In-A-Gadda-Levitre

ya, forgot about that. You're right, it's all kool aid and M&Ms

did you even watch Obama's speech? I remember clearly Ronald Reagan speaking on many occasions. I didn't agree with him on too much, but he made me smile (a lot) and he had a great vision for America. RR induced confidence, emotion, and patriotism because he was a gifted orator. So even though you didn't like him, you admired his skills and were inspired by his speeches. The other thing that makes him a little like Reagan is the way he walks in into the room and takes control. He has your attention and doesn't have to work for it. Reagan owned the room in exactly the same way. Does he say similar things or is he the same on issues? Of course not. They're just both great communicators. While there's some clear differences, the comparison to MLK is pretty obvious in his cadence and emotion style.

What about Swiftboat? they aired that in what, July 2004 and kept hammering Kerry months after, dooming his election. Plus, it remains to be seen if the 527s or the conservative media lets go of Wright, Ayers, and all that. I just don't see them waiting if they have such a thing.

GOP Fears Obama's Money Machine it's probably going to be worse as he taps into some of Clinton's fundraisers

Why on earth would they wait until October? Why not pound the Obama with this now and every day until November?

ya, way before

ok, my bad. I originally put in a lot of words Bush threatening to veto it because of the price supports and that he refused ANY tax increases. Since the Greenspan book came out slamming him for signing every spending bill that he was presented with, he has found his veto voice and so on. I struck all that out because it wasn't relevant and without paying attention, I said the WH supported the subsidies for the agribusinesses, when I meant to say they only supported the bill if there were no tax increases. Sloppiness on my part and I was wrong in that statement. My point is that this bill had strong bipartisan support in the congress, so to use against him as an example that he's some kind of hypocrite is just wrong. And that he was campaigning almost the entire time it was being debated on the floor and re crafted to pass. If he's elected, and turns out to be the same as others before him, then he deserves all the abuse. different than he wanted it to be nice twist... He got the nutrition program for kids, support for family farms hurt by natural disasters, investment in new alternative fuels like cellulosic ethanol, protections for afro-americans that had been discriminated by the USDA, and a host of other changes he was fighting for. So he's happy the bill passed with bipartisan support! He's unhappy that the cap is still too high, there's earmarks for things like freaking racehorses, not enough changes in the direct payment system, and subsidies that still make no sense. And as president, he'll work hard to improve it. Is that really so hard to understand?

There's a lot of speculation about Bush (and mostly Cheney's) support for the Central Asia Gas pipeline (CentGas) between Turkmenistan and Pakistan (via western Afghanistan). Not Bush himself, but supposedly Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca was negotiating with the Taliban to get CentGas completed prior to 9/11. Cheney's energy policy task force's (almost totally composed of big oil) recommendation was that CentGas and central asian oil was critical and all of a sudden the State Dept are negotiating with the Taliban for the first time since 1994. So that was the connection between the WH and the Taliban. The problem was Bin Laden was being hosted there, and the FBI (supposedly) was prevented from getting at him because the pipeline was more important. Cheney's Halliburton Corp. was angling for the pipeline construction contract and Unocal was the main US oil co involved. Also Enron conducted the feasibility study for the CentGas deal. People have also accused the US of supporting Karzai as PM for Afghanistan because he was the main adviser to Unocal on the project. So there's all kinds of theories about shoulda/coulda/woulda had Bin Laden, sleeping with the enemy, Enron, fat contracts, all that.

yes, I like Gov. Sibelius a lot. She's not a real dynamic speaker, but she'd make a good compliment to Obama's style and platform.

What he was calling the special interests in 2007 were subsidies for (and in some cases, monopolies of) huge agribusinesses, which were supported by the WH. Unfortunately what happened between November 21, 2007 and now was that major concessions had to occur in order to get a veto-proof majority. You can point fingers at the 81-to-15 Senate vote and the 318-to-106 House vote, it ain't just Obama. 6 months later, the final bill looks very different, and although he got a lot of what he was fighting for like alternative energy and nutrition programs for kids, he is clear about his disappointment. "This bill is far from perfect. I believe in tighter payment limits and a ban on packer ownership of livestock. As president, I will continue to fight for the interests of America's family farmers and ranchers and ensure that assistance is geared towards those producers who truly need them, instead of large agribusinesses. But with so much at stake, we cannot make the perfect the enemy of the good." I'm probably way too naive, but a president who wanted changes in special interests, assuming he had support in the congress, could force law makers to stop bundling special interests inside other bills, and create more visibility to the pork. As an example, he could say "I don't like this farm bill because of xyz, but send me back a separate bill on the children's nutrition programs and I'll sign it."

totally agree, but I doubt if she'd get confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice. Did you ever hear about her getting fired from the Watergate committee for lying and unethical behavior?

How long will this go on? Midnight on Election Day?

