GoldenDogs

Brian,

I don't want to quote and end up with an excessively long post but I disagree with you on Libya. One of the things that both politicians and the media do extremely well is claim what the American people or the public wants, as if they have their finger on the pulse of the entire nation. IA with everyone who says that Libya is not an issue because it's way too complicated. Just like the gun program over which Darrell Issa was intent on destroying Eric Holder. Those issues are way too complex for the average voter.

And I can't believe you take Mitt Romney not "hitting Obama hard on Libya" as telling anything more than his not wanting to get his foot stuck in his mouth, since it went poorly for him the times he did try to make it an issue. The way I saw it yesterday, Mitt Romney was encouraging people to vote early for him in hopes of influencing the media narrative in a way that would make him look like he was winning. I suppose he hopes that will get more voters on his side but that's not the narrative being told as of this moment. It's a far cry from his victory cheer of the prior week. It's his own "Field of Dreams."

I don't know about Michael Moore but how is what the "panicked Liberals" saying any different from their normal criticisms of Mitt Romney? I might have overlooked his campaign rally turned relief effort--whether genuine or not if it weren't so blatantly political. His staff went to Walmart and purchased $5,000 worth of granola bars, etc. to make sure their donation truck look full and they handed bars to attendees to make it seem as if those individuals donated them. That's not bashing--that's revealing.

Not only does Mitt Romney look bad for lying about Jeep and those 15,000 jobs he claims would be shipped to China (as if he's never been part of anything like that himself), but he looks particularly bad for the position he took regarding privatizing FEMA.

Anyone paying attention to this disaster should wonder what would happen to all those people if the only solution they could count on was people donating canned goods and granola bars instead of assistance from the federal government.

All surprisingly cynical from you, Wales...

Rather than argue the merits of all that you have said, I'll sit back and wait and watch to see what happens.

The fact of the matter, however, is that there is no excuse for the so-called mainstream media to sit on this Libya story and barely report on it. The facts are out there... check them out for yourself.

Does anyone care about Oliver Stone (if they ever did)?

The Libya attacks are muddled, which is the likely reason Romney hasn't pursued this. Darrell Issa made it his big beroic quest and ended up answering questions about whether he leaked classified information. McCain decides to turn a relief event into a Libya rant, which is awful PR for Romney.

Oh, Carl... <<sigh>>

Libya is a bigger problem than you want to acknowledge. It isn't muddled. It just isn't being covered by the mainstream press. But people know what happened... they know who to blame. And you know it, my friend.

And it IS news when Liberals eat their own... just like when Conservative devour their own. Nobody cares about Oliver Stone, true. But it is very interesting and newsworthy when Liberals turn on Liberals.

The Obama presidency is a failure... it's no secret. The man tried to do it the Liberal way and he failed. Period. It didn't work. Doesn't make Obama a bad man... it makes him a bad President. If I were a betting man, I'd bet on him losing. But we shall see.

In the meantime... I think you need to pay closer attention, Carl, to these supposed "muddled" stories. I invite you to look deeper into the Benghazi thing... Seriously. And how in the world could this story STILL be muddled? Give me a freakin' break, dude. MUDDLED?

Right... and California's budget woes will all be solved on November 6... <<eyes rolling>>

Again, not too long ago the Republicans were ranting that the polls were a Democratic conspiracy so when they become such fervent believers in polls all of a sudden? LOL! November 6th cannot come soon enough.

I still don't believe the polls, Ann. I believe the accurate numbers are much higher for Romney. Polls where the Democratic sampling is +8 or +9 and Obama is STILL only up by maybe 2 points suggests a major problem for Obama! The independents have broken for Romney in a major way... Obama no longer has an advantage with women - that's gone. A healthy number of Hispanics have broken to Romney.

Then you have the hatespeak from people like moveon.org and Michael Moore... the anger from panicked Liberals. Guys like OLIVER STONE going negative on Obama? Bashing of Romney because he turned a campaign rally into a donation rally for victims of Sandy? Come on... It's over the top. The guy isn't going to campaign against the President in any significant way while the President manages the disaster... the media would crucify him for that! And he knows it.

