they really are.

What baffles me is how the Liberal-elite are getting behind Obama, when what he offers will do NOTHING to enhance their existance - absolutely nothing. And how they are bailing on their 'girl'.

I accept the hate-of-Bush factor. But why support an untested, amateur instead of the love's-of-their-lives (Bubba and Hillary)?

Weird.

An inconvenient truth, nonetheless.

Wrong.

No, right.

Clinton - 17,631,144 (47.7%)
Obama - 17,559,843 (47.5%)

With 3 more Primaries to go.

There's NO CLEAR winner here.

As far as the Republicans eroding? Hmmm, the Dembos look to be broken in half.

This is a REAL problem.

Interestingly, no one on this forum wants Hillary (nor McCain 'cept for me). Could be where all you Dembos are getting your distorted/lopsided view of Obama's success.

What's really obvious is that the country is just about split in half over a Republican candidate and a Dembo Candidate.

However, unlike the Republican candidate probably able to get a 95% show of support from the right, the Dembo Candidate can ONLY get half of the show of support from the left.

2nd grade math tells us that the Selected-Dembo actually has less than a 25% mandate from the total U.S. popultion. Which is about 60% of what Bill Clinton received in 1992.

Translation for all you non-political speakers: Obama, if elected President, will be able achieve NOTHING.

Knowing that is a relief!

Sounds like you're using Hillary math (which is as inaccurate as anything else she says)

You can NOT count MI/FL as they are NOT part of the results.
You can NOT get an accurate count because of the caucus states which do not report actual voter head-count.

Amazing how McCain is not getting 100% vote in the current primaries .... he lost 15% yesterday! Some unity!

Florida & Michigan?

Yes, you are correct about the caucus results. These are estimates based on polling.

And why NOT count the MI/FL results? Oh, that's right, it voids the "Selection" process.

Interesting how this "Selection" method has become legitimate NOW. More evidence of the hypocrisy of the Dembos.

"Amazing how McCain is not getting 100% vote in the current primaries .... he lost 15% yesterday! Some unity!"

Not at all. I guess I should revise my "95% show of support from the right" to "slightly less than 85% show of support from the right".

And furthermore, why isn't an 85% show of support more impressive than the less than 1% difference between Obama & Clinton.

Isn't 85 greater than 1?

McCain wins, handily.

//And why NOT count the MI/FL results? Oh, that's right, it voids the "Selection" process.


They do not count because the states violated the rules BEFORE ANY VOTING OCCURRED. The states KNEW their votes didn't count. The VOTERS knew their votes didn't count. People DIDN'T vote because their votes wouldn't count. Both candidates AGREED to it before the elections even started. Now the bitch say's it's unfair because she thinks it can help her. Fuck her and the dildo she rode in on.

//And furthermore, why isn't an 85% show of support more impressive than the less than 1% difference between Obama & Clinton.

Actually, if you add the votes of the candidates, there is between 1 and 4% of "undecided or Other" votes, compared to McCain's 15% ... I think that's a bit better. In some states it's been 100% ... not so for mccain.

"Obama needs 2,026 delegates to clinch the nomination, and he moved within 100 of that goal after contests in Kentucky and Oregon Tuesday. Clinton was more than 250 delegates back."

Why do you guys like this empty-man? He's shown no experience in doing anything. His ONLY track record is hanging with 'not-so-nice' people.

This is most elusive thing that baffles me concerning the Obama-ites.

Just because he delivers flowery, yet empty, jargon.

Simple, frighteningly stupid thinking.

Well, you may just get what you want. Although, I don't think that you will.

As I stated earlier, the U.S. can survive Obama. We barely pulled through with Carter. I guess it has to go below the line for a REAL President to emerge.

sounds like you're describing your own commentary and "political" persona on this forum to me...

"sounds like you're describing your own commentary and "political" persona on this forum to me..."

For the sake of getting an answer, I'll agree with your statement.

Now, since you are a higher form of life... answer the question.

ask a real one worthy of an answer.

Give me ONE answer as to why YOU believe Obama is capable of being the President of the United States.

Please don't answer in the form of a question that includes 'Bush'. You could give me an example of some 'feat' that Obama has achieved that puts him above the rest of us that has demonstrated an ability to be the leader of the U.S. A REAL solid factual achievement - not a slew of dreamy words. Don't include anyone other than Obama in your answer. I am NOT interested why anyone else is not qualified, only why Obama is qualified.

If he is obviously unique and qualified, a single answer should be quite easy.

Once again, don't answer in the form of a question that includes Bush.

Have at it.

MM-baby! You deleted your post! Why you back out? Is Obama already fading?

Good thing I have a copy:

”Obama is the best hope for people who actually want something better for all of us...
He is a REAL leader who is willing and ABLE to do the work necessary to restore our country and our legacy as Americans amongst ourselves and around the world...
He inspires people (50-80,000 people in Oregon just days ago!!) to participate in the political process because he has the characteristics of all great leaders: grace, integrity, style, class, intelligence, restraint, compassion, and charisma. He understands diplomacy, economics, foreign policy and most importantly, right from wrong, and he isn't afraid to stand up for what he believes in when it's not popular in Washington, as his vote against the war clearly indicates.
He is: forward looking and thinking, presidential, focused, serious, educated, respectful, caring, energetic, capable, in touch with real people and their problems, and is willing and able to surround himself with top people, listen to their advice and expertise - and then exercise his own good judgement. That's what presidents who aren't wankers do.
His campaign effectiveness, efficiency, and fund raising speaks for itself, and it's just getting started!
Obviously, all my opinions, and just couldn't give one reason because there are just too many good ones...

and you knew all of this, despite whatever you might write in response... ”

And, best of all, here’s my response:

It all sounds wonderful.

But what has he ACTUALLY done? Accomplished?

I get most of those groovy feelings from a Thai massage. Santa Claus used to make feel all gooey all over when I was 4 years old.

The guy has done NOTHING. Your words are just rhetorical fluff.

Waiting for a solid example of an accomplishment that raises him to the lofty position of the President.

C'mon, ONE example.

I don't think you can.

"... he has the characteristics of all great leaders: grace, integrity, style, class, intelligence, restraint, compassion, and charisma."

Pick one of those wonderful attributes and give me an example.

"He understands diplomacy, economics, foreign policy and most importantly, right from wrong,"

He has demonstrated the opposite of all those.

But, I'm holding out for just one, single example.

Bring it on!

I had to log in to respond to that Michael M.
You do not even give one example of how he is fit to run the country.
His 50-80,000 people pep rally was for a free concert, not all about him. http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/007700.html
Raising money is easy for any charlatan/cult leader/used car salesman. Tell people what they want, and they'll support you.

