Barack Obama or John McCain

[Guest David Guyatt]

Richardson got a masters in international affairs from the "universalist" Tufts Fetcher School...

The words, "fixed", "casino", "wheel" and "roulette" spring to mind.

Old proverb says ALL IS YELLOW TO THE JAUNDICED EYE.

An even older proverb says that IN THE LAND OF THE BLIND, THE ONE-EYED IS KING.

[Michael Hogan]

Maybe, David. But if he (Obama) is willing to defy big pharma, the media and the DEA by signing a bill legalising medical cannabis, then he would get my vote.

Interesting article on the subject by Debra Saunders, writing for the San Francisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...=005&sc=190

In another article, Saunders writes:

Barack Obama is like a shot of Botox. Support him, and you take 10 years off your face. You join the cool crowd. You become one with idealistic kids and Hollywood glitterati.

Clinton Democrats can't compete. They're on the outside looking in. They used to be hip. They were the bad boys, who scoffed at finger-wagging conservatives. Now, they have traded in their saxophones for a pantsuit.

The glamour is gone. Once, their very politics, the simple fact that they registered as Democrats instead of Republicans, made them better than meat-and-potatoes America. They cared more. They were smarter. They knew how to play the system. They were destined to run things.

Now they are trailing behind an upstart junior senator.....

Full article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../INN110LINM.DTL

[Mark Stapleton]

Maybe, David. But if he (Obama) is willing to defy big pharma, the media and the DEA by signing a bill legalising medical cannabis, then he would get my vote.

Interesting article on the subject by Debra Saunders, writing for the San Francisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...=005&sc=190

In another article, Saunders writes:

Barack Obama is like a shot of Botox. Support him, and you take 10 years off your face. You join the cool crowd. You become one with idealistic kids and Hollywood glitterati.

Clinton Democrats can't compete. They're on the outside looking in. They used to be hip. They were the bad boys, who scoffed at finger-wagging conservatives. Now, they have traded in their saxophones for a pantsuit.

The glamour is gone. Once, their very politics, the simple fact that they registered as Democrats instead of Republicans, made them better than meat-and-potatoes America. They cared more. They were smarter. They knew how to play the system. They were destined to run things.

Now they are trailing behind an upstart junior senator.....

Full article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../INN110LINM.DTL

Nice piece from Saunders on the cannabis issue--thanks Mike. And Obama's position on this is intentionally hazy. It has to be. He's got no choice.

And the Clintons are just so twentieth century it's pathetic.

Edited May 18, 2008 by Mark Stapleton

[Guest David Guyatt]

Maybe, David. But if he is willing to defy big pharma, the media and the DEA by signing a bill legalising medical cannabis, then he would get my vote.

What politicians say in an election and what they plan to do once elected are usually at variance. Strikes me that Richardson is that sort of politician.

The sort that says on his Vitae that he was drafted to play professional baseball when no such thing had ever happened - and when caught in his lie, explained it way as being "unintentional" - as he thought he had been drafted.

Why is it never the other way around I wonder? "I didn't think I was drafted but wow! I was. Imagine that". Sort of like supermarkets that, if a mistake is made on the grocery bill, it invariably is slanted in the favour of the supermarket and not the customer. It's as if the law of averages is suspended in such situations. Freaky.

The sort of politician I would like to see is a principled one who genuinely represents his/her constituents to the best of his ability - and who is not a mouth piece for big business or other minority/personal interests. You wouldn't think this is a lot to ask for. But it proves to be almost an impossibility in reality.

Que sera sera.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

What politicians say in an election and what they plan to do once elected are usually at variance. Strikes me that Richardson is that sort of politician.

The sort that says on his Vitae that he was drafteto play professional baseball when no such thing had ever happened - and when caught in his lie, explained it way as being "unintentional" - as he thought he had been drafted.

As non-sequitors go, you have come up with a real HOWLER.

The researchers then pulled the students’ records, with permission, and found that almost half had exaggerated their average by as much as six-tenths of a point. Yet the electrode readings showed that oddly enough, the exaggerators became significantly more relaxed while discussing their grades.

The grade inflation was less an attempt to deceive, the authors concluded, than a reflection of healthy overconfidence and a statement of aspirations. “It’s basically an exercise in projecting the self toward one’s goals,” Dr. Gramzow said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/health/0...amp;oref=slogin

Every sportsman's accomplishments get better in the telling, but Richardson's accomplishments in political office are vouched for by a huge majority of voters in his state of New Mexico.

[Guest David Guyatt]

What politicians say in an election and what they plan to do once elected are usually at variance. Strikes me that Richardson is that sort of politician.

