scrolling down in fast motion they look like Karma Sutra

I heard an interview with Peter Scoblic on NPR today, the author of U.S. vs. Them. As opposed to the rather inflammatory subtitle of his book (How a Half-Century of Conservatism Has Undermined America's Security), he came across as very even-handed and engaging, with more of an impulse to understand and explain the forces that have shaped American foreign policy post WWII than to assign blame or tout a particular ideology and having little truck with the mythologizing or easy answers on left or right. Has anyone read this or anything else by him? I don't read much book-length material on subjects like this, but this seemed worthwhile.

pacino wrote:You are right, but it's close. I just found that hilarious...New Mexico is some important state with 1.2 millon people, and Delaware is an impossibly small state with a mere 600K people. So I flipped the populations in my mind, whatever.

But, of course that negates everything else I wrote, so you all got me! ptk is right, let's all pick everyone by race and state! I respectfully bow out and let you all go back to talking about how we can get a certain percentage of latinos and Virginians and such.

I really don't know what it is you think I"m saying or said? And why you are consistently so hostile?? I didn't say they should or shouldn't choose, I said that they will consider it in their thinking. I didn't say I care, or that people should care -- but that they the decision makers that guide each candidate -- THEY DO CARE. There's no way around a Richardson VP being noted over n over n over in the meida as the First Black PRez and First Lation VP.... that's the spin and it may or may not matter? It might draw Lation voters and lose racists in othe rplaces? I don't know... I was just saying that it's a factor to MANY people, and to those who are evaluating who to pick.

LOL, nice use of Britney and Paris...in a McCain ad

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHXYsw_ZDXg[/youtube]

I'm John McCain, and I approved Britney's hoohoodilly

Well, it's an issue ad, but taking shots at Britney and Paris is so 2006.

And I don't understand something--is the ad trying to make a connection between his inexperience and the taxes and offshore drilling? If it did it went by me.

This seems like an ad made by a committee. Here's how I imagine the meeting went:

Repwhore 1: I think we should do an ad with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. People love to mock celebrities!

Repwhore 2: Yeah, and we need to remind people that Obama doesn't have experience!

Repwhore 3: Don' forget he doesn't want to drill offshore, and he will raise taxes!

Reppimp: OK, so here's what I see--open with Paris and Britney, say something about celebrities. Then, we put on the words: Is he ready? Then, we'll remind people that gas is expensive, and Obama doesn't want to drill offshore, and he wants to raise taxes. This is brilliant!

An interesting tidbit in the otherwise characteristically banal Maureen Dowd column today:

The British opposition leader David Cameron gave Obama a copy of Winston Churchill’s “A History of the English-Speaking Peoples” and a box of CDs by British bands, including the Smiths, Radiohead and the Gorillaz.

Cameron likes the Smiths and Radiohead? My kind of Tory.

dajafi wrote:An interesting tidbit in the otherwise characteristically banal Maureen Dowd column today:

The British opposition leader David Cameron gave Obama a copy of Winston Churchill’s “A History of the English-Speaking Peoples” and a box of CDs by British bands, including the Smiths, Radiohead and the Gorillaz.

:thatsracistgraemlin:

dajafi wrote:An interesting tidbit in the otherwise characteristically banal Maureen Dowd column today:

The British opposition leader David Cameron gave Obama a copy of Winston Churchill’s “A History of the English-Speaking Peoples” and a box of CDs by British bands, including the Smiths, Radiohead and the Gorillaz.

Cameron likes the Smiths and Radiohead? My kind of Tory.

The opposite for me. I like both The Smiths and Radiohead, but this seems overly calculated, and strikes me as exactly what's wrong with discussions about music. "I need to look cool, and cover a large time range, without seeming over the hill. What is currently considered the hippest band from each of the last three decades? Okay, the Smiths, Radiohead, and the Gorillaz it is."

I practically got kicked off a music message board for arguing that the Smiths weren't as important as Billy Joel.

ashton wrote:

dajafi wrote:An interesting tidbit in the otherwise characteristically banal Maureen Dowd column today:

The British opposition leader David Cameron gave Obama a copy of Winston Churchill’s “A History of the English-Speaking Peoples” and a box of CDs by British bands, including the Smiths, Radiohead and the Gorillaz.

Cameron likes the Smiths and Radiohead? My kind of Tory.

The opposite for me. I like both The Smiths and Radiohead, but this seems overly calculated, and strikes me as exactly what's wrong with discussions about music. "I need to look cool, and cover a large time range, without seeming over the hill. What is currently considered the hippest band from each of the last three decades? Okay, the Smiths, Radiohead, and the Gorillaz it is."

I practically got kicked off a music message board for arguing that the Smiths weren't as important as Billy Joel.

Calculated how? Do you think he's playing to a domestic political audience? I guess that's plausible, with Obama just kind of a prop.

