Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

[Old Pio]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

I'm not aware of a President Moosejaw, nor his (her?) putting Americans in concentration camps. Was this a real history book, or one approved by the Texas Board of Education?

FDR, the Japanese, ring a bell, dodo?

 

[Priceless]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

FDR, the Japanese, ring a bell, dodo?

I wasn't aware that he was called "Moosejaw" but a Google search reveals that that was a nickname a conservative pundit had for him. So rather than the Texas BOE, it comes via Conservapedia. Even better.

And since Japanese-Americans were rounded up after Pearl Harbor was attacked in December 1941, the answer would be after 1928. I'm sure you had a point.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Ah yes, if only Woodrow Wilson had still been around.
When does the Birth of a Nation screening start?

 

[Rimbaud]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Wow, I'll bet the debate team at President Dukakis junior high is impressed with your forensic talents. Me, I think youre just a jerk with a keyboard and no commitment whatsover to accuracy. Stop trying to be an amateur mind reader, you're no good at it.

I'm the one accurately pointing out your own beliefs. I'm not sure how someone can say that Dems cheat and steal every election in every big city, but they're not doing it this time. Those are mutually exclusive statements. If you honestly believe the Dems aren't trying to steal the election for Reid, then you can't believe that Dems do it every election. Unless you have a different definition of 'every' than the rest of humanity.

Will you stop crying into your Metamucil if I said, "you know what, you're right, you don't believe those big bad union thugs are trying to steal the election for Harry Reid........yet."

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

I'm the one accurately pointing out your own beliefs. I'm not sure how someone can say that Dems cheat and steal every election in every big city, but they're not doing it this time. Those are mutually exclusive statements. If you honestly believe the Dems aren't trying to steal the election for Reid, then you can't believe that Dems do it every election. Unless you have a different definition of 'every' than the rest of humanity.

Will you stop crying into your Metamucil if I said, "you know what, you're right, you don't believe those big bad union thugs are trying to steal the election for Harry Reid........yet."

Absolutely little buddy. You can read after all. I think I've mentioned about three times now that you really can't jigger with the outcome of an election, unless it's close. "Finding" a box of "uncounted" ballots in King County only works if it's close and isn't needed if it isn't close.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

I wasn't aware that he was called "Moosejaw" but a Google search reveals that that was a nickname a conservative pundit had for him. So rather than the Texas BOE, it comes via Conservapedia. Even better.

And since Japanese-Americans were rounded up after Pearl Harbor was attacked in December 1941, the answer would be after 1928. I'm sure you had a point.

Well, your "point" as I understood it amid alll the self back patting, was that conservatives, or Republicans, or both, are responsible for all the evil in the world. I was pointing out that's not exactly accurate. Stick with me, you'll learn more.

 

[Priceless]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Well, your "point" as I understood it amid alll the self back patting, was that conservatives, or Republicans, or both, are responsible for all the evil in the world.

Cone now. Repubs aren't responsible for all evil in the world. Just most of it.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Cone now. Repubs aren't responsible for all evil in the world. Just most of it.

Ah, at last, a moderate.

 

[XYZ]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

THE great failure of the media is that there is so little relatively unbiased reporting from news outlets that people are left to pick what they like of the biased news outlets which fit their viewpoint. Of course the failure also lies with the populace, who watch junk news and don't demand quality, relatively unbiased coverage.

Thank goodness we have NPR for this.

 

[walrus]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Actually, what I wrote was:

..

How could that be with a join date of 2007?

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

What's the point of being a write-in candidate then?

But the Supreme Court decision allows voters at early voting sites to see the lists if they say they need help and want to be shown a list of write-in candidates. The decision could aid Sen. Lisa Murkowski's write-in U.S. Senate bid; her campaign had fought to keep the lists at polling places.

 

[moe24]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Thank goodness we have NPR for this.

They do have the quality part of the equation down, but the unbiased part is a complete miss.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

What's the point of being a write-in candidate then?

I think I'm with you here. Everybody who meets the qualification for the office is a potential write-in candidate. The deeper question is whether there's a status to get on the ballot or such a list even if you're not a party nominee, and I assume that's covered by having a sufficient number of signatures to be registered as a qualifying candidate by the deadline (in plenty of time to print the ballots, upload the data to the machines, etc).

I don't like on-the-fly changes to procedural rules in general. If the process needs amending, put it through the approved change management cycle and apply the approved change in the next election. But I do CM for a living, so of course I would say that.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

When does the Birth of a Nation screening start?

Well, Fox does have a movie channel.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/251211/angle-sends-flowers-behar-fumes-katrina-trinko

You've got to give this obnoxious cow credit, she's not resting on her laurels.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/251211/angle-sends-flowers-behar-fumes-katrina-trinko

You've got to give this obnoxious cow credit, she's not resting on her laurels.

Angle is feisty, I'll give you that.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Thank goodness we have NPR for this.

Good one!

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

Angle is feisty, I'll give you that.

Feisty perhaps, but "Joy" is the obnoxious cow here.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

THE great failure of the media is that there is so little relatively unbiased reporting from news outlets that people are left to pick what they like of the biased news outlets which fit their viewpoint. Of course the failure also lies with the populace, who watch junk news and don't demand quality, relatively unbiased coverage.

I'd be happy with just stopping all the opinion. News should give events and analytical context, period. Any opinion shows should be labelled as opinion...and even then it would be helpful to take a 'economist' magazine approach of stacking it full of evidence. Too much preconceived opinion (ie this party is bad)...then tayloring opinion to fit that platform and using negative language to deliver it.

 

[Priceless]

Re: Death to the Incumbent! Part Two: Now with more Death.

How could that be with a join date of 2007?

Because USCHO isn't the only site on the Internet?