How about this:
George W. Bush is a REAL leader who is willing and ABLE to do the work necessary to restore our country and our legacy as Americans amongst ourselves and around the world... He is: forward looking and thinking, presidential, focused, serious, educated, respectful, caring, energetic, capable, in touch with real people and their problems, and is willing and able to surround himself with top people, listen to their advice and expertise - and then exercise his own good judgement. That's what presidents who aren't wankers do.

Does me saying it make it true?

I hate how the only reason people want Obama is because he can talk the talk. Nevermind any REAL experience or ideas.
"We'll make America better!" is not a plan on how to do it.
Tell us how and why, not flowery words that no one can critique.

My brother is Secret Service and has spent personal time with Mr. Obama. He will not vote for him.


///back to lurker status

studiomusic,

Good points.

However, these lib-loons are first driven by an unfounded hatred for Bush. They don't even know why they hate so much - most of them are old flower-power hippes. So it doesn't square up. I have never seen such a large crowd of angry kool-aide drinkers.

Then this messiah-like blatherer shows up and spews out what they wnat to hear. They actually believe most of what he says. And I have no problem with that. Let 'em believe what they want.

But they have blindly lined up behind someone who has never demonstrated that he can even sort of come close to just a single one of these great and lofty ideas he blows out.

It's just amazing to watch this herd circling around this shallow entity.

This statement by itself illustrates how clueless you are

People will give any excuse as to why their party can't raise any money. How about the obvious... they don't support their candidate... and the Repugnican party is fading into oblivion... both nationally and internationally.... thanks to Bush.

i mistakenly deleted most of my post while editing it - thanks a lot for copying it and thus saving it! although, it seemed a happy accident once i thought about how you would respond, and there you did... whatever, man.

those are MY reasoned OPINIONS why I believe Obama is capable of being a great President of the US, which is what you asked for, requiring no justification to or approval from you or anyone else. if you don't understand them, or agree, that's fine by me - plenty of others do and don't. i don't follow anyone or do anything blindly, by the way - I wanted Obama to run when I first saw him 3 years ago... and am ecstatic with how well he's done and how he's handled himself so far against all odds. As he continues to manage to make his way through the likes of you, the media and the clintons... the Presidency will be a relative walk in the park.

...give me a break with the no reasons to hate shrub comment - he's a liar, and he's incredibly incompetent at pretty much everything except lying and being completely irresponsible.

carry on with your same old crap... just don't expect me to respond to it.

StudioMusic.. you're only contributing to your status of a troll when exhibiting comrades with the Zum.

"and don't expect me to respond to it."

I never did. Especially since there is no answer.

You guys are all feely-feely - never any substance, all filler.

You have no concrete evidence that the guy is capable. It's all in your religion of this empty-suit. You are worse than the religious right that you despise. He moved a crowd, is all you have.

Woo-woo!

It is weird indeed, even I do not dislike this Obama-dude. He's very affable. But NOT qualified. Clinton would make a better President.

Well MM, since you can't produce answer, maybe someone else here can (without answering with a question or including some reference to Bush).

Justine? kNick? Anyone???

Well, I voted for Hillary. At the time I thought she had a better command of the issues.

But I'll be happy either way.

"At the time I thought she had a better command of the issues."

And now? Don't tell me you too are an Obama disciple!

This place is really spiraling down the toilet.

just for the record, since you apparently ignore my answers to your question about what he's done, he's run a brilliant campaign to win the democratic nomination for president, and he didn't vote to go to war with Iraq for a couple of examples...

"just for the record, since you apparently ignore my answers to your question about what he's done, he's run a brilliant campaign to win the democratic nomination for president"

Yes indeed he has. And that alone qualifies him for the Prez-gig?

You are really reaching low. C'mon! Just one substantive accomplishment. Talk is cheap. He also has never said HOW any of this chit-chat will actually become reality - other than raisin' taxes (and that's never worked - so much for his economic knowledge).

Here are his 'accomplishements', as stated by you:

1) best hope for people who actually want something better for all of us... -- How do you 'quantify' this?

2) a REAL leader who is willing and ABLE to do the work necessary to restore our country and our legacy as Americans amongst ourselves and around the world... -- How? Where's the 'plan'? Is this that "I have a plan" routine?

3) He inspires people (50-80,000 people in Oregon just days ago!!) to participate in the political process because he has the characteristics of all great leaders: grace, integrity, style, class, intelligence, restraint, compassion, and charisma. -- Madonna's done all that - Rock the Vote! Madonna for Prez!

4) He understands diplomacy, economics, foreign policy and most importantly, right from wrong. -- You may want to revisit these claims. Obama has stepped in more piles in the last several weeks that can completely negate all your claims.

5) and he isn't afraid to stand up for what he believes in when it's not popular in Washington, as his vote against the war clearly indicates. -- Can you explain the Rev. Wright problem?

6) He is: forward looking and thinking, presidential, focused, serious, educated, respectful, caring, energetic, capable, in touch with real people and their problems, and is willing and able to surround himself with top people, listen to their advice and expertise - and then exercise his own good judgement. That's what presidents who aren't wankers do. -- Really? There is little evidence, if any to support this. Supply it if you have it.

7) His campaign effectiveness, efficiency, and fund raising speaks for itself, and it's just getting started! -- Says who?

Obviously, all my opinions, and just couldn't give one reason because there are just too many good ones. -- Yeah ALL opinions and NO facts. Wishful banter.

"and he didn't vote to go to war with Iraq..."

And, neither did I. In fact, both of us were NOT in the U.S. Senate when the vote came up.

Unfortunately its crap shoot for those voting on the Dem ticket.

I always view the presidents position to establish a foreign policy and congress for domestic policy.

- Obama passed legislation with Republican Senator Jim Talent to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend.

- After a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.

- His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent.

- Obama created the Illinois Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income working families in 2000 and successfully sponsored a measure to make the credit permanent in 2003. The law offered about $105 million in tax relief over three years.

- Obama joined forces with former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon (D-IL) to pass the toughest campaign finance law in Illinois history. The legislation banned the personal use of campaign money by Illinois legislators and banned gifts from lobbyists. Before the law was passed, one organization ranked Illinois worst among 50 states for its campaign finance regulations.

- As a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan.

- He traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world.

- Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting.

- In the U.S. Senate, Obama introduced the STOP FRAUD Act to increase penalties for mortgage fraud and provide more protections for low-income homebuyers, well before the current subprime crisis began.