When you see Obama on the defensive in states like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, etc., that spells trouble. The campaigns each have internal polls that are far more accurate than the crap we're getting from these schlock pollsters... and the Obama campaign people are responding to something concerning while the Romney camp is amazingly confident and comfortable in the stretch.

Oh, and I should add that the fact that Romney isn't hitting Obama hard on Libya is pretty telling. There is some dark stuff with the Libya mess... the Administration has a BIG problem with Libya and it isn't on Romney's radar? That means he doesn't need it... Think about that.

Norm Coleman, former "moderate" senator and veneers pitch person, booted out of office by Al Franken after months of court action, is letting us know that Romney won't go against Roe v Wade. He's lucky this is coming out when no one will be focusing on it, as this will make the social conservatives flip.

http://2012.talkingp...-roe-v-wade.php

Meanwhile, out of nowhere, Bob Kerrey, who was left for dead in the Nebraska Senate race, and will probably still lose, is now only a few points behind Palin-backed GOP nominee Deb Fischer, who has been having big ethical scandals.

http://www.thedailyb...enate-seat.html

http://www.omaha.com.../710289933/1101

Rove is throwing money in so they must be worried.

I'm sorry, Carl... but we're past the tipping point now in this race. I'm with that the polls have been total BS... But we're in opposite corners as to the motives. You believe the mainstream media wishes to keep it close for a good story... I maintain they've kept polls close to keep Obama from totally collapsing ahead of the election so campaign donation dollars would keep flowing. Nobody wants to throw money away on a losing cause.

It was suspected the polls would magically "correct" themselves about a week or so ahead of the general election... and those predictions are likely holding true.

Look, if Mitt Romney wins by a clear and decisive margin... or worse, a blowout... then the mainstream media will, indeed, have some explaining to do. A Romney victory by any measure suggests clear and deliberate manipulation of public opinion polls by the mainstream media and a closer look should be taken as a postmortem on all of this. Of course, the mainstream media has already lost all credibility...

I hope all of our friends who post here who live on the Eastern Seaboard are weathering this nasty storm of the century okay... Hope everyone is safe this morning!

I was half asleep this morning when I confused a couple of posts so I responded about the bank but not about the prescription drugs. I believe people with medical insurance usually have cards issued that identify them and their medical insurance numbers and if they purchase at their carrier's pharmacy then those cards suffice. Drugstore pharmacies may differ from state to state.

As of January 2011, photo identification is required for purchasing over the counter cough medicine in the state of California. I believe they're trying to prevent teens from being able to purchase it for recreational use. Other states may have similar laws.

Yup... I picked some up at Costco pharmacy and was asked for photo ID. Additionally, if I use a credit card and the clerk is doing his/her job, they ask to see photo ID. Happens to me all the time, actually. People who are never asked for photo ID either use cash for all transactions, have zero credit in their name, or purchase everything online.

Let's face it... if you don't some sort of photo ID... WHY? How do you NOT have any verifiable identification? It's absolutely ridiculous to suggest there are some who just absolutely, under any circumstance, secure a simple photo ID. Complete and utter BS. Are you telling me that a government that provides food, education, security, safety, a place to live, etc., can't cough up a simple photo ID?

This Voter ID thing... voter suppression tactics... is a complete and utter load of crap. Lies, lies, lies. And it's not working, friends.

You didn't just compare what Bill Cosby said to Mitt Romney did you? Please rethink that because it's not even close.

Actually, Wales, I didn't. I wasn't referencing Mitt Romney at all here.

"We're coming down to the 11th hour. We're facing a violent storm," Clinton said. He waited a beat, then added, "It's nothing compared to the storm we'll face if you don't make the right decision in this election."

Wow... Clinton making political points while life and property are in danger? WOW. Poor judgement from a guy who knows better... He's smarter than that.

I don't care what people want to call themselves because that's their business. The problem is that everyone else doesn't see it that way and it leads to idiocy such as the sports talk show host on ESPN referring to a Bahamian as an "African-American." He's so bent on being politically correct that he ends up being incorrect period.

