Did he sexually harass you?

On a whole other topic, what about government officials blogging?

There's one from the Secretary of transportation which seems to advocate Bush administration policies to

http://www.tsa.gov/blog/ which contains this arresting image

TomatoPie wrote:A really "sexy" pick, but if we want to make the case that Obama lacks experience, she doesn't help. Not in 2008.

Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Jeb Bush, JC Watts? Long shots.

Yea

go with the Alaskan

no Fiji Islanders the reps could run?

And is JC Watts even alive still?

face it, you've got a candidate older than Ronnie with [why not just leave it blank this time around, blank is better known than anybody you've named] as the vp nom.

go back to making up ominous-sounding baloney about Obama's chances - that stuff's funny, but not as howlingly funny, as these vp 'opportunities' you've listed

The Dude wrote:Did he sexually harass you?

I can't comment on pending litigation.

Woody wrote:

That's the honkiest picture I've ever seen.

Bakestar wrote:

Woody wrote:

That's the honkiest picture I've ever seen.

I didn't know she married jerseyhoya

I don't get dressed up.

NJ-03 interruption.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW9hW6A48wc&e [/youtube]

Just about the biggest reach in an ad that I've ever seen.

Really? He worked for a company that gave Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy money, so that's somehow reflective upon him?

I need to remind my dad to make sure he gets my mom and brother to vote in the primary.

She did not 'win' Indiana. Rush Limbaugh did. That article also showed Obama is running 1% worse than Hillary in PA and dead even in FL and OH, just like past Democrats. Big whoop?

She is dead. Why doesn't she help Barack cement these areas by campaigning for him. Then he will be unstoppable.

Yes, because targeting exclusively "swing states" worked so well for the Democrats in the last two elections.

Webb seems like a logical choice. Which means it won't happen. Pick someone really polarizing and give me a reason to vote for Nadar in November.

Woody wrote:

That guy looks like a tool. There. I said it.

Bakestar wrote:Yes, because targeting exclusively "swing states" worked so well for the Democrats in the last two elections.

Well, you see, LOSING those states was a bad idea. This time, you'd think they would try winning those states.

Just a thought.

TP, you really are an enlightened guy. You rejected Pat Buchanan's politics of economic populism/cultural reaction from the man himself, but apparently you buy it from Hillary. Alan Alda would be very, very proud.

dajafi wrote:TP, you really are an enlightened guy. You rejected Pat Buchanan's politics of economic populism/cultural reaction from the man himself, but apparently you buy it from Hillary. Alan Alda would be very, very proud.

Devil's advocate, quite literally.

I've been doing that for two months now. It's over now though. Any movement to give the nomination to Hillary would rip apart the party in a manner that would make any edge Hillary has now in the key states obsolete. Obama is the nominee.

Additionally, Obama's still even money at worse to beat McCain. It's not like he's a sure loser. The GOP brand is in the dumps. Obama's gonna have a crapload of money. The economy sucks. People still dislike the war, even if they don't hate it quite as much as a year ago.

jerseyhoya wrote:Just about the biggest reach in an ad that I've ever seen.

Really? He worked for a company that gave Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy money, so that's somehow reflective upon him?

Obama's reverend is a jackass, so that's somehow reflective upon him?