Maybe he needs to read his own newspaper...

What a moron.

I thought the Huck was referring to 1988, TBH

The Huckster probably got a memo from the RNC...

Being the dumbass that he is, he probably didn't suspect he was being handed another lie.

Or care....

Can you name a reichy who does? I just got this from another site that found it on a Maulkin town crier board:

If I wanted a black president,
I’d move to Africa. If I wanted a marxist/communist president, who’d tax me to death, I’d move to Cuba. If I wanted a Muslim for president, I’d move to Iran. If I wanted all of the above, I’d stay here and vote Obama/Biden.

Thankfully. I now have a choice: McCain/Palin.

Add to that Westmoreland (R-Ga) calling the Obamas "uppity" and we're right on the threshold I described yesterday - right wing racists just dying to scream "N!&&#R!" over  and over again...

Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland used the racially-tinged term “uppity” to describe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Thursday.
 
Westmoreland was discussing vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s speech with reporters outside the House chamber and was asked to compare her with Michelle Obama.
 
“Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they’re a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they’re uppity,” Westmoreland said.

Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”

Wow. In some parts of Georgia, they still think that's just hunky dory to say. Wonder if they ever heard of the 1960's civil rights era? Oh, & "all men are created equal" etc.

Yup, "uppity" ranks right up there with Carter's "boy" remark.

Oscar, I'm not familiar with Carter's "boy" comment can you elaborate?

"Oscar, I'm not familiar with Carter's "boy" comment can you elaborate?"

He made a reference to the child Obama as a "black boy" and the R's took it and ran with it.  Yes, it's insulting to call a black MAN "boy" - but a black male child IS a black boy, and Carter was talking about the young Obama. 

I am ashamed of these damn crackers.

 Yes, I'm white.

 F you Zell.

Walstib,

Zell Miller is a disgrace to the United States of America.  Pure and simple.  He's a liar, he's a scumbag.......he's a conservative.

He disgraced himself because he lied.  He's a conservative!! 

 

After last night's speech it should be clear to anyone who thinks that the Republican strategy in this election is to lie while smiling, lie while laughing and lie while mocking, all the while providing nothing of any substance.  They are not promoting good government, they are selling shallow personalities.

It's easy to get someone to laugh along with you when you tell a lie wrapped in an insulting joke, it's much ahrder to get them to pay attention and care when you talk seriously.

And the saddest and most pathetic part of this all is that it is a winning strategy.

Right. Just look at all those douchebags yelling "Drill, baby, drill!" Even though it is now well known that drilling here won't make much difference at all in the price of gasoline, nor will it end our dependence on foreign oil.

It's nothing more than a mindless hollaback talking point.

Or the buttons they wore that said something like "Hot hockey mom from cold state".

Now what was it that Mitt Romney wanted to remove from America? Something like pornography and promiscuity if I recall... ;)

Nerzog,

What's the alternative?  Do nothing and be held hostage to foreign countries for our supply of oil?

Lets start the process of drilling now so we'll have that option when it finally comes in and keep some of money for oil in our country.  What is wrong with that?

 

And I don't think our "alternatives" are quite ready yet, either.

There are already more than 68 million acres available for drilling.  The oil companies have capped productive wells saying that they don't have the equipment to proceed.  The oil drilled on US soil goes to world markets, not the US, you ignore this.  They oil companies are making money hand over fist right now and do not want to change the situation.  If you want us to cease to relying on foreign oil, we should put more money into alternative fuel research.  You know all this, it's been shown to you before in many, many other threads, by many, many posters.  Once again, you disregard reality and substitute talking points. 

History,

Do you have any link that proves domestic oil is shipped overseas?

 Snopes.com said that it is a myth.

Check out this link:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/alaskaoil.asp

"Sold into a world market" does not equate with "shipped overseas" with respect to oil pricing.  Gee, kind of like Fred Thompson's "bucket".

 

Who proposed doing nothing?