I can't even get two people to give me the same meaning of the term. I've read about people getting mad when people from the African continent refer to themselves as such. They claim those Africans have no right because they're not a part of the American slave history. Then I've seen people get mad when all the black people don't want to label themselves as such because who do they think they are.

Je ne sais pas. Confusion must be some sort of glorious state.

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LztZu5s0-QU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Heh... I think I need a drink. ;-)

.

Don't you ever hear any Republicans admit what a poor job they've done with minorities and how they need to change that?

Yeah, I have, actually... It is a perennial election cycle event, when the current Repubican nominee goes to the NAACP convention and offends everyone because nobody wants to hear the popular Bill Cosby version of things that you pointed out earlier in the thread. Or they just don't know what to say or how to say it because of hypersensitive individuals like Ann here in the forum who looks around every corner for a racist.

I have no use for the term "African-American" because it muddies the waters and now I don't know whether you mean only black people, born in America with slave ancestry or everyone and that makes a difference to me because there are black voters who are not connected to America's legacy and don't necessarily believe they've been oppressed or are being oppressed.

I feel stupid, Wales, because I fell into that trap. I have previously posted saying "black" but said "African American" in responding to Ann because SHE used the term and I fell into the "didn't want to offend anyone" trap.

I need to get out of that mindset. And I should know better because the black folks in my life prefer being called "black"... NOT African American because it was explained to me this way: "Brian, I've never been to Africa and neither has anyone in my family." So, I should always default to what I know and not what I THINK someone else WANTS ME to know... LOL!

And why, for some, do we have to have some complicated set of rules regarding what to say or how we say it?

Maybe I'm being naive, but doesn't everyone have an ID in the US? If not how do they identify themselves when getting prescription drugs, or withdrawing money from the bank etc?

Here you can't vote if you can't identify yourself. Before every election we get a voting card, and when you vote you have to bring that card, and a photo ID, otherwise you can't vote.

I remember you posting this fact once before. Do you feel specific groups of people of been targeted in your country by being required to produce a photo ID when voting?

You are correct regarding the need to produce photo ID in the US when withdrawing money at a bank, receiving certain benefits, etc. The arguments against requiring a photo ID to vote in America become more flimsy when all the reason why you MUST have a photo ID are mentioned.

You must have a photo ID to receive healthcare in America - will that remain consistent with Obamacare? With my heath insurance, I must show photo ID every time I go to the doctor or visit a specialist, etc. If we are all to receive free Obamacare, won't we all then be required to have photo ID?

Here in California, those without a Driver Licence can get a California ID card. My son needs to get one... But he didn't have to show photo ID to vote because he already established his identity when he registered for selective service. One of the many ways, as a citizen actually qualified to vote in America, an individual can establish proof of elegibility to vote in every election.

Now Republican's voter suppression laws and tactics are aimed at Hispanics and African Americans.

Ann, you live in a fantasy world and the hate you personally espouse is palpable.

Republicans constantly court votes from Hispanics and African Americans. Those groups are important to any candidate who wishes to get elected by any great majority number. So-called "minority" groups are only told they're victims by Liberals who wish to ensnare them in the trap of dependancy on government... and those that rise above and beyond the limitations put on them by said Libs prove that point.

People are defined not by skin color or ethnicity... I believe they are defined by their dreams and what they wish to achieve in life - the kind of person they are or wish to become. Everyone makes a choice as to the direction their life takes. This notion that the big white racist hand of Republican evil is smothering people of color is old and tired; laughable, really. Ann, you need to find another line of attack. The only group holding back people of color in this day and age is... surprise... people of color.

I must ask... where do you live where the bigotry is so strong that people of varied backgrounds and ethnicities are routinely hobbled? Where in America is it still the early 60's?

Okay... cue the standard "it's happening but much more subtle now" line... I know the argument so well that I can actually argue your side for you.