The sort that says on his Vitae that he was drafteto play professional baseball when no such thing had ever happened - and when caught in his lie, explained it way as being "unintentional" - as he thought he had been drafted.

As non-sequitors go, you have come up with a real HOWLER.

The researchers then pulled the students’ records, with permission, and found that almost half had exaggerated their average by as much as six-tenths of a point. Yet the electrode readings showed that oddly enough, the exaggerators became significantly more relaxed while discussing their grades.

The grade inflation was less an attempt to deceive, the authors concluded, than a reflection of healthy overconfidence and a statement of aspirations. “It’s basically an exercise in projecting the self toward one’s goals,” Dr. Gramzow said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/health/0...amp;oref=slogin

Every sportsman's accomplishments get better in the telling, but Richardson's accomplishments in political office are vouched for by a huge majority of voters in his state of New Mexico.

I've come up with a howler?

Only in the America is cynical lying condoned as a "healthy overconfidence and a statement of aspirations".

And everyone does it, so that's okay, right.

It's alarming to those of us who haven't been shaped from birth in the parlour of Peter Pan make believe that y'all so willingly swallow this trick-cyclist mumbo-jumbo.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Every sportsman's accomplishments get better in the telling, but Richardson's accomplishments in political office are vouched for by a huge majority of voters in his state of New Mexico.

It's alarming to those of us who haven't been shaped from birth in the parlour of Peter Pan make believe that y'all so willingly swallow this trick-cyclist mumbo-jumbo.

Some people become alarmed over the most trivial stuff. Maybe it is the result of reading too many children's books.

[Len Colby]

Every sportsman's accomplishments get better in the telling, but Richardson's accomplishments in political office are vouched for by a huge majority of voters in his state of New Mexico.

It's alarming to those of us who haven't been shaped from birth in the parlour of Peter Pan make believe that y'all so willingly swallow this trick-cyclist mumbo-jumbo.

Some people become alarmed over the most trivial stuff. Maybe it is the result of reading too many children's books.

Can we presume that Mr. Guyatt has never ever inadvertently or intentionally exaggerated his accomplishments? By his standards probably no one in the world is suitable for elected office.

That being said though I hoped through some miracle he would gain the nomination I don't think he would be a good ticket mate for Obama wrong gender for one. And I doubt that voters uneasy about electing a black man president would have their worries assuaged by having a Latino on the ticket.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

And I doubt that voters uneasy about electing a black man president would have their worries assuaged by having a Latino on the ticket.

People who are worried about having a black man for president will not vote for Obama anyway, no matter who he chooses for VP.

One benefit of Hillary's obstinacy is that Obama need be in no hurry to name his VP. It is McCain who is under pressure to name a VP, and unless McCain names a woman, the question of gender need not enter Obama's calculations.

Bill Richardson is qualified to be Vice-President and President, even though he is not qualified for the baseball Hall of Fame

[Guest David Guyatt]

Some people become alarmed over the most trivial stuff. Maybe it is the result of reading too many children's books.

Ah, the old "trivial lies" argument.

It is a proposition that disregards the obvious conclusion that someone who will lie about something so trivial (as being drafted for a professional baseball player when he wasn't) almost certainly wouldn't hesitate to lie about something big when the pressure was on.

We are apparently to accept this frayed argument by only seeing the virtues of a chosen candidate because pointing out their obvious failings and pro big business bias, is a sin of great magnitude to those girded up with blind faith in the political process.

Btw, I keep meaning to ask in this 28 pages long thread, where in the 140 plus posts you've made thus far, resides the "political conspiracy" that this forum is about? Because it looks to me that the vast bulk (if not all) of your posts are singly focused on promoting your chosen presidential candidate. If I'm wrong about this then my apologies are offered in advance.

****

If Mr. Colby could locate a single exaggeration I have made on my career bio at any time, he would be crowing and lofting it high with a boastful smirk, rather than engaging in his usual split-tongue tactics of insinuation, deceit, spin and twisting.

His post says a lot about him.

So he will have to be content in the future by my further studied lack of response to his poisoned penmanship.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

If Mr. Colby could locate a single exaggeration I have made on my career bio at any time, he would be crowing and lofting it high with a boastful smirk, rather than engaging in his usual split-tongue tactics of insinuation, deceit, spin and twisting.

His post says a lot about him.

Maybe this post says more about you than it does about Mr. Colby.

EVERYONE has told a lie, but they say the man who claims he's NEVER told a lie is the BIGGEST xxxx of all.