Obama asked for a 10 year intensive effort to get us off the Foreign Oil Udder. Can it be done? If we have the political will, it can. Brazil did it. What worked for them may not work for us, but I think we're smart enough to figure it out, if we can get the Oil Companies' tentacles out of our pockets.

Nerzog,

How did Brazil do it? Are they drilling for oil domestically or are they not using oil? Thanks.

It's from bio-fuel.  That was easy to find AA.  I used the Google.

Foghorn, It takes a village to raise a village idiot. AA is a Republican, he doesn't like being self-sufficient.

Brazil achieved energy independence through a combination of increased oil drilling and increased use of ethanol and alternative fuels:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/19/AR2006081900842.html

"Drill Here - Drill Now" is a simplistic solution to our energy problems.  It will require hard work by people who are not beholden to Big Oil - which means Democrats will provide the solutions to our problems.

""Drill Here - Drill Now" is a simplistic solution to our energy problems"

It's an answer, not a solution.  And it's a poor answer with no hope of accomplishing the stated goal.  The USA does not have enough undrilled oil reserves to go off foreign oil  We use too much.

Why is that when the GOP posters here refuese to reply, or drop the argument altogether, whenever they are refuted with facts/reputable links?

 

I belive that they expose themseleves to be the "talkiing point" pussies that they actually are.

 

That being the case, why do they continue to recieve reponses to their fart based reponses?  Ignore them please.

walstib, that's the general MO of the wingnuts. Post a bunch of opinion nonsense, and ask everybody to refute it. When it's refuted, they just post a fresh pile of it.

I don't generally respond to them, except for brief posts to point out their idiocy.The lengthy rebuttals just flatter them into thinking they're having a discussion. The good news is, if you embarrass them enough, they get too scared to respond to you, and they just ignore you.

I'll say it again, and again, because either AA doesn't (or won't, or does and chooses to act ignorant) understand. We don't have enough oil reserves in the US to affect the price, or the supply one way or another. We could drill everywhere there's oil in the US, and it won't make a difference.

Peebs,

Various estimates of oil in the U.S. rank it up there with Saudi Arabia. I find it hard to believe that any increase in domestic oil production will not benefit the U.S. It is a simply matter of supply and demand. Why does it not work in this case? 

Adding .001% to the world supply of oil probably won't affect prices very much. (And I have a finance degree!)

Wow, somebody is really drinking the koolaid today! We have as much oil as Saudi Arabia? I sure hope you are including oil shale estimates in that figure, because if you are implying that sweet flowing crude is there for the taking you are sadly mistaken.

Your source for that would be?

I think he got it from pulledoutofhisass.com

It was never about drilling now, it was always about tying up the rights to drill in the future when the price per barrel is even higher.  Corporations do not serve any country, they only serve profit.  Even Pickett is just using the recent energy crises to generate his own profits under the disguise of being a patriotic American who just wants what is best for the country.

The associated press did a great job with this report that dispells all the claims made last night by Palin and 9ui11ani. One example they reported:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

Of course, I think the rude pundit, though often rude, gets right to the point:

And to answer another of Palin's statements, um, a community organizer in the projects of Chicago is probably a little more active than a small town mayor in a distant suburb of Alaska. All Mayor Palin had to deal with was tax abatements for the new Target and the occasional walrus attack.

Snoop:

It's been a day, and I notice no Repulican mouthpieces have been able to reply.  Surpise, surprise...

What is clear from the speech last night is that Palin is qualified to be the next VP, and that she will do just fine in a debate with Biden. You want to talk about specifics, then look no further than the complete lack of substance in Obama’s speech last week. He has grand ideas, with no concept of how to pay for them. His war plan is a disaster waiting to happen, and he has no proven ability to lead anything, let alone the most powerful nation on earth.

His war plan is a disaster waiting to happen?

What would you call the Bush/Cheney/McCain plan then?

Obama's plan calls for bringing troops home. Without a draft the McCain plan has to include making vets go back again.