- Obama sponsored legislation to combat predatory payday loans, and he also was credited with lobbied the state to more closely regulate some of the most egregious predatory lending practices.

- Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 to provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.

- Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.

- Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.

- Obama and Senator Feingold (D-WI) took on both parties and proposed ethics legislation that was described as the "gold standard" for reform. It was because of their leadership that ending subsidized corporate jet travel, mandating disclosure of lobbyists' bundling of contributions, and enacting strong new restrictions of lobbyist-sponsored trips became part of the final ethics bill that was signed into law.

"just for the record, since you apparently ignore my answers to your question about what he's done, he's run a brilliant campaign to win the democratic nomination for president, and he didn't vote to go to war with Iraq for a couple of examples..."


And his positions in general are right on. But his ability to lead is why I think he'll make a great President. He has all the right qualities; who cares whether he's only been in the Senate one term.

I'm not a disciple, by the way. The Democrats had two great candidates this time.

Sounds like an agent that doesn't need to be on his detail anymore. All of the agents I've spoken with that travel with him have nothing but good things to say about him. Some of the locals has sticks up their ass, but I attribute that to them being local assholes.

one man's supposed opinion...

Andrew, all those points truly sound good.

They'd make a great resume for a Social Worker - but not the President of the U.S.

As I've said before... we'll survive this boob, if he makes it in. We had four years of miserable practice with Carter.

The real let down will be for the disciples. Buh-Rak-O-Lambada will NOT be able to 'change' anything. When the euphoric honey moon wears of, it'll be the biggest cold-turkey withdrawal of all-time. Since I already know this, I won't care.

But alas, don't worry my friends, McCain will prevail and you'll be able to resume your miserable complaining.

;-)

Even McCain would change a lot of things. For the past seven years we've had the most evil, corrupt administration in our history. For all his misguided ideas, McCain does want to do good for the country.

Are you going to tell me that Cheney (who's really the president) does?

Pres of the US is the Ultimate Social Worker position.



I agree with that. Obabma definitely has a fringe cultist following segment to his support base.... but I'm not worried about them.





McCant will have to raise a whole crap load more $$ to be even a remotely competitive candidate to Obama.

It will be fun to watch McCant and the Republican party running around like a bunch of chickens with their head cut off. Also, as time draws loser to the election, it will become much more obvious just how "out of touch" with reality and the US McCant the the republican party is.

"Even McCain would change a lot of things."

I agree! Let's ALL vote for McCain.

McCain won't raise taxes (or sign any attempts by the loony-left congress). Might even make the present tax cuts 'permanent' (whatever that means).

Probably appoint some more clear-thinking Supreme Court judges - this is the most worrisome area if Buh-Rak-O-Lambada takes the helm. Good-god, that would be disastrous.

"Are you going to tell me that Cheney (who's really the president) does?"

I don't know. What does your source, dailykos,com, have to say?

McCain will not be a pansey-boy, like Carter, when it comes to National Defense. Buh-Rak-O-Lambada, man, that guy is most clueless in this area. He'll have a 'street meetin', just like the good ol' days in the Southside, and ponder 'bout some things. What a dope.

If elected President, McCant would be a politician like all the rest of the Repugnicants before him... and would keep the US military machine overextended. Obama is much more of a Statesman and Diplomat. He'll be infinitely better for our country in foreign affairs than McCant.

"McCant will have to raise a whole crap load more $$ to be even a remotely competitive candidate to Obama."

These numbers may offer some comfort to your concerns about McCain and money.

Obama = $37 million
DNC = $4 million
Total = $41 million

McCain = $22 million
RNC = $40 million
Total = $62 million

These are current as of today.

Thanks for caring!

* * *

"Obama is much more of a Statesman and Diplomat."

Really? When has he done any of that? He's a Jr. Senator with not even 4 years experience. McCain was tortured at the Hanoi Hilton for a longer period of time.

Dude... I don't know where you get your numbers. Look at the cash on Hand column. And Obabma is going to raise a hell of a lot more.... buh bye McCant.

Dood... those charts are incorrect.

Here's an acceptable source for the lefty-liberal-loonies, from the employer of Keith Olbermann,

MSNBC

* * *

It's also been unnecessary for McCain to raise money right now.

Dude... put down the crack pipe... and I quote YOUR source:



Now.... look at those numbers... and look at the numbers on my chart in the April column.... get it??!! They're saying the same thing...

BTW... Obama could raise more $$ thant the RNC has in about 1 month.

"Buh Bye" McCant

I think YOU need to reread those bogus charts.

YOUR phoney chart states that Obama has $46.5 million. He doesn't. He has $37 million.

YOUR phoney chart states that McCain has $24 million. He doesn't. He has $22 million.

You then add in the funds from the cndidates respective National Committees.

And the results give McCain MORE funding.

What you are not seeing is that, yes, Obama is raising a lot of money - but he is spending it like there's no tomorrow. And barely edging out Clinton.

And with nearly 3 times the amount spent, over McCain, he's not gained any ground.

Also, Obama spent MORE than he raised.

Not a good trend.

SO which one is it Zum?? 37 mil... or he spent more then he raised??

All common sense reporting has Obama WAAAAYYYYYY in the lead insofar as campaign funding... over Hilary and especially McCant.

In fact, I'd say Hillary has a better chance of being Pres than McCant

Buh Bye McCant

Truth be told... I like McCain... he's a good guy. I just feel he's not what the country needs right now.

I actually feel a little sorry for him.

Geeze... did you fail 2nd-grade math?

If one raised $31 million, spent $35 million and has a balance of $37 million... then one started with $41 million.

Why is that hard to calculate.

So you see no problem with the DNC only having $4 million v. the RNC having $40 million?

"I actually feel a little sorry for him (McCain)."

Considering what he's been through in life? Your feeling sorry is hardly necessary. I'd suggest you feel sorry about your own math skills.

;-)

I think you failed first grade math. You're talking about April 08. There will be time-frames where he spends more than he earns and vice versa... but over the long-run he has a balance of over 37 mil (your numbers).

BTW... he can raise that in about a month. Am I worried about the RNC $$???... pfft.... not in the least... I mean... look at them

But you should be worried about them.

While I appreciate your enthusiasm for Buh-Rak-O-Lambada...

The REAL numbers you need to watch are how Buh-Rak-O-Lambada can do in the key states of Florida and Ohio.

Ar this point, he needs to raise those - not dollars.

"What does your source, dailykos,com, have to say?"

Read Jeremy Scahill's "Blackwater: the rise of the world's most powerful mercenary army," for example. I know you don't like to read, but it's a very well researched book.

