How many of you feel this way?
“If you’ve got a Hillary and McCain race, you’ve got a third option: That’s the pistol on the bed table.”
So why does the media seem to want this matchup so desperately?
How many of you feel this way?
“If you’ve got a Hillary and McCain race, you’ve got a third option: That’s the pistol on the bed table.”
So why does the media seem to want this matchup so desperately?
l’m politic’d out this weekend…so, taking advantage of the OT, here’s a great vid of some very cool street theatre a friend sent me:
more on there guys here: improv everywhere.
later
lTMF’sA
You’re not the only one.
l’m not that pissed…just taking a break before it hits the fan on monday w/ fisa, and then tsunami tuesday.
gonna be busy.
lTMF’sA
I’ve become convinced that Markos himself could write a GBCW and the masses would mock him and tell him not to let the door hit him on the way out.
That’s fucking hilarious.
They want elections to be such meaningless, discouraging events that leave the populace so unhappy and despairing that they never vote again?
I dunno. I got nothing.
that it has more to do with the media just wanting a story. They want excitement. They want drama. They want conflict. They want to see a fight where blood is drawn.
I think it was Dana Milbank on Countdown the other day who admitted that what the media wants and what is good for the country aren’t always the same thing.
They don’t want people who speak outside the approved narrative.
Hey – Ethel Kennedy, wife of the slain Bobby Kennedy, just endorsed Obama!
http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/robert_f_kennedy_widow_backs_b.html
I assume it’s because they’re a bunch of lazy bastards, for the most part. They’ve been through the mill with both of these people, so the connections and the cliches are all on file ready to be cut & pasted without having to actually go out and get “news”.
I have no idea what Buchanan is trying to say. We could all shoot ourselves? We could all go out and shoot somebody else? We could join Bin Laden? I realize I could click the link and maybe find out, but it’s too much bother.
What a disturbing comment from Pat Buchanan.
I am trying to keep my spirits up. Watching a rally on C-Span now of Michelle Obama. I really like that lady. The theme of the speech is the “moving of the bar” on all of us over the last generation. Really good stuff. She would be the coolest First Lady ever. Far more inspirational to young women than Hillary Clinton ever will be.
But hey, good news for Pennsylvania… your primary might actually be the deciding contest this year. And what is it about Philadelphia and bloggers, anyway? Is there something in the water? So many of the good ones seem to be there.
happy Buchanan is not running this year.
I don’t know. If he were running, I wouldn’t have to see him on my teevee so much, telling me how to think and vote.
I don’t know, if Pat B is feeling suicidal we must be doing something right. I notice he’s stopped sneering at Rachel Maddow when they’re on together. It must of sunk in that she’s making better points, nononono stop me, he’ll never get it.
The cynic in me believes it’s because they think McCain would have a better chance beating Hillary.
yep, Hillary is their fav.
He WOULD. If Hillary should win the nomination, it’s over. All the new trash on the Clintons will be released and all the fake outrage of the 90’s will rise back to the surface. I guess the menopause crowd is determined to get themselves a Republican president.
They like ratings. They think they can create big ratings because they had big ratings in the 90’s trashing the Clintons. Of course that doesn’t explain the McCain half of the equation. I don’t see where he does anything but put their audience to sleep.
In all fairness though, even though the media seems to be lusting for more months of Clinton bashing, they’ve been good to Obama. His coverage is relatively positive and where he occasionally makes a lapse it doesn’t seem to be completely overblown. At least not as much as say, Bill’s lapses are. Thank goodness 🙂
I just got a three question automated telephone poll for Republicans voting in the Mo. election Tuesday – paid for by John McCain.
I said I’d be voting for Ron Paul but Mike Huckabee was my second choice. And terrorism/the war in Iraq was my top priority.
And people rely on polls …
lol!
And my sister just called and told me that she got called for a long poll on the Missouri primary from a national polling organization. I’m jealous. She couldn’t remember if they told her which polling organization. But I assume one will come out tomorrow afternoon and that will be the one.
I’m sure there are many like me. Since Edwards threw in the towel (really disappointed about that) Obama is now the anti-Hillary. His flaws don’t matter. He’s the only game in town.
Go Obama! (I hope your word means more than John “I’m in this race to the end” Edwards)
Pat oughta pick up that gun.
And rob a liquor store.
a youthful, high-energy Obama means defeat for McCain who is a little old and is known to take naps. that could be one of the reasons.
Think about it:
Would you rather have SOTU addresses from Obama or McCain?
Who has a nicer smile?
Who looks like an uncut penis?
….Well..except for the part about the pistol.
The second question is more difficult and I can’t answer it completely. The short answer would be — never question what the corporate overlords want. This is the “Big Mac” and “Whopper” choice, the point is not whether you want one, or whether they’re good for you, it’s the choice you get in a “bread and circuses” diet.
It’s not personal, it’s business. As in “business as usual”. K street, Pentagon types, weapons systems manufacturers, multinationals all continue business as usual.
So Buchanan is suggesting that a third choice is to shoot the candidate you don’t like with a pistol? How shocking! How traitorous and un-American!
(Sorry, I felt the need to channel a right-wing talk show host for a moment).
it made real good bad news in the 1990’s and TV people are nothing if not unoriginal.
Unknown quantities(Obama) make them have to actually do some work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD_fpgCT3i8
HERE.
Just got back from the Obama rally and it was huge! Claire McCaskill said there were 20,000 of us, but I missed the news coverage of course so I don’t know if that’s true. The line to get in was enormous.
I hope all those people show up to vote on Tuesday.
This article says 20,000 too: http://www.bnd.com/336/story/245577.html
It also notes that 3000 turned out to hear Bill Clinton, albeit in a smaller city (but still, the state’s third largest).
3,000 is a decent crowd for Springfield. It’s the third largest city in the state but it’s really not that big.
It’s also probably the only part of SW Missouri that has any Democrats, and it doesn’t have that many.
I find it interesting that they are spending time on Springfield – it’s a good GE strategy to campaign there to try to cut into support of the Republican you are running against – but the Dems never win it and never expect to win it.
So in a primary it’s odd – until you remember that Southern Missouri is also very … southern. Maybe they’re looking for the “white choice” voter?
That article says he only got 1,000 people at Columbia. I would have expected more there. It’s a small Democratic enclave in the middle of the state where the University is located.
I think it’s more that they’re looking for the less educated ‘rural’ voter.
That or Hillary is trying to keep Bill far from the spotlight.
And maybe both…!