I know the standard Liberal lines for most arguments... I once played Devil's Advocate to my son when he was searching for clarity on some big issue recently. He was dumbfounded by my "stance" and was certain I had lurched left. I know the game and I've heard the arguments on so many of these hot-button Liberal issues... It's tiresome. And, Ann, your arguments amount to empty rants because you lack substance - it's just always a laundry list of leftist faves without offering anything more. I suppose we're all guilty of it here, particularly when we're just being lazy... but all I see from you is more of the same hatespeak and don't recall ever seeing anything more than that.

But I'm sure you're a pleasant enough person out in the real world, away from the forum. I wish I could meet everyone here at least once. Would be interesting.

It IS true though. Why are these laws coming out in an election year after the Repugs were swept into power into various state houses in 2010? Why are states limiting early voting days? You never heard about widespread voter fraud and suddenly this is a huge issue in a number of states? Does not compute unless you reach the reasonable conclusion that it is being done to keep likely Democratic voters from the polls. They stole Florida in 2000 with the purge and aborted recount there and they are trying to steal even more states this time.

It's interesting how you will read novels and encylopedias into Barack Obama's motivations, Brian, but not for one second question alterior motives about the Voter ID Law trend.

Don't forget that Voter ID laws are not new ideas born out of this election cycle. Efforts to establish such laws the past many years have been stymied by Democrats, sometimes by left-leaning judicial activists. Look, I live in California... I know judicial activism... LOL!

Let's look at the flip-side of this thing. You all will read novels and encylopedias into the motivations of those interested in establishing Voter ID laws... but what of the motives of those who are adamant against the establishment of such laws? All reason goes out the window with conspiracy theories, etc. You have to wonder why it scares the left so much?

Obama, himself, was required to show a picture ID when he voted early. Shouldn't everyone?

The bottom line is that there is no voter fraud so the voter ID laws are pointless bureaucracy designed to keep Democratic voters (minorities, the elderly, the poor and students) from the polls

If you say it enough times, it MUST be true.

Wow, miss a day... miss a lot.

Wales, you speak truth and I appreciate and respect you for it.

Ha, Sununu could never make the Republican ticket. He is of Palestinian and Lebanese descent. He is an Arab-American although I would be surprised if he sees himself as one. I bet his fellow Republicans do and we all know what right wing conservatives call Arabs behind close doors.

Heh...

I appreciate what you offer, Ann... Reminds me, if I were to ever have doubts, that hate exists on both sides of the aisle. Unfortunate to see it rise from those who supposedly belong to the party of tolerance...

I haven't ordered anything since the day before it went into effect but won't rule it out for the future. If they have a significantly lower price including the tax, I will go with them.

One of the L.A. County propositions asks whether or not porn film makers should be required to get a public health license. The Erotica whatever company who wrote the rebuttal of course says that it's not necessary and a waste of money. I'm having a hard time with the idea of county health inspectors visiting porn shooting locations to check up on these people.

The majority of the 11 state propositions were poorly written so while I may have agreed with them, they were not definitive enough and had too much wiggle room. I don't mind comparing.

I can tell you, because I remember these two quite clearly, I am surprisingly okay with keeping the death penalty. People like Charles Manson should never be up for parole and they should have let him die in that gas chamber.

The Three Strikes law absolutely needs to be revised. Not only can there be issues with the first two strikes, but to send a man whose third strike is for stealing a slice of pizza, to prison for life is insane. Yes, he should have known better and is simply dumb but I cannot just shrug my shoulders and shake my head and pretend it's okay to lock people up forever for being stupid.

Oh and I do think it's stupid to have me vote for a list of people of whom I've never heard. Should I go with the nice sounding names or eenie meenie. I ended up with a plastic bag full of pamphlets for the recycling bin. The candidates for representative send at least ten pieces of mail/week accusing each other of various practices.

Is Dianne Feinstein ever going to retire? I don't even know what she does. California loves their old politicians. All you need to do is get elected once and you have a job for life as long as you aren't caught committing crimes....ethics violations--you can worm your way out of those.