This administration is simply EVIL. There's nothing looney about my saying that at all; the level of corruption is hard to believe.

kNick, this topic is about Hillary's popular vote exceeding Buh-Rak-O-Lambada's.

It got morphed into pipe-dream accomplishments of Buh-Rak-O-Lambada - which NO factual ones were given.

Then another U-turn into campaign funding. Which I clearly demonstrated that while Buh-Rak-O-Lambada has raised an astonishing amount, it hasn't really done that much for him.

He is underfunded compared to McCain. He also is NOT doing or going to do well in Florida. He has made too many blunders concerning that state.

First, he hasn't gone there. Second, he is stedfast on NOT counting the Florida vote - very curious. Third, he trails there considerably and will soon blow whatever money he does have to attempt to get votes - that then will need to be counted - very curious. A hypocrite? Yeah.

Lastly, if McCain chooses Florida Gov. Crist as the V.P. candidate... it's over for Buh-Rak-O-Lambada.

Let's also add that McCain's wife has more $$$ than Buh-Rak-O-Lambada has raised.

Well then.. this topic is about a fallacy.

"Well then.. this topic is about a fallacy."

Clinton has 58,000 more 'popular' votes than Obama.

For all that campaign money Obama has raised... not a very impressive lead.

It's almost the inverse here... more $$$ = less votes.

Hmmm...

"kNick, this topic is about Hillary's popular vote exceeding Buh-Rak-O-Lambada's."

I don't think that's true, but what if it is? The one who wins is the one with more delegates at the convention.

Now, I'm not a fan of the electoral college (is it called the electoral college in primaries?), but campaign strategies are devised to grab as many delegates as possible. The candidates would concentrate on different places and focus on different issues if it were a popular vote contest.

Anyway, you axed me what the source of my left-wing lunacy - that our current administration is evil and that even McCain will be an improvement - has to say. That's why I mentioned "Blackwater" as only one of a long stream of books that expose the crimes these people have committed.

What does it matter with the dollars raised? Last time I asked you to sell me on why I should vote for McCain, you said that he wouldn't raise taxes. My response was something like is that it?
Trash Obama and Hillary. Fine. But why McCain? What is the draw there? I don't get it. Because he was a POW? Please, Zum, convince me with real reasons to vote for McCain.

According to people who live in a vacuum.

"According to people who live in a vacuum."

Yeah...

Here is the ACTUAL difference in votes:

168,383 - not including IA, NV, ME and WA.

Clinton leads OVER Obama by 168,383 - not including IA, NV, ME and WA.

Now... watch carefully (this benefits Obama). The four states IA, NV, ME and WA use a slightly different system - caucuses. The actual popular votes are ESTIMATES.

With these ESTIMATES, the difference narrows (i.e., gives an increase TO Obama). The vote difference, with only these four states, reduces the OVERALL difference by 110,222 (subtract 110,222 FROM 168,383).

The 'estimate' adjustment gives Clinton an edge of 58,141.

I get the feeling you don't do well with numbers.

With all the money that Obama has raised and spent, not a very impressive return on investment.

I get the feeling you are rather selective in your ignorance

Who are you trying to convince here... me or you?

No matter how selective you are with your "research" there's 1 thing that's undeniable....

wait for it.....

her it comes........

Buh Bye McCant

"But why McCain?"

I'm not going to try to convince anyone to vote any particular way.

But as far as why I would NOT vote for either Clinton nor Obama is because BOTH (more so Obama) have said that they'd try to get Congress to raise taxes and then sign that into law.

Not interested in giving my money to those boneheads. They get plenty of it and have YET to spend it wisely.

And following that thinking, I am NOT interested in ANY from of national health insurance. The government has destroyed the education system, no reason to let it ruin something else.

So, from what you are saying, taxes is your big selling point, and you basically don't agree with the Democrats on some other issues, so McCain it is, warts and all...

I assume you are sure that McCain will not raise taxes, will fix the broken education system, and will generally be a better choice for American families with regard to health insurance, the economy, the education system, and taxes. And this never-ending war on terra. Sheesh. Ok, well nice try, but taxes is not my yardstick for presidential potential.

Then why all the Obama bashing?

"Not interested in giving my money to those boneheads. They get plenty of it and have YET to spend it wisely."

You'll give lots of money to boneheads if McCain wins too. Don't kid yourself.

"And following that thinking, I am NOT interested in ANY from of national health insurance. The government has destroyed the education system, no reason to let it ruin something else."

Troubled as it is, the idea of not having public education is pretty appalling. What's really ruined it is the "no child left behind" crap, which removes all creativity from education and assumes every kid is identical. As a result we're leaving the children behind.

"Obama bashing?"

Obama truth telling. A big, unfuzzy difference.

"I assume you are sure that McCain will not raise taxes, will fix the broken education system, and will generally be a better choice for American families with regard to health insurance, the economy, the education system, and taxes. And this never-ending war on terra. Sheesh. Ok, well nice try, but taxes is not my yardstick for presidential potential.

No, I am NOT sure that McCain wouldn't ask for a tax increase - he, however, hasn't said that he would.

The ONLY way to get the education system fixed is to privatize it. I'm sure you'd agree that Harvard is a better school tham Swampville City College. I wouldn't send my kid to a government school. No government in school = no taxing for that = you have YOUR money to send YOUR kid to the school of your choice. I don't need Obama telling me where to send m kid to school

Why does government need to be in the Health Insurance business? They aren't in the business of home insurance, auto insurance, life insurance, etc. The government would create an enormous layer of bureaucracy that would ultimately deliver a lower standard of health care. I buy my own insurance now. Don't need Obama telling me what to do.

As far as the 'war on terra', yeah, McCain is decidedly better choice. NO ONE needs Obame running/ruining the military. A HUGELY scary thought.

* * *

"What's really ruined it is the "no child left behind" crap, which removes all creativity from education and assumes every kid is identical. As a result we're leaving the children behind."

I couldn't agree more and one of several things Bush blew - along with those stupid-ass rebates. KEEP THE GOVERNMENT AWAY!

"The ONLY way to get the education system fixed is to privatize it."

That would be the end of public education. Bad idea, and thankfully it gets voted down every time there's a voucher system on the ballot (which is less extreme than just privatizing it).

Right now we have a two-tiered education system - or maybe more than two-tiered. The disparity would be far worse if we didn't have public education.

And if you've ever tried to get your kid into a good private school you know why I'm so opposed to the idea. Forget it unless you're a movie star...although that doesn't stop them from taking your application fee.

Furthermore, I have huge problems with the right-wing fetish for privatizing everything - especially the armed forces. The free market is great for a lot of things, but it has some serious blind spots.