I remember when he ran for president in 2000--very briefly--John Kasich wouldn't shut up about Pearl Jam. So there's precedent.

dajafi wrote:

ashton wrote:

dajafi wrote:An interesting tidbit in the otherwise characteristically banal Maureen Dowd column today:

The British opposition leader David Cameron gave Obama a copy of Winston Churchill’s “A History of the English-Speaking Peoples” and a box of CDs by British bands, including the Smiths, Radiohead and the Gorillaz.

Cameron likes the Smiths and Radiohead? My kind of Tory.

The opposite for me. I like both The Smiths and Radiohead, but this seems overly calculated, and strikes me as exactly what's wrong with discussions about music. "I need to look cool, and cover a large time range, without seeming over the hill. What is currently considered the hippest band from each of the last three decades? Okay, the Smiths, Radiohead, and the Gorillaz it is."

I practically got kicked off a music message board for arguing that the Smiths weren't as important as Billy Joel.

Calculated how? Do you think he's playing to a domestic political audience? I guess that's plausible, with Obama just kind of a prop.

I remember when he ran for president in 2000--very briefly--John Kasich wouldn't shut up about Pearl Jam. So there's precedent.

To be fair, it was a box of cds. Maybe the moron reporter only listed the three bands he'd heard of.

Regarding VP for Obama, very unlikely that it would be a woman, as that would be a slap to Hilary.

i'm sure that's the reason he wouldn't choose a woman.

I don't often agree with P-t-K, but I think there's a lot to that.

Are we talking about reality here, or perception? It wouldn't be a slap to Hillary at all. The Vice President is not the President. Dick Cheney would never be elected President, and Hillary Clinton would never be seen as a viable VP candidate. It would only be seen as a stepping stone to her presidency and nothing else.

Barry Jive wrote:Are we talking about reality here, or perception? It wouldn't be a slap to Hillary at all. The Vice President is not the President. Dick Cheney would never be elected President, and Hillary Clinton would never be seen as a viable VP candidate. It would only be seen as a stepping stone to her presidency and nothing else.

Perception is what campaigns are all about.

I understand that, but if PtK had said "that would be perceived as a slap to Hillary," I wouldn't be arguing this point. I don't think Hillary would be personally offended if Obama chose another woman as his VP candidate.

Barry Jive wrote:I understand that, but if PtK had said "that would be perceived as a slap to Hillary," I wouldn't be arguing this point. I don't think Hillary would be personally offended if Obama chose another woman as his VP candidate.

Yeah, I think it would be perceived that way by Hillary supporters.

Weaver blasts McCain

John Weaver, a long time confidant and friend of Sen. John McCain, told Marc Ambinder that McCain's current campaign strategy "diminishes John McCain" and the recent ad linking Sen. Barack Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears was "childish."

Said Weaver: "For McCain to win in such troubled times, he needs to begin telling the American people how he intends to lead us. That McCain exists. He can inspire the country to greatness. There is legitimate mockery of a political campaign now, and it isn't at Obama's. For McCain's sake, this tomfoolery needs to stop."

Weaver probably hates that it's Karl Rove's proteges, and their shared tactics, now running the show for his old boss and friend--and that they're trying to win by appealing to the worst instincts of the public rather than offering inspiration, as they did together in 2000.

dajafi wrote:Weaver blasts McCain

John Weaver, a long time confidant and friend of Sen. John McCain, told Marc Ambinder that McCain's current campaign strategy "diminishes John McCain" and the recent ad linking Sen. Barack Obama to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears was "childish."

Said Weaver: "For McCain to win in such troubled times, he needs to begin telling the American people how he intends to lead us. That McCain exists. He can inspire the country to greatness. There is legitimate mockery of a political campaign now, and it isn't at Obama's. For McCain's sake, this tomfoolery needs to stop."

Weaver probably hates that it's Karl Rove's proteges, and their shared tactics, now running the show for his old boss and friend--and that they're trying to win by appealing to the worst instincts of the public rather than offering inspiration, as they did together in 2000.

What's sad is -- it might work. Keep in mind my assumption is that between rigged machines and other irregularities in local precincts under local election officials, McCain will steal about 5%, so Obama has to win by a very large margin, any close race probably goes to McCain. I still don't see that Dems would really fight back, a few would make some noise but Nancy Pelosi doesn't have the gumption to really go after the Reps and reveal things -- that could expose 'too much'. So Obama has to win big. I don't see Obama fever being that wide spread. He probably has something Kerry, Mondale and Dukakis didn't have -- but I'm not sure it's Bill Clinton level enthusiasm, and in 92 I don't think there were rigged Diebolt machines, etc... Rove tactics hadn't been brought full to bear though Willie Horton was out there over 20 years ago...