100% agreement on everything you said... I believe I hesitantly voted to retain the death penalty in California. Very hesitantly...

My problem with the death penalty ANYWHERE in the country is that it is not consistently or fairly enforced. The fact that Manson is alive (I know why, stupid Rose Bird and friends) gives me pause to put anyone else to death. I don't want to rehash all of the old arguments pro and con... I'll just say that what my have you put down in Texas won't have you put down in California or anywhere, etc. That isn't right... I also know it's complicated and touches upon state's rights, etc., but the death penalty, if retained in any form, should really be consistent from state to state.

Having said that, I know that if I vote to retain it as part of California law, it doesn't matter because no one will ever be put to death in this state again. Kind of a moot point, frankly.

We agree on so much here, I have nothing to argue with you about... LOL! I'm sick of the whole state proposition thing. How many rotten ballot measures have passed in California? Too many to count... I'm wary of any measure that will either raise taxes or cost the state more money. It seems the choices are never made in the state legislature anymore... they hang their hats on ballot measures designed to either spend money the state doesn't have or cost the state money it can't afford to lose.

How 'bout a little leadership from Governor Brown? How about starting over with all new legislators? They all suck... the state is broke, overtaxed and overregulated.

I think I will tackle my ballot today.....or at least read the umpteen propositions on it. My gripe: Los Angeles county has the most unfair property tax assessment in all the land, according to me. I don't know why California is so crowded considering the number of laws they produce that should run people out of the state. My biggest gripe this year is that they finally forced Amazon to start collecting state taxes--which wouldn't be so bad if the state government was even moderately efficient. Our special fuel regulations has gasoline near $5/gallon....I know it could be a lot worse so happy face time

Okay now I feel better....

We live in such a beautiful state, Wales... So many different landscapes, each different yet unique. Given what this state has to offer, it really is a shame it has been run into the ground 10 times over and made to be such an inhospitable place to live. The state legislature is one big massive fail. The governor(s)? All one big massive fail. I realize a governor has limited power unless the legislature plays ball, so I suppose you must give credit where credit is largely due... but still... It's disappointing to see these people routinely throw us all to the wolves.

Since the sales tax mess, I haven't ordered a single thing from Amazon, by the way. Screw 'em. And screw the state. What's sad is that the issue doesn't steer people to local, small business... It drives them fast to Costco, Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, etc., where they look to save every penny. That's where I go. I'm not throwing a dime away... not when my pocket is being picked by Governor Brown. But it will be interesting to see which state propositions pass... We should compare notes on these things to see which way we went.

I think you misunderstand Max. It's not that Obama hasn't governed from the center, since he has (if he is sooo socialist where is the minimum wage increase and protectionism and collective farms and vast expansion of social security and nationalization of healthcare and oil and etc.) That article is simply stating that Romney positioned himself as a centrist in the DEBATE better than Obama did.

I think Romney is to the left of the mainstream Republican party and I would not consider his presidency such a potential disaster if it weren't for the far-right Republicans in the House whose voices I fear would win out in a Romney presidency.

Also reading the past page or so I love the liberal circle jerk that is SON. My other politics msg board is city-data.com and it's mostly conservative... it is fun being the minority but only to a point.

Thank you, thank you, thank you Juppiter! I read some really wild, extreme leftist rants here that make my eyes pop out... Then I come across a post by Wales, Q-Fan... and now you... and I appreciate it. I remember being here posting exactly four years ago and this forum was actually more moderate than it appears to be today. Oh, there were so really huge arguments and partisan rants... but some of the posts I've seen recently, particulary the last couple of days, have been some of the most extreme stuff I've ever seen here.

But I admit I'd be bored at some Conservative Circle Jerk board. I don't want to discuss things with people I agree with... I want to engage in intelligent conversation with those I don't agree with and share ideas. Some of the coolest people I've chatted with on here aren't of the same political persuasion and I'm grateful and happy to have met them... :-) They know who they are...

I say thank you for being down the middle with both men. Some should take your lead.

Amen to that! Wales rocks!!

Interesting comments this morning...

