This is off topic, but I did not wish to interrupt Sasha's Politics and Ethics thread. Surprising so many people just answered No. But not surprising, because it is truePolitical campaigning has become a large advertising campaign based on selling you the best appearing candidate for the 'job'It really has little to do with the most Statesmanlike or most capable candidate, but the one who can get the largest advertising budget from the most supporters with the most capable ad team to present the Product to be favorable, preferably enthusiastic supporters, to large sections of the population.This is a simplistic view, but it covers the major points. In our system, there are some areas of the country that are not worth campaigning in or even proposing favorable legislation.There would not be enough electoral votes to be worth while.Spin is it. Palin has been presented to to be hard hitting and just/fair. But when you look into the background of the cited events you find a different story. Obama has been presented as an advocate of change. Did you forget he is from Chicago? The Daley City? Find out how he won his first election, he was unopposed. McCain is being presented as a Maverick, a free thinker who does the right thing despite the Party line. This ad campaign started in '97. And his voting record belies the image. I believe with a spin doctor of Rove or better ability I could make having sex with an underage mentally handicapped child look like a humanitarian gift to the ages. And that is what you should expect from any political campaign.So no, I don't see anything ethical about politics. I keep forgetting it, but this year I suddenly woke up and remembered. The idea to present the candidate in the most Holy Light, his achievements to akin to the Way of the Cross while always working for the Greater Good (yours) and his future time in office to be like getting Manna from Heaven in a Land of Milk and Honey.There have been some good presidents. Most of the ones remembered as Good had a tremendous opposition during the time they were in office, but left policies or programs behind that made them memorable. I have changed my mind over the years of who was great and who was not. Because History has much less spin.jCsuffering from Ring Around the Collar
well said, joe.and thanks.
jCI can't vote for Tide, it makes me itch:)LWW
What comes to my mind, when hearing this, or similar topics being discussed, is that our government is representative of the people who voted the politicians into office.Best Wishes, Jon
LWW,I an currently vetting 2 new candidates, Wisk and Ivory.Do you have a preference? Or perhaps some dirt on one or the other?jC ;-)
What comes to my mind, when hearing this, or similar topics being discussed, is that our government is representative of the people who voted the politicians into office.Who was it who said we get the government we deserve?The average American is reallyx10 stupid. I don't know who said this, but "think how stupid the average American is. Now remember, half are even dumber than this."(we, on this board, are far, far above average, of course :-))I am also sick of hearing that tired old lie that "My vote counts!" B*llsh!t! Of all the offices I've voted on, from village idiot to Idiot-in-Chief, there are exactly *two* candidates in office that I voted for. And then there are the propositions. Yeah...my vote counts...NOT!You can tell me it's my duty to vote. I'll certainly buy that. But please don't tell me my vote counts. No one believes that--that's the real reason voter turnout is so low.The three biggest lies:1. Of course I'll still respect you in the morning.2. The check is in the mail.3. Your vote counts!
Hey XWordPhile - Your vote counts !