So you're all in favor of having those who've already served, go back and serve some more, correct?

You talk about a lack of substance in Obama's speech yet Palin's, like McSame's tonight, has yet to articulate any kind of plan for America. All we heard was she knows how to lead because she was a member of the PTA, she has international credentials because she lives in a state that's close to russia and she doesn't want you or the press saying anything about her family because they are off limits (except when she wants the press filming her kids and her preggie daughter for political purposes). Really, what morally lacking mother invites a teenage kid who just graduated from high school, has no job, has no future prospects to meet the republican candidate and get countrywide tv introduction when his only qualifications are he knocked up the VP's underage daughter?

You want to talk about specifics, then look no further than the complete lack of substance in Obama’s speech last week.

It is only lacking in substance to those who are too dim to understand. Palin's speech was aimed at those who are at the kindergarten level, both intellectually and emotionally. No ownder you thought it was good.

Palin will be able to debate with Biden only if she gets all the questions at least four weeks in advance, and if Biden has a stroke.

Yet another lie from so-called "good Christian" Mike Huckabee.....

If it wasn't for lies...

probably 30% of conservatives wouldn't have anything to talk about at all.

Alright, two questions:

 

1) If the Redskins-Giants game overlaps McCain's speech (long game [incompletions, high scoring, plays OB, game ends late in OT]), how many people will be hearing his speech?

 

2) And how much of McCain's speech will be about slamming Barack and encouraging a creepy (almost cult-like) obsession over his mate?

I am just wondering (a la The Onion) if McCain will be able to deliver any of the 'applause' lines without cracking that creepy, fake smile.

Also, the over/under on usage of "My friends..." is at 25. 

What's the over/under on how many times McSame will refer to his former POW status... though, as we all know, he HATES to talk about it. :o)

And.... will he be able to resist looking at her butt while they're on stage together?

Another question...

Will the media allow any Democratic response at all to Grampah's speech?  Or will it be a seemless presentation worthy of any fascist dictatorship?

Or is this another Hitler - Stalin media moment brought to you by Corporate Media, USA.

There has been a conspicuous lack of Democrats this week. And those that are around are wimps-- I couldn't get over how they fell all over themselves praising Palin's speech.

What a braintrust. If the Dems don't start wising up, they're toast. These are not nice people they are up against, so playing nice isn't going to work.

8,

I had to chuckle that Olbermann's first comment after  Huckabee's speech was to say Lincoln was not the founder of the Republican Party. So you had a Democrat responding after every speech. :-)

ps. In fact, according to Wikopedia"

Drawing on remnants of the old Whig, Free Soil, Liberty and Democratic parties, he [Lincoln] was instrumental in forming the new Republican Party. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln

Does instrumental equal founding?  If so, Gore invented the internet, after all, he claimed he "took initiative" in fostering the technology.

Olbermann also corrected Huckabee’s claim that Abraham Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party. “It was actually founded in 1854 by disaffected members of the Whig party,” Olbermann said, adding, “Mr. Lincoln joined later on and ran for office in 1860.”

From the GOP website:

"In 1856, the Republicans became a national party when John C. Fremont was nominated for President under the slogan: "Free soil, free labor, free speech, free men, Fremont." Even though they were considered a "third party" because the Democrats and Whigs represented the two-party system at the time, Fremont received 33% of the vote. Four years later, Abraham Lincoln became the first Republican to win the White House."

Isn't the internet a great place to find FACTS

AA....meant to put this in bold for you as well........

"...Four years later, Abraham Lincoln became the first Republican to win the White House."

Are you taking about his life partner and soul mate, or Cindy McCain?

How can you make any cult like remarks when Obama is nothing but a cult figure?

POV,

Care to back up that assertion? Holy cow!

I didn't think so.

If he backs up too far, his ass will be against the wall, and his source of information will be blocked.

I thought Huckabee was referring to Biden's electoral votes in the Primaries.