I really think, based on his performance last night, that Obama has lost the presidency. All Romney needed to do was hold firm and steady and not do anything to stem the current tide rising in his favor. He did, in fact, remain steady and did not get trapped on any policy issues. He was flat on foreign policy but not clueless; he demonstrated adequate capability, in my opinion.

This debate was Obama's best. He is consistent and steady. While I didn't feel he was overly aggressive, I did think he was overly defensive - but again not adequately defending his economic policies. This is what I believe will cost him the election. Obama is simply unable to defend his record. And it doesn't matter whether you are a Conservative who thinks the stimulus and Obamacare continue to hobble the economy... or if you are a Liberal who feels Obama didn't go far enough with the stimulus and that Obamacare isn't as all-encompassing as it should be - you just aren't satisfied with what Obama has or has not done.

Polls continue to indicate momentum in Romney's favor and nothing in last night's debate will change that. Unless, of course, some huge surprise comes our way and Gloria Allred produces shocking pictures of Romney at a gay orgy or taking a dump on the hood of somebody's car after a drunken binge... You never know. But without dirty tricks from either side... without some ridiculous nonsense from the media... odds are definitely in Romney's favor at this stage.

Wow, so Candy Crowley corrected herself on CNN after the debate... Romney was CORRECT about Libya? Either way on the Libya thing, it's a problem for Obama because if it WASN'T a terrorist attack, why did the administration deny that for weeks? If he DIDN'T state it was a terrorist attack, then what was Obama's point in the debate? It's a paradox and the only reason Obama got away with it is because he received help from Crowley. No surprise there... but wow.

It was interesting to see how many times Obama hid behind Crowley. To the point where he would actually LOOK to Crowley for help in shutting Romney up, or even interrupting asking to move on. Amazing, especially since the man had almost four minutes more speaking time than Romney.

I think the two were even on substance, Obama wins in bluster. The fact of the matter is that this all boils down to Obama and his record. Can he defend it? Can he defend his economic and energy policies? And how long can he maintain this ruse regarding Libya and foreign policy in general?

The one thing that I criticize Romney for in this debate is that he willingly limped off to his corner after being hushed by both Obama and Crowley. That was a mistake, in my opinion. He interjected a couple of times, one to Biden-like smiling from Obama... he should have done it more often. Nobody knows where you stand on an issue if you aren't heard... he should have insisted. What, Crowley was gonna call in security to lead him out? Come on... Romney should have been as aggressive as Obama, maybe even more so.

Wow, so Hillary Clinton is to blame for what happened in Libya? Guess she wasn't ready for that 3am call...

Or was she?

My question is, does Barack Obama take responsibility for ANYTHING that happens under his watch?

Joe Arpaio keeps saying the birth certificate is a forgery. And obviously it is not overt racism; it is a vast right-wing conspiracy to make Barack Obama "different" from all previous presidents. Which he is different, but it's riding the line so as not to overtly imply that it's because he's black. Instead elected Republican officials and the Republican part of the mainstream media have created the Islam thing and the birther thing as ways to say black without saying black. Dunno, if you watch South Park, but there is an episode where Oprah, Will Smith, etc. move to town. The townspeople say they want the "richers" out, and succeed in getting them out without talking about race the entire episode; at the end Mr. Garrison proclaims, "At least we got rid of those nig--" and it cuts out. It's exactly like that. Of course you're allowed to say his middle name but I don't see people saying "George Walker Bush" or "William Jefferson Clinton" because it sounds weird. Why else would people constantly say Barack Hussein Obama if not to remind people of what his middle name is?

I think it's selective memory on your part to say the health care law was rammed through. It was extremely difficult to get it passed and they ended up having to do a budget maneuver in order to even get the House and Senate to pass the same bills. It's not like they passed Obamacare on day 1 and then ignored the economy for two years. In fact at the time conservatives were even saying the maneuver used to pass Obamacare was illegal -- it was that hard to get ANYTHING passed thru congress at that time. Between the Repugs voting no on everything and filibustering routine bills, it was not an easy time to get bills passed at that time so the "2 years of complete control" is just not true. It had also been 20 years since health care reform was even attempted and it went down in shambles the first time. It was now or never to get any kind of health care legislation enacted and Barack Obama had learned (some of) his lesson from the Hillarycare debacle.