Public school is necessary, no matter how good Harvard is. If they can't afford private school, they probably also can't afford private health insurance.

Can you give me an example of 1 country where this brilliant theory works?

The auto, life and home insurance industry has proved itself capable of running its business efficiently and affordably and without the need of gov't intervention. Actually, the gov't did investigate the auto insurance industry and my premiums have halved since. The health care industry (not just insurance) is wildly out of control, broken, and getting worse all the time. That's the difference.

Congratulations to you (and me) for being able to afford an insurance plan as large as a mortgage, but health care needs to be accessible to everyone.

It worked so well for the airlines.

But curiously you I'm sure you've included FL/MI which conforms to Hillary math - not reality.

As for his campaigning in FL, that's for the general election cycle.

"Can you give me an example of 1 country where this brilliant theory works?"

Right here in the U.S. My kid goes to a great private school. Unfortunately, I'm STILL being taxed as if he were going to a public school-disaster. If I could get my tax back, I could send him to even a better school.

"health care needs to be accessible to everyone."

It already is. You seem to not be able to differentiate health CARE form health INSURANCE. I don't want to pay someone else's health insurance premium - that's their responsibility.

Well, there's where we will NEVER agree. I think you should pay for other people's health care. Same as I pay for your kids education that you're not using. I don't even have kids. Why should I pay? What a shakedown! My health is at least as important as your kids Spanish lessons. And why should I pay for an army that defends your state? I live clear on the other side of the country. Sheesh.

What health care is available to everyone? Emergency care? That's not care. Medicade? It only kicks in if you're penniless. Where would someone look for cancer treatments without insurance?

"I think you should pay for other people's health care"

I already do.

"I pay for your kids education that you're not using."

No you don't.

"My health is at least as important as your kids Spanish lessons"

Maybe to you, but not to my kid.

"And why should I pay for an army that defends your state?"

It's a national army, not 50 separate state militias.

"What health care is available to everyone? Emergency care?"

Emergency care is available to those who don't have adequate insurance, obtain an insurance policy if you want something different/better.

"Where would someone look for cancer treatments without insurance?"

I don't think there are such places.

Zum, I enjoy the provocative post but I think, what are you saying when you write the oppisite? The persona of a republic?
Just the fact that your kids go to a private school tells me that you inherited a mass of money. Your wife is the bread winner and you secretly luv Walt Midi. Then you back MoCain, a serpatist! Out of touch with humans and living in scaredy pants cave!

Ummm... sorry Kimosabe, but the U.S. education system is not privatized. The U.S. has a public school system and there are private schools in addition.

Give me an example of 1 country where the entire school system is privatized.

How about this.... pay teachers a lot more so that we can attract the best educators... and get rid of tenure in public schools.

]

Sorry, you'll need to pay more. I feel a case of the sniffles coming on.



Well, maybe not your kids, but every kid in my neighborhood.



He should be paying too.



Well, it shouldn't be. I mean, every man for himself, right?


YOU can't seem to differentiate emergency care from health care. Maybe health care ISN'T available to everyone after all. Hmmm.



By George I think he's got it!

Seems everytime I had to go to the ER, I had to pay for it ... without insurance.

How about giving every US CITIZEN the SAME health benefits the ILLEGALS have? No one seems to send THEM the bills when they go to the hospitals. They get the FREE health care, AND don't pay for schools.

"How about this.... pay teachers a lot more so that we can attract the best educators... and get rid of tenure in public schools."

Great idea! But how?

In the L.A. Unified School district, the ratio of 'adminstration' position to 'teacher' position is 1:1. In the private Catholic schools, within the SAME area, the ratio is 1:7. Just a very telling statistic.

Start by FIRING administration jobs (probably 95% Dembos), abolishing the NEA (probably 95% Dembos) and the teachers union (probably 95% Dembos) AND we'll see mass-improvement. First affect: more money left-over to hire more teachers. Get the government and loser unions OUT.

* * *

"Zum, I enjoy the provocative post but I think... that you inherited a mass of money. Your wife is the bread winner"

Thanks for the backhanded compliment. I inherited a mass brain. The wife doesn't (have to) work.

Joe, do you want to trade places with one single "ILLEGAL?"

That's a staggering statistic!!!! That right there is a huge problem. Why have I never heard of this before??

Do you have a link for that info?

AK

No link that I know of. This info was given to me by an 'administrative' employee that has his kid in a private school. I doubt that it would be esily found. IF... I can find any source I would certainly post it.

Kind of like algore sending his kids to a private school, huh? Even that baboon knows better.

Look, EVERYONE knows that there is NO competition between a private school and a public school.

A GREAT contributor, aside from the money, is the parent involvement in private schools. The low-life slobs that use public schools as a baby-sitting service have contributed greatly to the demise of public education. There are a few examples of very successful public schools - often voucher schools. But NOT any in LAUSD.

The government will destroy anything in its path. This why I don't understand how ANY of you can support ANYONE that even hints at creating more government control. They will NOT serve you. Sad, indeed.

I went to public schools. I'm not sure about the "low-life slobs" stereotype. I'm sure there are some, but most of the people I went to school with were pretty cool, in normal middle class families, and some are still my friends after all these years. We all learned math, science, history, languages, music, etc. I thought that's how all schools were when I was there. I had a great time, and got a scholarship for college. Maybe public schools have changed a lot since then.

"Maybe public schools have changed a lot since then."

You have young child, don't you?

If so, you better get the latest info on the state of this debacle (public education).

And, if you are considering a private education... let me give you some inside info: It is harder to get into pre-pre-K today than it was for you to get into college.

There are good charter and magnet schools in LAUSD, and they're public. As a matter of fact we got accepted into a very good private school but decided to send our daughter to a charter school instead.

[edit: a magnet - we were going to go to the charter school.]

And part of the reason these schools are better than the regular crap high schools is just what you say: parent involvement. That's an intrinsic thing, of course - parents who have the wherewithall to get their kids into charter or magnet schools are going to be more involved by definition.

But it's more than that. CHAMPS, a charter high school my daughter was going to go to before she got accepted into a magnet that's better suited to her, pays their teachers $100k and gets to choose the best ones. They're also able to devise their own curriculum without having to deal with "no child left behind." The magnet she's going to does as well, plus it doesn't hurt that they get to pick the best students. Same with private schools, of course.

Yes, I admit it: while I do prefer progressive education (which means a lot of different things) and I believe strongly in public education, I'm not liberal when it comes to my daughter's education. I want her to have much more than the standard one-size-fits-all crap you get in regular public schools. Screw Bush's "standards-based" education; it's total shite.

