WWTBAM Bored

Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high.

It is not Barack Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02583.html

I read Will's article yesterday. Very informative and well-written. He wrote another good piece today, essentially suggesting that before Congress roll over once again for the administration on this $700B bailout thing, they should spend at least as much time reading the U.S. Constitution as they did that three-page outline from Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke.

I'd say out of all of the conservative columnists out there, Will is my favorite, as he tends to get it right the most often.

And he's a fine baseball writer, too.

Stoopid Bored double-posted. When I clicked on the X to delete this post, then clicked on Yes, a second duplicate came up.

Stoopid Bored did it again. Now there are three duplicates!

<grumble>®

Well, that's the way to post artificially and gratuitously! Quadruplets!

George Will is in love with the sound of his own voice too often for my liking, but he gets it about baseball over football, so he's okay on that front...

minimetoo26 wrote:Well, that's the way to post artificially and gratuitously! Quadruplets!

George Will is in love with the sound of his own voice too often for my liking, but he gets it about baseball over football, so he's okay on that front...

My favorite George Will quote: "Football combines the two worst parts of American life: violence interrupted by committee meetings."

nitrah55 wrote:

minimetoo26 wrote:Well, that's the way to post artificially and gratuitously! Quadruplets!

George Will is in love with the sound of his own voice too often for my liking, but he gets it about baseball over football, so he's okay on that front...

My favorite George Will quote: "Football combines the two worst parts of American life: violence interrupted by committee meetings."

Mine too!!!! He gets it!!!!!

This is why I didn't support McCain in the primaries (I was for Thompson), and it's also why I wasn't big on McCain in the general election until he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Personally, I'd rather see Palin at the top of the ticket than McCain, but anybody in the field is better than Obama-Biden. I would vote for Richard Nixon before I would vote for Obama (and yes, that does take into account the fact that Nixon has been dead for 14 years just so everyone knows the extent of my dislike of the prospect of an Obama presidency).

Before Palin got on the Republican ticket, I had even considered voting for Alan Keyes, who is running as the candidate of the American Independent Party (www.alankeyes.com and http://www.selfgovernment.us/). So my feelings are representative of how much Palin has energized us conservatives out here. Of course, McCain is going to win Texas handily. Maybe I should move back to Colorado so I can help try to defeat Obama there...

So it really is the lesser of two evils (in this case, the much lesser of two evils) in voting for McCain.

McCain has never been known to hold his tongue. Problem is, nobody really knows how to "fix" this problem so one person's suggestion is as good as the next. I heard they brought in several hundred of the country's top economists to Washington to discuss the problem. In a nutshell, how I understand it, if they go ahead and write the check, it puts our country's debt in a deeper hole than it's already in. And it asks the average taxpayer to shoulder a burden (about $2500 per person) that should never have had to be borne. If they don't write the check, they risk the stoppage of the national credit machine. I don't know how they will resolve this but I don't think it will be the last bailout request.

danielh41 wrote:This is why I didn't support McCain in the primaries (I was for Thompson), and it's also why I wasn't big on McCain in the general election until he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Personally, I'd rather see Palin at the top of the ticket than McCain, but anybody in the field is better than Obama-Biden. I would vote for Richard Nixon before I would vote for Obama (and yes, that does take into account the fact that Nixon has been dead for 14 years just so everyone knows the extent of my dislike of the prospect of an Obama presidency).

Before Palin got on the Republican ticket, I had even considered voting for Alan Keyes, who is running as the candidate of the American Independent Party (www.alankeyes.com and http://www.selfgovernment.us/). So my feelings are representative of how much Palin has energized us conservatives out here. Of course, McCain is going to win Texas handily. Maybe I should move back to Colorado so I can help try to defeat Obama there...

So it really is the lesser of two evils (in this case, the much lesser of two evils) in voting for McCain.

You seemed to be in lockstep with him on that ABC test. He can't be all that bad in your eyes.

And have you heard the kicker on this? It gives Paulsen (or whoever replaces him in January) absolute power over who get the bailout money, and these decisions are not reviewable by any executive agency, nor can they be challenged in court.

If this passes, don't you think VP Cheney will be green with envy?

minimetoo26 wrote:

danielh41 wrote:This is why I didn't support McCain in the primaries (I was for Thompson), and it's also why I wasn't big on McCain in the general election until he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Personally, I'd rather see Palin at the top of the ticket than McCain, but anybody in the field is better than Obama-Biden. I would vote for Richard Nixon before I would vote for Obama (and yes, that does take into account the fact that Nixon has been dead for 14 years just so everyone knows the extent of my dislike of the prospect of an Obama presidency).

Before Palin got on the Republican ticket, I had even considered voting for Alan Keyes, who is running as the candidate of the American Independent Party (www.alankeyes.com and http://www.selfgovernment.us/). So my feelings are representative of how much Palin has energized us conservatives out here. Of course, McCain is going to win Texas handily. Maybe I should move back to Colorado so I can help try to defeat Obama there...