our government is representative of the people who voted the politicians into office.I heard this a different way, but yes I think it is true. Idiots and ignoramus' are allowed, but it is up to the Majority to actually listen to what is being presented and make a rational Judgment on it.If we do not act intelligently we will not get an intelligent representative.I have met a lot of people recently who are going to vote for their imagination instead of Who they are.Case in point: A black man is voting for Obama. jC: Why? BM: because he is Black!So I should vote for McCain because he is Irish? I much prefer you listen to some campaign rhetoric ... I mean speeches, and Judge the candidate against your own personal Values. I am having a difficult time of doing it this year, so I listen more. just so I can make an informed decision.jC
I an currently vetting 2 new candidates, Wisk and Ivory.Do you have a preference? Or perhaps some dirt on one or the other?I don't have any dirt on Wisk, however, I have it on good authority that Ivory is 99.9% pure. Pure what, I have no idea:)LWW
I an currently vetting 2 new candidates, Wisk and Ivory.**************************I haven't used Wisk since the 1970s because of their obnoxious "Ring around the collar" commercials. The commercials were always about some woman being mortified in public because "dear hubby" had a ring of dirt around his collar. If she had used Wisk, there wouldn't have been a ring. Dear hubby can wash his own darned shirts!LoveLoving
I have met a lot of people recently who are going to vote for their imagination instead of Who they are.Case in point: A black man is voting for Obama. jC: Why? BM: because he is Black!************************I've met some women recently who are insinuating they'll be voting for Palin for the same reason.Palin scares me. Those women scare me even more.LoveLoving
I haven't used Wisk since the 1970s because of their obnoxious "Ring around the collar" commercials. Ah, but as my father the ad-man used to say -- you're remembering the product.btw, I agree with you.<>i>Dear hubby can wash his own darned shirts!Many years ago, one of Oh Doc's aunts gave him a pile of shirts her son no longer wore. She told me that they were all cotton so I'd need to iron them.The whole set of inlaws was appalled when I replied,"They're his shirts. He can iron them." ~~ Alison, bad inlaw
Loving,Palin scares me. Those women scare me even more.Palin was a good choice for McCain. She appeals to the independent in complete control of their lives manager type women while at the same time doing the men /sports things like hunting and fishing and gutting moose.My surprise was a Hillary fan who declared she would not vote Republican Because of Palin. I don't understand, but I am glad she is looking at the candidate and not just a female candidate.As you are.jC
Ah, but as my father the ad-man used to say -- you're remembering the product.Just what the candidates are doing.Create an image, saturate the media with the selected image, refer to the image in every speech, the image becomes the man (or woman) .McCain has done it with his veteran status and Maverick image. Obama has done it with his Change, not-the-same-old-thing image.You should interview your father about advertising techniques and see how relevant is is to political campaigning.jC
You should interview your father about advertising techniques and see how relevant is is to political campaigning.That could be very interesting. He's been out of the business for some time, but he say many changes over the years. They did book advertising, and when he started, it was very much more "publishing" rather than "marketing." ~~ Alison
jc: you dont understand why some woman wont vote republican because ofpalin???? even some republicans are against her stand on abortion......s
jc: you dont understand why some woman wont vote republican because ofpalin???? even some republicans are against her stand on abortion......s Her personal stand on the issue isn't so relevant as whether or not she is willing to back the law of the land. I hear a lot about many candidates who have personal beliefs that don't jibe with what the law says. But until the executive branch starts making the laws (we have a legislative branch for that) I don't think it's something that could be a deal breaker. That said, I don't intend to vote for them, but that's more a reflection on McCain than on her.LWW
you dont understand why some woman wont vote republican because ofpalin???? From a womans point of view, I see Palin as having a husband. She goes out hunting, tracks muddy boots across the floor, lets You take care of the kids, gone for days campaigning, btiches when dinner is not ready when she gets home, .... I would not be surprised if she drinks beer in front of the TV. A husband with boobs AND she leaves the seat down.Since that is what a lot of women have, How could you object to it?jC
jC:i doubt most voters reflect as much as you do..........we HEAR all thethings she is RABIDLY against, and i strongly doubt that all the peoplewho are AGAINST WHAT SHE'S AGAINST, stop to think about the law......and it's not so hard to repeall or change a law.....it happens allthe time........all it takes is a change in the majority.roe vs wade is in great jeopardy....one more republican appointed supremeand reversing that law can happen.......her opinions on most social issuesare extremely scary..........maybe EVEN TO SOME REPUBLICAN WOMEN....... in my opinion,
and jC........with all due respect, you cant have a woman 's point of view.there is no such thing.........you can have the point view of SOME women........perhaps.