But there's nothing intrinsic about schools being private that makes them able to provide a better education. It's because they're smaller, not beholden to a staid bureaucracy, and able to pick the best teachers and students that they're better. They'd be just the same if they had to deal with huge numbers of kids of all ability levels from all socio-economic classes, hire the teachers who are shoved upon them, and do all that without much money.

The answer is to improve the public schools, not to privatize them. And certainly not to impose block-headed "standards" on them.

It's different today, Sean, at least it is here. And what zumbido says about getting into...well, pre-K wasn't hard, but into a good K-5 elementary school is absolutely true. If you're a movie star, no problem, but these bastards choose kids based on how much money they think their parents have.

We ended up getting into an excellent and really nice public elementary school (Roscomare Road), but we went through hell before that. Roscomare is at the top of Bel Air - gorgeous location - and the people who live in the area are either older or they send their kids to private school. So they have open enrollment, and we lucked out and got picked in the lottery they have to fill those extra slots. It worked out very well, although the middle school she's just finishing is pretty lousy.

And the local public elementary school here is total ass - and we live in a pretty good area.

"I'm not liberal when it comes to my..."

Typical Lib.

"But there's nothing intrinsic about schools being private that makes them able to provide a better education."

Are you kidding me? You screw up as a teacher and you are FIRED. Do the same and/or worse in the public system, you waive your tenure status and the union provides you with lawyers. The bureaucracy is overwhelmingly thick

nKnick, once again you know very little.

* * *

By the way... Hillary does have MORE votes. What a predicament! Good ol' Howard Dean'll fix it. Right?

Actually I know a lot about this.

The answer is as Andrew says: make it so teachers can get fired if they suck.

"Typical Lib."

Sorry, my daughter has too much to offer to be stuck in a gang-ridden school with shitty teachers. I want the quality of those schools to be raised, but I don't want her there in the meantime.

"Sorry, my daughter has too much to offer to be stuck in a gang-ridden school with shitty teachers. I want the quality of those schools to be raised, but I don't want her there in the meantime."

Gang kids from those "low-life slob" parents.

"make it so teachers can get fired if they suck."

Liberal, union lovin', NEA member teachers - good-luck firing them.

The problem started with the liberal-left-dembo thinking. It has evolved into a liberal-left-dembo mind set.

As long as there is no competition within the public teacher business, you will NEVER see an improvement. The pathetic state of it completely serves the current bureaucracy, which derives it's source of funding by the continued failing system.

There are actually DROVES of people that DO want that lame-ass loser L.A. mayor to take control of it.

What are you people thinking - besides nothing?

The ONLY way to fix it is to destroy it and start over.

Unless you live in NJ... which has some of the best public schools around. A lot of them are almost I.V. league prep schools.

I'm not advocating more government control, just better and more efficient government control. There is a HUGE difference.

Government jobs should be much better paid (to get better quality people) and a whole lot of fat needs to be trimmed. There's no denying that it's huge and bloated. It's the huge colossal inefficiencies that cost us $$... not the "control" or oversight.

AK

"Unless you live in NJ... which has some of the best public schools around. A lot of them are almost I.V. league prep schools."

According to the latest Newsweek list...

There is ONLY one school from N.J., and it finished at No. 30.

Are you getting your info from the same source that you get the ba-rack-o-lambada bits-n-pieces?

Hey zumbido, how about firing up those brains you say you were given instead of posting generic anti-liberal straw man shite?

"generic anti-liberal straw man shite?"

Where have I done that?

Problem is... you don't like the truth if it (may) adversely affect you. You gave a great example of why you send YOUR kid to different school than the one your continued lib-loon beliefs perpetrate.

No, my brother and his kids live in Plainsboro NJ (near Princeton) and the public schools there are amazing. I don't care what Newsweek says. I'll trust my brother and his raising-of-his-kid's judgment over Newsweek any day.

BTW, Chris (my nephew) got a hockey scholarship to college. He was the MVP of his borough. I don't know if he'll be good enough for the NHL, but we're still proud of him:

http://www.nj.com/hssports/results/boysicehockey/index.ssf/2008/02/west_windsor_north_9_ewing_3.html

Impossible. NJ is a dump.

Dude... you know you love Bayonne.

bullshit.
Primary State totals:
BO: 15,942,581
HC: 15,567,218

Caucus State Totals: (which are not actual people counts)
BO: 390,238
HC: 188,054

FL/MI are bullshit and are not counted. PERIOD.
Even counting Florida, he would STILL be ahead.
If you can find a way of counting MI when he wasn't on the ballot, you just show how lopsided your logic is.

Just because a clinton say it, doesn't mean it's so .. in fact, it probably means it's not! Of course, it could depend on the meaning of the word MORE.

"bullshit."

Yeah, you are full of it.

You don't even have the 'Primary State totals' correct.

And as far as FL & MI, I could NOT careless.

In fact, I REALLY couldn't care less about either of these losers.

What I do care about is riling you lib-dembo-loons. It's so easy!

Alright who's talkin bout Jersey?

The grade schools are very good where I live, the high school is okay (my kids are 4 & 7). Plainsboro has a very good school system but there are some really ivy league type private schools around Princeton / Hightstown (Peddie School or Lawrenceville).

There are some crazy expensive schools in the city (Dalton etc..)

Here's the raw data .. source is CNN current numbers. The SD count is off because they haven't allocated some of them to the states yet. The pledged count ties out correctly.
Election Results

It's a very close race, though, no question.

And I agree with you, Joe - Florida and Michigan absolutely should remain off the ballot. There's no realistic way to count them now, and you can't re-stage the election.

"Florida and Michigan absolutely should remain off the ballot."

Good! Piss those two states off!

Next you'll want them eliminated from the General Election.

No .. they CHOSE to not follow the rules, they live by the punishment that was spelled out BEFORE they made the choice to break the rules. Everyone agreed that is what would happen. There is no debate. Do you reward your children for breaking the rules?

When have the Clintons EVER followed any rules? They BOTH make them up as they go.

As far as Obama, even he is smart enough to know not to get involved in something that serves absolutely no gain.

Had the situation been reversed, we'd be seeing Obama crying and Hillary dismissing it.

Either way, the voters get screwed, as usual.

They are both equally losers, one of them just has a few extra votes in their back pocket. The Dembos are pretty much split 50/50 on this. Too much damage done to recover by November. And it'll get even worse by the so-called convention.

I can't wait for that docu-drama.

:-)

I can't either. McCant will be floundering... and the repubs will be is such disarray (they already are) it will be like watching the Keystone Cops

Buh Bye McCant.