Even if he meant something else, it did make me chuckle. 

I didn't know you accumulated electoral votes in the primaries...

Oh, never mind.  It's now being reported Sarah Palin received 2-dozen jelly donuts for her victory in Alaska.  Go Sarah!!

I didn't know you accumulated electoral votes in the primaries

8 Homes, you're obviously not well-versed in conservative humor. Where real humor is based in reality, the set-up in con humor is made up of pretend stuff. Notice AA's train of thought. He "chuckled" at a joke that didn't make any sense, because it was built on a lie. When that fact is pointed out, he says that he thought the joke was based on some other hallucination.

Let me illustrate with a joke that, while not extremely funny, is at least based on a perceived (if not proven) reality;

Did you hear KMart is having a Michael Jackson sale? Little boys' pants, half off!

Now, let's try the conservative version;

Did you hear KMart is having a Joe Biden sale? Little boys' pants, half off!

While there is no basis for this, not even a rumor, about Biden regarding allegations of abuse, this joke is much funnier to conservatives.

Why? Because it's a lie, and a non-conservative is the butt of the joke. I hope this helps.

Thank you Colonel...

You make a good point.  I've never understood conservative humor.  Because, as you point out, if humor has no basis in reality, then what value does it have?

 

 

He may have been joking.  Or he may have been lying but will now claim he was joking.  Funny thing is I wouldn't be surprised if Palin got mor than 76K votes in a town of 6500.  Sort of like some of those Ohio districts Bush won in 2004. ;)

Shaggles, I wouldn't put it past any of them to claim it was a joke. It hasn't been presented that way, any more than any of their other BS punchlines.

I've heard this claim on the radio, and it's been posted here as fact.

Maybe this explains why the GOP convention speeches have been filled with so many "zingers" and one-liners. The faithful swallow them as a truth-based punchline, and when they're busted, they can go back to the "just kidding" weasel. As long as they pile them up faster than the other side can clean them up, they've got the ignorant vote locked.

I happen to sit through Giuliani's stomach wrenching speech last night, regretfully.  It was so mean, and nasty, and disrespectful and full of so much crap I was astounded.  I never could stand him anyway, but his gleeful chuckle and snarky laugh made me almost lose my soon to eaten dinner before I ate it.

And the Republicans were proud of that?  Pitiful. 

Thank you Tommy.

This is what some of us on the left have been trying to point out for years.  Rush, Coulter, Hannity, Savage, etc are not aberrations or exceptions, they are the face of modern day Republican politics.  There is no greater proof of that than Giuliani's hour of mean spirited, baseless and insulting schtick followed by Palin outright lying for an hour after that.

Parties and ideologies may disagree on the best way to get things done or to resolve problems, but no solutions can be arrived at as long as the loudest voices in the room think that acting like a spoiled adolescent is wise policy.

You need to replace Savage with Laura Ingraham. I only listen to Savage when I am in my car, but it sounds like he hates everybody.

I've actually had personal experience with the "just kidding" defense. 

I was on a CBS Sportsline message board and someone had posted typical neo-con talking points.  Rather than debate, I responded with an ad hominem attack that said he was exactly the type Stephen Colbert satirizes and he must be constantly laughed at.  The poster said he had read my post verbatim somewhere else and said my plagarism talents make me an excellent candidate for a journalism career at the NYT.  I called him out and asked him to prove where he saw my comment verbatim and he came back with "it was just a joke."  Hopefully the link works.

http://www.sportsline.com/mcc/messages/chrono/10241636/0/0/10247201#ID10247201

Neo-cons are the real joke - and I'm not laughing.

Funny thing is I wouldn't be surprised if Palin got mor than 76K votes in a town of 6500. 

I guess they were using Diebold voting machines.....

These political conventions are full of disposable red meat, served up buffet style for their conventioneers. Should the media even bother reporting such useless "humorous" lines such as this one by Huckabee?  No.  But they do anyway, and don't even bother to check it out, even lazily, for accuracy.  MMFA is right, they should.