i doubt most voters reflect as much as you do..........That is probably my biggest personal failing.I think. And I don't have a box......and it's not so hard to repeal or change a law.....Really? I think it takes a concerted effort over a period of time, including stacking the deck in the Supreme CourtRvsW was made by a unique Court that, I believe, had only one lawyer or judge on it. We will not see that again, perhaps ever. And there are a lot of openings comming uproe vs wade is in great jeopardy....Much more is at risk. One law passed by Bush (W) made the issue of unsecured home loans possible. (guess who was a supporter?) The industry ran with it, slowly, until you could get a no doc loan. And a sub prime mortgage crisisYour phone can be tapped. Because the White House said so. No law was passed, and it is a question if one was broken. (mine too, I called Norway last year) It is inches away from monitoring your web habits, but there are no lawsuits on that yet.Reagan, Nixon and both Bushes have created a lot more power in the Presidency than ever existed before. I think it is time to change that. Or perhaps too late.Find a country that interferes with the US ideals? Bomb them. Pre Eisenhower the President had to have Congress vote on an Act of War.Do you have cable TV? In 2 years there will be no "free" TV. Digital does not broadcast well. Radio will be the next to be pay only. Since you are 'subscribed' and digitized everyone can be monitored by Nielson ratings, even if you mute commercials, it's recorded. In a time of war we will have CB radio, that's it.Sasha, I Fear McCain. I Fear Obama. I Never Trusted Hillary. Palin scares the krap out of me like looking down the barrel of a 12 gage.I watch and listen to people talking about their 'preferred candidate' and wonder Why? He won't help you. He is Not like you unless you went to Harvard or Yale, got a law degree and make a million $ each year.I want a Lincoln or perhaps a Washington to vote for. Not the guys who the S&P 500 support. I want a Ghandi or a Martin L King. I want to TRUST my president.jC, stepping off his personalized soap box
"you cant have a woman 's point of view."I sit corrected.jC
I want a Lincoln or perhaps a Washington to vote for. Not the guys who the S&P 500 support. I want a Ghandi or a Martin L King. I want to TRUST my president.Sadly, jC, that's something we'd all like to have, but I don't think it will ever happen. Years ago, when we didn't have a media that monitored our every move, presidents and other heads of state were off limits for anything but good press. When the person was running, you could have mudslinging, but you'd better be sure you could back up what you said. Once they were elected, it was hands off. It's now common knowledge that FDR and JFK both had mistresses while in office, but during the time they were actually in office, not a word was breathed to the press. Think of the uproar there would be if it was leaked that our president today (no matter which person that may be) was contemplating ending a war by dropping atomic bombs over the country we were at war with, and that there was no way to predict what the fall out might be. We'd be outraged! We'd demand that innocent men, women and children not be killed. But that's how we ended the war in the Pacific during WWII and no one in the general public had a clue until it was a done deal. These days any possible skeleton is dragged out and paraded in front of the country should any decent citizen decide to run for office. The mudslinging knows no end, and rumor and innuendo has become accepted as truth. What's the end result? Good upstanding people aren't willing to subject their families and themselves to the harsh treatment and so the only ones who end up running are those who are able to stoop to new lows even as they dodge the mud sent their way.LWW
Years ago, when we didn't have a media that monitored our Their,every move,I think the Nixon tapes was the turn about. The way W runs his office shows a similarity to him.you could have mudslinging, but you'd better be sure you could back up what you said.Pre and post Civil War the thing was to make egregious accusations on Mon and print a retraction on Thurs .... on page 9 FDR and JFK both had mistresses while in office,I forget the exact number but I believe 6 presidents had affairs or hookers while in office. But divorce was death, and we had just one unmarried President.our president today (no matter which person that may be) was contemplating ending a war by dropping atomic bombs uuuh, that was a Declared War, as Commander in Chief he had that right. And he Did take a lot of bad press for months. (speak to a Japanese today, they still hate him)These days any possible skeleton is dragged out and paraded in front of the country should any decent citizen decide to run for office.Which is why I want a Ghandi. Or a priest. Or at least Jesus.innuendo has become accepted as truth. The Power of the Internet? I think they use that old trick, insert a link to the correction on page 9I feel both ways on blogs and the Net. Speed is good and bad, Accuracy is Requiredthose who are able to stoop to new lows even as they dodge the mud sent their way.It's also who has the time and the money as well as experienced liars. My Mayor owns 12 houses and a business. He has done some borderline stuff but got away with it because his opponent had only hearsay, no video. But you are right, only the "select few" even Want to run for office.jC
ocd.........<<all it takes is a majority...>>should have read 'all it takes is a majority of one in the supreme court...'