When you say "find a way to control spending rather than figure out additional ways to blow the wad" you're failing to be objective. You have to realize, liberals see increased government spending as a way out of recession. You think the government needs to contain itself even during recession. So there's a fundamental disconnect there. The stimulus was our fiscal policy to contain the recession and achieve recovery. So really, it's not that you don't think Obama did enough for the economy, it's that you think what he did was not the correct solution and made our problems worse.

I'm not making racism a moving target at all. Black people wanting to be represented by one of their own is as valid a reason as any, and causes no harm to the prospects of any white man becoming president. The first black president being railroaded by elected, mainstream Republicans because he "must be a muslim foreigner" is thinly-veiled racism that actively seeks to unite white voters against a foreign entity holding power over them, actively preventing blacks from pursuing further glass ceiling shatterings.

Hey Juppiter...

First of all, I want to apologize for the comment earlier in this conversation where I said, "More crap, Juppiter." That was a disrespectful response to your well-articulated thoughts and was unnecessary.

Rather than line-by-line a response, I will offer something more general. I'm sensitive to the fact that there are some people out there who dislike Obama because he's black. I just want to make it clear that it isn't Republicans or conservatives as a block of people that feel that way... The fact of the matter is that people of all political stripes can carry some type of bigotry with them. I believe to offer up the old, "Well more Republicans do" argument is unfair without offering a disclaimer that it isn't EVERYONE... but some or even a fringe. I recognize some people like Ann here in the forum believe bigotry is part of the expressed Republican platform, interpreting meaning to words or whatever... I speak only for myself and MY interpretation as a registered Republican and I don't believe it or see it that way.

Joe Arpaio is a bulldog. I don't know what proof or evidence he has to back up his claims... we'll never know because, rather than disputing his claims or examining his evidence, he is dismissed. I would think the proper thing would be to discredit him and make him look foolish to revealing his claims to ridiculous... instead, it is covered up, glossed over, and never referred to by the mainstream media. That may be their biggest mistake, in my opinion... If there is no basis for his claims, then blow him out of the water publicly. Just a strategy, in my opinion...

You are right in correcting my statement about Obama's handling (or lack thereof) of the economy... I didn't like his attempt and resolution. Results speak for themselves.

But I stand behind the statement that voting for a person BECAUSE he is black is racism. Is may not be as insidious as cross-burning or denying employment based on color, etc., but it is still a bigoted thing. Why? Because if *I* said I was voting for a white man or woman because I wanted a President who looked like ME, then I would be excluding another based on the factor of race. It doesn't work one way and not the other... People of color can also be bigoted. When I hear a black woman express disapproval of a black man who wishes to be with a white woman, she is exhibiting racism - same as a white man who expresses disapproval of biracial romance. It's racism, period.

Anyway... I appreciate the spirited discussion, Juppiter. :-) I also appreciate the way you share your thoughts with me... You're offering me some things to think about, which is why I like to participate in these types of forums.

Look at all the reasons given today for why Johnny cannot read (short of a real physical or mental disability):

• the textbooks in his school are old, outdated, torn, etc.
  
• he speaks a special language/dialect and should have an ESL class like non-English speaking immigrants
  
• he doesn't have any teachers that look like him
  
• America's slave history has placed him on unequal footing
  

Wales, don't let me get away without commenting on this later... I don't have time right now but I want to add some thoughts to this... Remind me privately or here in the forum so I don't foget... Gotta go for now...

I think the hate among the fringe right for the Obamas is stronger than the disdain they hold for Mormons. But maybe I'm wrong.

I think the hate amongst the fringe/mainstream left is amongst the worst I have ever seen, period. Largely because that type of hate and intolerance is masked behind this supposed "well-meaning" and "love" for others, but often doing, themselves, precisely what they accuse others of doing.