So it really is the lesser of two evils (in this case, the much lesser of two evils) in voting for McCain.

You seemed to be in lockstep with him on that ABC test. He can't be all that bad in your eyes.

That ABC test merely presented two quotes. I selected the one that I agreed with the most. So yes, I am far more in step with him over Obama. But he does seem to have an impulsive streak. Perhaps his military training taught him to take quick decisive action.

danielh41 wrote:This is why I didn't support McCain in the primaries (I was for Thompson), and it's also why I wasn't big on McCain in the general election until he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Personally, I'd rather see Palin at the top of the ticket than McCain, but anybody in the field is better than Obama-Biden. I would vote for Richard Nixon before I would vote for Obama (and yes, that does take into account the fact that Nixon has been dead for 14 years just so everyone knows the extent of my dislike of the prospect of an Obama presidency).

Before Palin got on the Republican ticket, I had even considered voting for Alan Keyes, who is running as the candidate of the American Independent Party (www.alankeyes.com and http://www.selfgovernment.us/). So my feelings are representative of how much Palin has energized us conservatives out here. Of course, McCain is going to win Texas handily. Maybe I should move back to Colorado so I can help try to defeat Obama there...

So it really is the lesser of two evils (in this case, the much lesser of two evils) in voting for McCain.

McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

Bob Juch wrote:

danielh41 wrote:This is why I didn't support McCain in the primaries (I was for Thompson), and it's also why I wasn't big on McCain in the general election until he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. Personally, I'd rather see Palin at the top of the ticket than McCain, but anybody in the field is better than Obama-Biden. I would vote for Richard Nixon before I would vote for Obama (and yes, that does take into account the fact that Nixon has been dead for 14 years just so everyone knows the extent of my dislike of the prospect of an Obama presidency).

Before Palin got on the Republican ticket, I had even considered voting for Alan Keyes, who is running as the candidate of the American Independent Party (www.alankeyes.com and http://www.selfgovernment.us/). So my feelings are representative of how much Palin has energized us conservatives out here. Of course, McCain is going to win Texas handily. Maybe I should move back to Colorado so I can help try to defeat Obama there...

So it really is the lesser of two evils (in this case, the much lesser of two evils) in voting for McCain.

McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

Haha. That's funny.

Rexer25 wrote:And have you heard the kicker on this? It gives Paulsen (or whoever replaces him in January) absolute power over who get the bailout money, and these decisions are not reviewable by any executive agency, nor can they be challenged in court.

If this passes, don't you think VP Cheney will be green with envy?

Actually, the first person I thought of being green with envy was Joseph Stalin.

Bob Juch wrote: McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

This is too funny, Bob. Look at your source. I would no more believe anything MSNBC / NBC wrote about McCain than I would MoveOn.

Sir_Galahad wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

This is too funny, Bob. Look at your source. I would no more believe anything MSNBC / NBC wrote about McCain than I would MoveOn.

It may be posted on MSNBC, but it's got an AP byline. I've heard some local news/scuttlebutt about it, too. Just based on what I've heard and past reporting on other independent/third party candidates, this suit has not chance of getting anywhere, because the judges who will hear it are all Dem/Rep, and they will not let it get started.

Sir_Galahad wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

This is too funny, Bob. Look at your source. I would no more believe anything MSNBC / NBC wrote about McCain than I would MoveOn.

This is just reporting - the article says that Bob Barr is suing the state of Texas to have both McCain and Obama removed from the ballot because neither of them was the party nominee by the time the Texas ballot had to be certified, so they missed the deadline. Thus they should not be permitted to appear on the ballot.

Hey Sir G

Guess who originally pointed me toward this Will article.



Samcat, over on Facebook.

She must be with the Obama campaign with all the stuff she pushes out.

eyégor wrote:Hey Sir G

Guess who originally pointed me toward this Will article.



Samcat, over on Facebook.

She must be with the Obama campaign with all the stuff she pushes out.

No kidding!!?? Does she use her samcat name or her email address?

Sir_Galahad wrote:

eyégor wrote:Hey Sir G

Guess who originally pointed me toward this Will article.



Samcat, over on Facebook.

She must be with the Obama campaign with all the stuff she pushes out.

No kidding!!?? Does she use her samcat name or her email address?

No, I don't think so. I don't get to Facebook to often. There are always too few computers in my house, and it is blocked at work.

Bob Juch wrote:McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

Isn't happening. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

Isn't happening. --Bob

ITYS. Here's the key line of the article:

"The court did not explain the reason for its decision Tuesday."

In other words, "We make the rules, we don't have to follow them".

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:McCain's not going to win Texas if they decide he didn't qualify to be on the ballot (and Obama too).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753569/

Isn't happening. --Bob

Well, I have trouble with the courts reasoning-

official ruling here