uuuh, that was a Declared War, as Commander in Chief he had that right. And he Did take a lot of bad press for months. (speak to a Japanese today, they still hate him)I'm not questioning his right as Commander in Chief, and he certainly had bad press afterwards, I'm saying that had the newspapers reported before the fact that he intended to do that, people would not stand for it. LWW
innuendo has become accepted as truth.The Power of the Internet? I think they use that old trick, insert a link to the correction on page 9I feel both ways on blogs and the Net. Speed is good and bad, Accuracy is Required Political Language --Guaranteed Effective All-Occasion Non-Slanderous Political Smear Speech:http://www.mendosa.com/politics.htmlscroll down to a description of the 1950 Florida campaign ~~ Alison
LWW,I'm saying that had the newspapers reported before the fact that he intended to do that, people would not stand for it. Oh. ooops.So suppose we are in a World War with [China?] [Iraq?] and we have txt, phone message, interned etc and we wanted to drop ..... oh a Neutron* bomb. The war is 3 years on, one faction has given up. Six million 'enemy' are still fighting, fiercely. Peace is not likely.You have ONE Week to vote, one vote per person. Vote.jC*Neutron bombs destroy all Life but leave structures intact. The half life of a Neutrino is days, so in 3-4 months it would not be hazardous to life at all.
Allison,Dam that's GOOD!I think if I put that up at work they would make me take it down for obscenity. Or defamation. Or incongruity. Or because they don't f'n understand Engrish!jC
*Neutron bombs destroy all Life but leave structures intact. The half life of a Neutrino is days, so in 3-4 months it would not be hazardous to life at all. I still don't think that people in this country would agree to wiping out all the citizens in a country, just to end a war. It's one thing to wipe out an army, it's another to take out innocent men, women and children. And once the people are wiped out, who would be living in the structures left behind? Keep in mind that when the first atomic bomb was dropped no one knew exactly how well it was going to work or what the fall out would be. I still remember seeing old films of people getting doused with radioactive dust after the "tests" were run in the South Pacific and the American deserts and salt flats. Aren't there still islands in the South Pacific that are no longer inhabitable because of the testing of the atomic bombs? I think I'd have to vote no.LWW
I think I'd have to vote no.I think everyone would. Personally I oppose all wars.But countless presidents, kings, ministers etc have made the choice to send young soldiers to war with the full knowledge that most of them will not come back. And in the action of the war there will be a lot of collateral damage, a euphemism for killing innocent civilians, destroying historic buildings and artifacts and laying waste to the land.Balancing the Greater Good of killing thousands for the sake of millions seems to have some logic, but then you have to realize that thousands died, at your hand.I don't see a need for war. But if the decision is made to war, I follow McCain's idea, go in with sufficient force to overwhelm them quickly and don't leave until the opposition is vanquished. Then get out.We don't fight wars like that anymore. We have idealistic plans that are not well defined so you never know when you have won. So it never ends. jC
We don't fight wars like that anymore. We have idealistic plans that are not well defined so you never know when you have won. So it never ends.I read somewhere that the rules of war changed when we fought the first one in Southeast Asia. Having to fight in jungles and never knowing where your enemy might be hiding, changed the way wars have been fought ever since. The first Gulf war was a get in/hit hard/get out. I think we got spoiled with how well it went. Then when we got into the mess we're in now, the leaders were shocked that it didn't work the same way.Someday, I'd like to see the US not insist on being the watchdog for the world.LWW
The first Gulf war was a get in/hit hard/get out. Ah, but see, that's because Daddy Bush, having actually some knowledge of international politics, unlike Shrub, had a PLAN. There was a clearly defined GOAL (get the Iraqis out of Kuwait). With a clearly defined goal, and nearly unanimous international support, it's easy to get in and out!Shrub never had a real plan or goal or international support.Ishtar