Is this what this campaign has been reduced too?  Comparing vote totals to see who is more popular or qualified.  I will be glad when this convention silliness is over, I can't watch or read another minute of it.

Yeah, I don't know if I should anticipate or dread November. The 1UPsmanship is getting old, but I have a feeling life after November may get worse than it is now...

 

As you people know, I'm not sold on either Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin. I don't quite think either one is the answer right now.

Neither is the "answer",  but we need someone to "right" the ship, which has veered off course considerably in the last 8 years.  And for me, that is Obama.....our foreign policy arrogance and impulsiveness needs righting, our Rovian slash and burn divisive politicking to obliterate your opponent needs righting, our corrupt discourse that permeates our politics needs righting, our country needs a new brand of sorts in our fight against Islamic terrorism.

McCain offers nothing in the way of righting anything, for me. And in his first serious decision and most important thus far in his presidential aspirations, he has made an unserious and pandering cynical pick for VP, his focus was on solidifying his evangelical base, not in who is best to step in his shoes if necessary.  

If there was any doubt about a McCain vote for me, there is no more. 

I see it as something similar to having the option of having either your left arm cut off or your right arm cut off.

 

It's a dilemma between nationalism and globalization - assimilating with a larger environment or reinforcing your cultural identity; it's a dilemma between defense or commerce - taking one at the risk of losing the other, or even both; and I'm having less time to choose with each passing second...

And for her snarky anti-community organizer remarks, this wonderful reply from the I Am TRex blog site 9-04-08

Says it all doesn't it!

 

I’d like to remind you that this guy was a community organizer:

As was this guy:

Oh, and don’t forget this guy:

 

Excellent, thanks.

An update from I Am TRex......Super quote of the day!

 

UPDATE: Quote of the day from a Politico reader.

“Mrs. Palin needs to be reminded that Jesus Christ was a community organizer and Pontius Pilate was a governor.”

 

Man, the more information I find about the GOP indifference to community organizers, the more I love your post!

You should forward that to Obama and Biden, you may not know it but that would be the commercial retort of the century! Seriously!

OT, but who can wear $300,000 in clothes, let alone to the Republican convention? You coult repair that broken bridge in the twin cities for the price of Cindy's outfit!

I just sent the link and info to the Obama site...I think it's a wonderful come back and makes her remarks seem  so ridiculous.

Sorry, an OT reply to Snoopy... A Michelle Obama convention dress was a Thakoon that retails for about $1,200, but she is all the rage in the fashion circles with her $148 dress she wore on national TV.

So compare that with the Cindy McCain clothing....the McCain/Palin ticket calls Obama and elitist????

 

" This just in. Michelle Obama wore a $148 dress the other day on national TV. And this is a big deal. And lots of other women are reportedly running into the chain store she mentioned. And maybe not cat-fighting yet but grabbing the dress for themselves.

And a lot of people are talking about this. So here we are writing about it in great excitement too.....[...].....

This expert predicts that Michelle is gonna revolutionize first lady clothes-wearing because she mixes high fashion with cheaper stuff. And we don't mean pantsuits.,,,," Los Angeles Times, Andrew Malcom

 

Dang, type-o again, meant AN elitist.

That was definitely worth 3,000 words!

I only hope that Obama won't continue the pattern of these other three, in that they were all murdered.

So the first words of his video at the RNC was POW.

 

SHocking.

 

He's the new JESUS.

OMG, he followed orders.

 

Big friggin deal.

 

Please.

I was under the impression that we were commanded to respect McCain for being a POW.

From the video tonight, I've learned that being in a box gives you super powers.Did I get that right? I think somebody was reading Grampy's own words, and the implication was that being kept in a cell elevates a person to a level that others just can't touch.

If I was an inmate going up for my parole hearing, I'd bring McCain's biography with me.

McCain is a real POW now.

Prisoner of Wasilla.