Andrew, everything you say is based on your own private speculation, with nothing indicating things going this way. Where are the Republicans in disarray? Or short on money? There is absolutely no division over the candidate.

You seem to be fabricating these things in your own mind. Are you writing for the DailyKos? A resident blog-meister of sorts?

However, when it comes to the problems within the Dembo conspiracy, the divisive things are already (and have been) occurring, with more to follow.

To me it's not a matter of punishing children (because the voting public didn't have a choice when their primary was held), it's that you can't count votes from an election in which the candidates weren't all running, and you can't have another election because it would give those two states too much power in a close race.

Besides, I have an uneasy feeling about elections in Florida...

Zum, look at how much the 2 Demo candidates have raised to date compared to the Repubes... case closed. Buh bye McCant

McCant is too liberal for the religious right-wing nut cases that constitute a large (and organized) segment of the Repugnican voters. It's fun to watch the pirouettes he performs to attempt to please the nut cases.

But... what I really can't wait for is when it comes out that McCain totally backed the loss of potentially over 100,000 jobs in the defense indunstry due to the whole Boing/Airbus fiasco. Just wait... that'll be fun.


Private Speculation??... ooookkkkay

i wouldn't worry too much about mcchristian raising more money. he can waffle again on the christian right, or dip his beak into the oil subsidy/tax refund the republicans just bankrupted our country with.

"Zum, look at how much the 2 Demo candidates have raised to date compared to the Repubes... case closed. \:D \:D Buh bye McCant"

That was all raised to fight within. Donors will be tapped out (probably a Republican conspiracy).

Besides. As of today (as you pointed out with your charts and graphs, ala Ross Perot), McCain and the RNC have considerably MORE money.

"McCant is too liberal for the religious right-wing nut cases that constitute a large (and organized) segment of the Repugnican voters. It's fun to watch the pirouettes he performs to attempt to please the nut cases."

That argument has a bigger hole in it. McCain may be too liberal for the "religious right-wing nut cases", but the option is FAR and away too much for them. If you've been paying any attention 'Conservative' radio - which I doubt you have - you'd have a handle on this. The frightening prospect of ANY liberal judges will have the money and the far-right voters crawling out of the woodwork. You really need to think this through. Cute try, though.

"But... what I really can't wait for is when it comes out that McCain totally backed the loss of potentially over 100,000 jobs in the defense indunstry due to the whole Boing/Airbus fiasco. Just wait... that'll be fun. \:D \:D"

Why isn't it out now? Besides, I thought Dembos want to abolish the military and hand out flowers at world conflicts. And since when is the U.S. military using Airbuses?

"Private Speculation??... ooookkkkay"

Well you're right, not 'totally'. You have kNick.

The BIGGEST factor you aren't seeing is the dissipation of euphoria surrounding Obama. It used to be a religious-like fever pitch. Not anymore.

And the downside of euphoria is miserable. I think Clinton is most responsible for that. You go girl!

Oh, and the funding... It has dropped off considerably. April contributions were down. Obama spent more in April fighting Clinton, than he took in. Take note of May's contributions when they become available. Po' folk dembos need gas money (probably yet another Republican conspiracy), not Obama.

Do you realize the average donation to the Obama campaign is between $50-$75... with over 100 million contributions??? This is unprecedented in the history of any candidate in this country... probably the world.

Don't kid yourself. Then again... ignorance is bliss.

Since they decided to use Airbus for the next fleet of refueling aircraft instead of Boeing. Guess they figured outsourcing is better - screw the american workers again.

"Guess they figured outsourcing is better"

Ja think?

Read "Blackwater: the rise of the world's most powerful mercenary army" by Jeremy Scahill for a glimpse at the extent of their insane fetish for privatization. I guess not all privatization means outsourcing to foreign countries, but Blackwater figured out they can get a great deal on mercenaries from places with horrendous human rights records - ex-Pinochet people, for example.

What's especially unsettling about that is not just that these people were brutal to their own people, but in some cases their countries are opposed to the war.

"Since they decided to use Airbus..."

I thought you dembos were upset about spending too much for the military? Airbus had the lowest bid. So, what's the problem?

Which way is it? Oh, whichever one is convenient for your pointless argument.

* * *

AK,

It doesn't apparently matter how much one spends, or at least there is a threshold of no return.

Obama has indeed raised a whopping amount of money - which I acknowledged about 5 pages ago. But for the amount he has raised, why isn't he that much further along? He's even behind in the popular vote with Hillary (she spent $50 million less)?

He's CLEARLY not two and a half times ahead of McCain - except on spending.

He IS two and a half times ahead of Nader, though. So maybe you have a point there.

Which one is it? It's the one that reveals that McCant was partially responsible for sending over 100,000 good paying defense industry jobs out of the country. And continued jobs for parts and support over the next 30 years!!!!!! Nice one McCant.

If you don't think people in the industry don't see it that way, talk to someone from Boing... I did.. my brother-in-law.

Buh Bye McCant.


wrong.



Let's wait until November for that statistic... shall we.

Buh Bye McCant.

"If you don't think people in the industry don't see it that way, talk to someone from Boing..."

Of course. That's human nature. There are cry-babies everywhere, when they don't get 'their' way.

I thought you were a 'lover of Europeans', like kNick. You should be happy for Airbus and the extra 100,000 jobs for the French. Viva la France!

"Let's wait until November for that statistic... shall we."

November 4, to be precise. That's the day it'll all matter.

But the dembos will be crying 'foul' and want a million pointless recounts.

Dembos lose Florida, hanging chad havoc all over again.

Dembo-drama-rama. Talk about something fun to watch.

The Dems are smart enough to know when to release the Airbus bomb. It will be dealt with at a crucial time for McCant (if there will be a crucial time -- I think he's more of a lost cause at this point... sadly).

The real show ill be seeing how he tries to wriggle his way out of that one. heh....

Buh Bye McCant

"Airbus had the lowest bid. So, what's the problem?"

That's a departure from the usual no-bid contracts given to the likes of Haliburton and Blackwater.

There's no way to spin it, zumbido - the amount of our money being thrown around the military is staggering. So is the level of corruption. That's why I say this administration never cared about doing good for the country, but even McCain does (in his misguided way).

Guess again if you think the current economic crash has nothing to do with all the money that's been plundered in the name of this "war on terror."

"The Dems are smart enough to know when to release the Airbus bomb."

Do you think that they'll call it the 'Fat Boy"?

"the amount of our money being thrown around the military is staggering."

3% of the U.S. GDP is a 'staggering' amount?

