YellowLinesandArmadillos

What are you talking about, or having been listening to OXY Rush and didn't hear the whole speech? Obviously not talking to anyone with an ounce of sense. What rock did you crawl out from under. Go back. All you Republican liars go home and learn the real meaning of honor. McCain learned in combat but he and his ilk have forgotten it in politics. I have no respect for McCain anymore. Also, please get rid of your rabid bulemic blond haired spokeswomen, get them help asap.

Whatever, you go on thinking that. If they lose the election it won't be because of anything that happened today. That pig and lipstick remark more aptly describes your last couple of posts. And if the Dems lose, it will mean more Rovian nasty politics in the BushMcSame mode. All we saw today was the same old tired non-issue Republicans we have seen since the end of the Reagan Admin. Rove is an Atwater desciple and while I admire his success, I think he and his ilk could use some exercise out in some pasture. And if they win, then I agree with all the cynics, Americans care more about putting the other guy down then what is their wallets. Get ready for the McSame/Palin admin of oil barron corporate greed.

That would be indeed be an issue, staffers and lobbyists would gain more power as a result. Some of it will go to un-elected bureaucrats who are not responsible even to a political party. All would have the institutional knowledge of legislation and how to change it and therefore be able to unduly influence the result. Just my opinion, but you would better off finding a way to diversify the power base further and make it more difficult to get things done. But term limits won't work, the power will go somewhere. The only other thing I would not mind seeing is a third successful political party emerge. That would force more give and take and less centralized control of power in DC.

I know that she has said that, but in fact I think she has by certain cuts in public education and special ed that she supported. I am not sure all the details but remember reading that there is more than meets the eye with her rhetoric. I would check her record further.

Agreed, but they want to advocate investigating evolution more.... I don't see the problem unless there is a but after that statement. Once again, I think there is a wide lane where one can interpret the timing in the bible and still believe in evolution and scientific theory and the two should not necessarily be in conflict. But that is just me.

It is: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gV5jvU5...6zwOqAD92V3VQG0

I would agree except there is not enough time in the day to pass each item individually, nor properly consider how it relates to everything else. I am not saying they do that now particularly well, but the staff does. So line-item maybe the only way to short circuit all the deals cut in order to pass a funding or tax bill.

Someone has to let kids know how to avoid a log cabin republican predator: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6092901574.html.

Or the blind man at the fish market saying good morning ladies....

What I understand about the soundbite stuff is it is best used to drive up your opponents negatives, hopefully driving undecideds away from you opponent, then, to the extent you can id them, you hit those areas with positive direct mailings about things you know they will support.

"They have this idea," he says, "that it's a zero-sum game, so anything you can do to knock evolution down actually promotes creationism without having to say the word." The problem is that they will by default actually strengthen evolutionary theory by causing more investigating and more information found that can be used to support discrepancies. Really, now what is scientific theory all about but doubting something and investigating it more! Duh! Fine, I think we can agree on this with conservatives as long as students are required to not just doubt, but further investigate using science!

And there begs another tired saying.... 7 days without meat makes one weak!

Gramm Rudman attempted to institute pay-go procedures for budgeting and though Congress and the White House found ways around it, it was largely successful in helping the Clinton Administration balance the budget in the 90s. Here is a general link to the act. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Rudman The line item veto was struck down in 1996 by the Supreme Court and would require an amendment to the Constitution, but it was used very successfully prior to that point. It would help both sides eliminate pork barrel spending.

True, but the wonderful thing about the American public is their consistent ability to ignore their politicians. Little harder after 911, but for the most part they do, unlike the obsessed schmucks on this board, self included.

; Then you will enjoy this. Someone posted a link to OBama's fundraising from this site... figured McCain's should be illuminated too: http://www.whitehouseforsale.org/candidate...ndidateID=C0005 That being said it is coming from Common Cause's.... Ralph "Trust Fund Baby, I have never worked a day in my life" Nader's where he treats his young idealist employees like crap, doesn't play be labor laws etc., all the usual hypocritical crap of a holier than thou self-absorbed sanctimonious self-proclaimed do gooder. And to be fair and balanced, here is Obama's again for comparison: http://www.whitehouseforsale.org/candidate...ndidateID=C0009 Now are you LOL??? P.S. That being said their numbers are usually pretty good.

I agree, he could have come up with a better line... pretty lame and it mostly misses the mark, especially when McCain left himself open to response. Could have said. So McCain knows honor in a fox hole, but he can't seem to get it right in Washington..... Then be ready with all the folks McCain has insulted over the years or just plain dressed down. There are quite a few.

You mean fake backdrops and scary faux scenes while referencing 911.

Now there you go again... repeating an oft used RNC talking point about the teleprompter. Been hearing that for at least 4 months. And in this case it doesn't apply. And here is what OBama campaign's response should be to both attacks. So what is the deal, doesn't McCain/Palin support protecting children against sexual predators. Doesn't sound like it and that is disgusting. So much for McCain/Palin being different kinds of politicians, sounds like the same old Republican Attack machine... a pig with lipstick. Then some clips of Bush stating something about bringing compassionate conservative stuff to Washington...same thing in 2000.

This is the most ridiculous crap ever. OBama if you watch the whole clip was talking about the whole change idea the McCain campaign is trying to coopt from OBama. Lipstick on a pig is an oft use expression for stating you are copying me but you don't really mean it, I am the original. Whatever, but that being said the McCain camp is practicing good politics and twisting something their opponent said to their advantage. The goes the faucet.... the kitchen sink is next... wonder if is the sex ed ad they are running.. It could backfire. The legislation Obama introduced was to help protect kids, give them safe tips to avoid sexual predators after a particularly gruesome incident. All Obama has to say is that McCain is against protecting our children from sexual predators and giving them some tools to spot them and avoid them. Hardly what the RW knuckle draggers call sex ed. Wonder how McCain camp will respond once they are called on it.

Yeh, it wasn't until after the fact that he really panned Obama. Didn't get a chance to see the second part of the interview nor O'Really's flailing closing interpretation.

I doubt all questions would be allowed and even if they were, they would be wildly inappropriate for a Disney owned co. Plus Fox News' GOP supporter Brit Hume is his buddy and two old DC boys probably have some trust about not sand bagging her. That being said, it should be interesting and the GOP is masterful at manipulating the press is she is competent at all. I will bet she comes out looking good especially if he doesn't ask follow up questions.

It is getting a little stale, but they should keep repeating it. Most of us have heard it, but most of the lemmings who vote haven't or not enough, hence why it is still being used. They should try a fresh angle, though I agree. Maybe make it McCain is just another member of failed conservative policies.??? Not sure, but I hear you. I will check out the other stuff.

Minus the first sentence of you post AD, I completely agree with everything you wrote.... ME TOO!

She was a huge trap and you are right, the press ate it up. Not sure anymore how much it is happening. She isn't giving interviews on the national level for now. Grass Roots work cannot be ignored and I am sure she is great for the GOP on the campaign trail, but because of these current dynamics, this trap goes away for a while. Also, schmucks like us may debate this crap, but it sounds like Obama is dealing with it well, for the most part ignoring her yet acknowledging her energy. The trap for the GOP is if she is put forward by the GOP in a puff piece as a "first lady" then she can be framed as an empty suit and not just pandering to women, but in a way, talking down to them. The focus for the Dems should still be on McCain and tying him to Bush.

I don't believe that any more than I believe deficits don't matter and giving un-needed tax breaks to oil companies will trickle down.