that's GOOD!Glad you enjoyed it! Or because they don't f'n understand Engrish!Did you ever hear about the DC brouhaha over the word "niggardly" some time ago?http://www.adversity.net/special/niggardly.htm ~~ Alison
Shrub never had a real plan or goal or international support.So sad, and yet so true.LWW
Having to fight in jungles and never knowing where your enemy might be hiding, changed the way wars have been fought ever since. Like the American revolutionaries against the British? Four snipers can cause a lot of terror in an organized force and pick up and vanish. Just like they are doing in Iraq with roadside bombs. Rumsfeld had changed the way American troops fought to a quick attack force. It is efficient and effective as Rommel proved in Africa, easy to supply and cheap because you don't need food and shelters as an occupation army does.Really a matter of choosing the correct technique. Air attacks were very effective for factories and do not work on troops. But a single Predator R/C can effectively attack a car convoy successfully.Someday, I'd like to see the US not insist on being the watchdog for the world.That's the WHOLE answer. We $upport different countries for political reasons and interfere with those of idealogical differences. Time to stop wasting millions and pave the roads and educate the kids.jC
the DC brouhaha over the word "niggardly"I got in trouble with my boss for using that word correctly. His ignorance of the language is his own problem.Recently I was called down for using "tar and feathered" because it had a black racial connotation. It does not. I spent a lot of time on google to see it is early Christian, colonist, Irish and religious in origin and was rarely practiced in the South.I get annoyed when PC interferes with intelligent conversation.jC
i got fa'd for using the word niggardly.....i also got fa'd for telling a poster he had a waspish tone.......waspish, as any dictionary will tell you, means 'stinging'....not w.a.s.p.....nanny-fool needs a thesaurus......s.hmm: wonder if this post will sticki........t...oh yeah......a couple of threads back we were using the term:pussyfooting around....i, in my wisdom, separatedthe 2 words...ie: pu--y footing, and was cited for using a badword.what if someone's name was pu--y, or the nickname for richard??.
LOL Sasha!From the time I was 4 yrs old I had a string boyfriends named Richard. Some of them were Dick's, other's were Rich.I know a guy whose last name was Head. He waited for the day a police officer asked him for his full name...Julie
Time to stop wasting millions and pave the roads and educate the kids.You got that right!LWW
You mean like Pu**y Galore from the 007 films, or D1ck Dasterdly from the...dang! I can't remember which show he was on. Maybe a cartoon from the 70s?LWW
Recently I was called down for using "tar and feathered" because it had a black racial connotation. It does not. I spent a lot of time on google to see it is early Christian, colonist, Irish and religious in origin and was rarely practiced in the South.I get annoyed when PC interferes with intelligent conversation.It does make for some interestingly censored conversations. We have a lot of phrases we use in the South that are absolutely not used north of the Mason Dixon as they would have the wrong connotation. And while I'm thinking about it, what's with the gender-biased packaging on Orbit bubblemint gum? My package has a circle with an arrow coming out of it, pointing to the lid flap. Clearly an indication that the gum is male:)LWWway too much time on my hands today
also got fa'd for telling a poster he had a waspish tone......."If I be waspish, best beware my sting!"Katherine, uh, I meanIshtar
lol julie,,,, re yer friend, richard....i too have a friend named ricchard.. richard small. he calls himselfrick because of the way most applications, etc. request the lastname fist.......small rick tends to sound better.
We $upport different countries for political reasons and interfere with those of ideological differences. I'm in the midst of reading Tim Weiner's "Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA" -- Some of what's written just keeps me shaking my head in disbelief. I find some of it pretty frightening too.http://tinyurl.com/6yce5r(link to Amazon) ~~ Alison
Alison Please stop reading about 6 PM. I don.t want you to have bad dreams.jC
Please stop reading about 6 PM. I don.t want you to have bad dreams.Thanks, jC. I guess I'd better not share any excerpts (unless asked, of course!) -- I don't want anyone else to have bad dreams.;^D ~~ Alison