[Guest David Guyatt]

If Mr. Colby could locate a single exaggeration I have made on my career bio at any time, he would be crowing and lofting it high with a boastful smirk, rather than engaging in his usual split-tongue tactics of insinuation, deceit, spin and twisting.

His post says a lot about him.

Maybe this post says more about you than it does about Mr. Colby.

EVERYONE has told a lie, but they say the man who claims he's NEVER told a lie is the BIGGEST xxxx of all.

I didn't expect you, Mr Carroll, to sink quite so low.

I also have to say that you're missing the point. Yet again. Purposely it would seem. When you lose the moral argument, typically it is time for the mud slinging to commence.

Firstly, I have never stated I have never spoken a lie, so please refrain from attributing to me rationalizations that, clearly, belong in your own shaving mirror. What I said is that my Vitae has never contained an exaggeration. It seems that such care for accuracy in these things alarms and disturbs you on a personal basis.

Why is that wonder?

More specifically on the subject in hand, the comparison and charge you imply is both lurid and ludicrous. I am not running for any political office, nor seeking any form of paid public position where good standing, honesty and straight forward ethical compliance with the expected norms of public behaviour are considered to be a requirement. Rightly so, I think.

Besides this, it is not I who is promoting someone who does not fill those norms. You are. I am simply pointing out the lack of integrity of those you promote. Your judgement is therefore in question, not mine.

If these are the best you can come up with and pin your hope on, then god help you.

[Len Colby]

If Mr. Colby could locate a single exaggeration I have made on my career bio at any time, he would be crowing and lofting it high with a boastful smirk, rather than engaging in his usual split-tongue tactics of insinuation, deceit, spin and twisting.

His post says a lot about him.

Maybe this post says more about you than it does about Mr. Colby.

EVERYONE has told a lie, but they say the man who claims he's NEVER told a lie is the BIGGEST xxxx of all.

Exactly Ray I thought it was obvious I implying that just about everyone (except me of course ) has at one point or another exaggerated their accomplishments so David presumably has as well. He understood it as a personal attack, if anybody else had made a post like his I would have responded in the same manner. His replies to you and me are quite revealing. Now you’ve sunk low because you dare imply that he like every other adult on the face of the planet (and those 6 feet under as well) has told a lie at one point another in their lives

Decades ago Ray Davies (twice even) and Ozzy sussed out people like him.

[Evan Burton]

That's right; I intended to move a couple of threads to Political Discussion, because there was no conspiracy involved per se. John said they should remain because they were interesting discussions, and that a lot of members don't go over to Political Discussion but will often visit Political Conspiracies and JFK.

[Christopher Hall]

Some people become alarmed over the most trivial stuff. Maybe it is the result of reading too many children's books.

Ah, the old "trivial lies" argument.

It is a proposition that disregards the obvious conclusion that someone who will lie about something so trivial (as being drafted for a professional baseball player when he wasn't) almost certainly wouldn't hesitate to lie about something big when the pressure was on.

We are apparently to accept this frayed argument by only seeing the virtues of a chosen candidate because pointing out their obvious failings and pro big business bias, is a sin of great magnitude to those girded up with blind faith in the political process.

Btw, I keep meaning to ask in this 28 pages long thread, where in the 140 plus posts you've made thus far, resides the "political conspiracy" that this forum is about? Because it looks to me that the vast bulk (if not all) of your posts are singly focused on promoting your chosen presidential candidate. If I'm wrong about this then my apologies are offered in advance.

****

If Mr. Colby could locate a single exaggeration I have made on my career bio at any time, he would be crowing and lofting it high with a boastful smirk, rather than engaging in his usual split-tongue tactics of insinuation, deceit, spin and twisting.

His post says a lot about him.

So he will have to be content in the future by my further studied lack of response to his poisoned penmanship.

I agree with you, David.

The new term for lying (at least with the alphabet media) is "misspoke".

I view misspeaking as accidentally saying that it rained last Thursday (when in fact it was Wednesday).

That kind of inadvertent error stands in stark contrast to:

(1) intentional resume' padding (particularly for someone who is a former Cabinet member, the Governor of a state and a candidate for President); and

(2) saying, for example, that one had to take evasive actions under sniper fire (while under Secret Service protection, no less) when she was really just working a ropeline of friendly greeters at the airport.

I am sorry that Bill Richardson has seen fit to lie on his resume, particularly because I have pretty much liked him since he left the Clinton Administration.

This whole discussion reminds me of a statement that Dan Rather made, during the WJC impeachment/perjury debacle, to the effect that someone can lie about certain matters, but still be an honest person.

Edited May 19, 2008 by Christopher Hall