Gee kNick, what is your customary tipping habit?

"Guess again if you think the current economic crash has nothing to do with all the money that's been plundered in the name of this "war on terror.""

The numbers do NOT indicate that.

So let's stop spending that insignificant money on rebuilding a country we bombed and helping our domestic causes instead. Since it's so insignificant, they won't miss it.

If you don't see a problem with sending 100K HIGH WAGE/SKILLED jobs out of the country, you're crazy. Why can't we teach those damn indians and russians to mix - they already have the computer jobs, they can certainly use ProTools over there and be able to offer remote studio time for $5/hr - cut your major label CD for only $399!

I don't know why we haven't fired all the goverment paper pushers yet. Big business has already declared that India does much better and cheaper handling customer service and accounting functions that US workers, so there's got to be a LOT of work we can have done cheaper. We can send SS, IRS, and bunches of others over there. We can certainly trust them with all of our accounting and money if we can trust them with all our trade secrets.

Last one out, remember to shut off the lights.

War is big business.

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

"So let's stop spending that insignificant money on rebuilding a country we bombed and helping our domestic causes instead. Since it's so insignificant, they won't miss it."

You'll need to take that up with the Dembo controlled Congress. maybe shoot off an e-mail to Pelosi.

"If you don't see a problem with sending 100K HIGH WAGE/SKILLED jobs out of the country,"

You'll need to take that up with the Dembo controlled Congress. maybe shoot off an e-mail to Pelosi.

"I don't know why we haven't fired all the goverment paper pushers yet. Big business has already declared that India does much better and cheaper handling customer service and accounting functions that US workers, so there's got to be a LOT of work we can have done cheaper. We can send SS, IRS, and bunches of others over there. We can certainly trust them with all of our accounting and money if we can trust them with all our trade secrets."

You'll need to take that up with the Dembo controlled Congress. maybe shoot off an e-mail to Pelosi.

Congress has not been "dembo-controlled" for all that much time. These situations have been developing for quite some time. Nice try though. Remember - vote for McCain, he won't raise taxes! The never-ending war on fear will pay for itself somehow. It's interesting to see the pie chart on spending that the gov puts out vs. the unweighted figures.

There's a difference between a narrow Democratic majority and a Democrat-controlled Congress, zumbido, but I agree that we need to take it up with them.

"3% of the U.S. GDP is a 'staggering' amount?"

It most certainly is, first of all, but do you really believe that's all the money being spent on "defense?" A recent tally of just the Iraq war estimated that the total cost to our economy is 3 TRILLION dollars. What a waste.

"It's interesting to see the pie chart on spending that the gov puts out vs. the unweighted figures."

Post it if it's so interesting. And please, NOT the "Ben & Jerry's ice cream pie" version.

* * *

"A recent tally of just the Iraq war estimated that the total cost to our economy is 3 TRILLION dollars."

Over what amount of time? 5 years?

If it's over 5 years, that's too high. It's probably closer to 2.2 billion - still about 3%.

kNick, I can see you have trouble with a number like this: $439, 000,000,000.00. It is big. But you are small-minded. So, too bad.

Why, was that pie chart too simplified for you? Pie charts are supposed to be "Ben and Jerry" simple. Or you don't agree with the figures? What is your source? Can you post a link to the "real" figures? A legitimate website source that even you trust?

In any case, war is big business. I say we start a few more. It's keeping things rolling economically. Bush is a self-proclaimed "war president". That's what we need after all, military personnel and their families need to eat, too. Killing people is hard work, especially when we have to go to where they are to do it. Go McCain and the whole military mindset!

Sad, very sad indeed.

"Why, was that pie chart (Ben & Jerry's ice cream pie chart) too simplified for you?"

Seriously, is that the one you are referring to? Really now, not even you...

Sad, very sad indeed.

Now, what figures do you want to know about?

What's sad is your obsession with the BS surrounding the race. Who raised how much, who said something about the other, etc. It's a consuming part of your life. Are you trying to convince us that we shouldn't vote Democratic? I thought you weren't trying to convince anyone of anything, as per my request for info on why I should vote for McCain.

That chart may be slightly distorted, and since it is the official 2007 gov't chart, I believe it about as much as I believe the official report on 9/11. More BS like the "weapons of mass destruction" BS. But it feels good, kinda like all those shows on TV like "War Stories", heroic. That's sad.

I asked you for actual reasons to back McCain, and you have no good answers, yet you consistently bring up the National Enquirer style BS that is irrelevant to the job. Besides taxes, what are you looking for in the next President of the United States? With your incessant posts on the BS surrounding the candidates, no answer would indeed be sad, very sad. State your case.

Let's see... you have health insurance, so everyone who doesn't should just run out and pay the premiums, you are retired and meet (or met) your mortgage payments, so anyone who is in foreclosure is stupid, and it's their own fault. Your boy is too young to be in actual combat, so the war makes no difference to you if it runs for years, and it's not really costing Americans very much, anyway. Your kids go to private school, so anyone that goes to a public school is a low-life slob. You've invested in oil, so high oil prices and record profits are great. Am I wrong on any of this? It all seems so "me-first", and many, many people do not share your view.

I guess if the guy running convinces you that you won't pay more in taxes, that's all you need to know. If everyone could only be more like you, the world would just be perfect! I'm somewhat comforted by the fact that your wife's vote will cancel yours out.

sscannon, you sound very pissed off at most everything.

"your wife's vote will cancel yours out."

Yes, let it be known, I was absolutely shocked and haven't fully recovered, but Mrs. Z, announced a few days ago that there is no way she could vote for Obama and can't see how anyone else could. That's not to say she wouldn't vote for Hillary. Hillary IS leading in the popular vote, dontcha know?

And, how do YOU know I'll be voting for the opposite candidate of my wife's choice? I believe there are several candidates in the race.

What about Chuck Baldwin?

I was kidding with that, but it is entertaining to me to think about. Plus you called my post sad, which I found irritating and condescending.

Zum's not voting for McCain? Your location on this forum was listed as "In the booth voting for McCain". I guess you were just kidding about that.

I'm not pissed at all, I just get tired of the "he said - she said" posts, when the real issues are more important to me. And I'm having fun with you. You say you aren't trying to convince anyone of anything, then you post another "look how stupid the dembos are" kinda post. I just want to know what is so alluring about McCain, and you have no concrete answers. Tell me- what is positive about McCain? Not what is negative about the others.

And I don't blindly believe every chart, reason, or document the gov't machine spits out. It's cool.

Chuck Baldwin?

Hanging chadfest.........he he.....
OK, back to mixing!