She owes him the respect of congratulating him on the nomination. He goes out of his way to show her respect when she doesn't deserve it. All she had to do last night was say "we fought hard, and thanks for all your support, I congratulate Mr. Obama on his victory, and now let's make sure we put a democrat in the White House..." Instead, she had to play her defiant little games. She has no chance whatsoever of being on the ticket after that. It's over, deal with it.

ya, you're right, whatever chance she might have had, she blew it. McAuliffe introduced her as "the next president of the United States". I swear they're living on some parallel universe. You should watch Obama's speech if you get a chance, he really did a great job. Barely mentioned himself and what he accomplished in the primaries. He makes me think of Ronald Regan and MLK put together. McCain had some strong messages, but his delivery was laughable. The Fox News commentators were arguing over why it was so bad, lol.

well, he's crazy, but not stupid

John Deere mowers are some of the best, most reliable in the world, and most expensive, bar none. It will probably run a long time time as long as you keep oil in it. Having said that, and I don't know what the value of the model you bought, $1100 sounds like a really good deal for a John Deere. Since oil is the life blood of your engine, it seems like a wise investment to get at least an estimate for repair of the leak. With reasonable care and maintenance, it will last another 10 years or more, so probably worth putting some money in it to prevent an engine failure.

Noticed that nobody recommended Hydroseeding. Is it that expensive, or doesn't work well in WNY, or something else? I'm guessing it costs more than sod, but not sure. I live in New England and seems like a lot of the new homes and pro landscapers use it. Just asking...

your link is no good, but this one works I sure hope it falls on its face!

1st off, everyone is entitled to their opinion, however outrageous it may seem, and clearly one of the best parts of TBD result from the lively debates from these unique and subjective opinions. You seem to be a pretty smart person, who has the ability to really think things through and develop strong convictions. It's all good... But, you have this delivery that comes across like sulfuric acid and 40 grit sandpaper mixed together. Why is it necessary to attack the opposite point of view like a pit bull? Chill out a bit and you'll get alot more mindshare and interaction with people who might be willing to consider your point of view if you didn't come at them with an Uzi in each hand. Just a thought... I'd offer a slightly different answer on "chances of winning"... Pretty much anyone who is a proud, card carrying member of their party (regardless of affiliation) believes/wishes/wants/roots for their party to win; every election, every year. Some more than others. Like you say with the Bills, you think they can and will win. And I'll be the first to admit that the dems haven't fielded a strong enough candidate in recent years, besides Bill Clinton, and arguably Gore. So while they could have won several recent presidential elections, all things considered, they didn't put a strong enough team on the field and/or didn't play to win. This one is different. They have a sitting president with a record low public opinion, an unpopular war (forgive me, but let's compare it with, let's say Afghanistan...), economy that's in the tank, less than great opinion of the GOP, blah blah blah. And while there are clearly people who disagree, if the dems put together a pretty good platform and a really good candidate, the chances of them winning are much better than, let's say 2000 or 2004. And with the exception of the conservative media, most of MSM and the blogosphere thinks the same thing: not that they will absolutely win, but they have a great chance if they execute and field a serious team. Lastly, while it has gone up and down in the past year, most democrats and the MSM still believe it is their election to lose. I'm not sure if I agree with this. I believe it's more true now than a year ago, not sure if the polls will show that though. In 2007, there was a better economy, lower gas prices, less anger towards the war, better GOP image, and Bush was stronger then. So shoot me, but the GOP has greased the skids a year later. Again, this is subjective, but I don't think most democrats think they blew a huge lead. They have record new voter registrations. They've brought huge numbers of people out to vote and they had not one, but two strong candidates. Could the eventual nominee used this time to focus on McCain? Sure, but in this case the likely democratic candidate has an extremely well-oiled campaign machine that can raise cash by the truckload, so not much is lost. It's also pretty clear that while there's some amount of hindsight 20/20 about things like MI and WI, wishing it hadn't taken so long, etc., most people think it's been a fantastic primary for the democrats. No one is complacent, but there's tons of confidence right here and right now. If there was any fault, of course they blame the Bush administration and the congressional republicans. But therein lies their opportunity to take control of the WH, and possibly both houses of congress for a term or two. There's very little blame because they see a great momentum for the party in the short term. To use your words, reasonable people in general, Dems, Reps, Inds, as well as pundits, analysts, talking heads, and pols, don't pay a lot of attention to GE polls in May 2008. Maybe in other elections, but not this year. The 2008 GE campaign is embryonic. The real polling starts in about 2 months, when the two nominees have a chance to flex their muscles.

bingo! I think the reason the superdelegates didn't commit to Obama early was to get everyone to vote. If the average democrat knew Obama was in the bag, they'd think why bother. Now the SDs wait till the primaries are over, and make it official...

and most of the pollsters and media have predicted that Obama will jump 10 points once Hillary bows out. Don't waste time arguing with this peabrain

me thinks they mean on US soil

not counting caucuses, so still fuzzy math

but I'm winning in total yards and more fans like me than the Giants!

wow, great word Tom