Barack Obama Elected President!

[Roman]

You know, sometimes I sit back and wonder....do the young kids today have it tougher, or was it tougher for me when I went to school?

Sorry to get off-topic.

[Wales2004]

No apology needed....I think it's a very fair question and it's probably a case of in some ways yes and in some ways no.

When I see old programs that show that whole village thing where everyone was involved in everyone else's life and well being it makes me think that they really had the right idea.

We're so detached now that kids are missing more of what I call the human touch and it's evident with the video games and gadgets. Technology is wonderful but the way it brings us together illustrates how detached we've become as a world since it's universal. Kids used to go outside and play with each other and now they go online to play with each other.

[bandbfan]

But I think if you let students dictate teachers (which is what happens if "bad" teachers are fired), there will be an endless stream of teachers. I'm not saying that all teachers in my schools were good, because they weren't. But there were AMAZING ones that just got really lousy kids that didn't give a d*** about education. Is it the teachers fault that these communites are gang infested? Is that the teachers fault that parents don't make the kids come to school? Is it the teachers fault that the parents just want the kids to get by with D's?

[Roman]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200809140003?f=h_top

Discussing "Lipstickgate," Kurtz asked: "Why, exactly, did the mainstream media go hog-wild over a manufactured story that was pushed by the right?"

[Jess]

You know, I don't have a problem with testing of students. I do have a problem with it being used punitively. I think school districts with a high percentage of failing students should receive help from the federal government. They should not fire teachers or cut funding.

I think the problem with No Child Left Behind also is that the federal government isn't paying its share of the costs.

[Jess]

I watched Kurtz on CNN today. he asked some good questions. The reporters all agreed the pig thing was BS.

[Jess]

This is funny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=656Z6gN5-4g

[Greg's GL]

Man, it looks like I missed quite a bit over the weekend....

Actually, I think the links are quite useful, regardless of whom is posting them. And not all of them are from "liberal" blogs, btw. Oh, that's right....unless we post a link to FAUX News then it's a "liberal" source. I got it now.

Nah. Nothing could be worse than 2000 when Bush was chosen to be the next President. He certainly wasn't elected. The Repubs made such a big deal of Clinton not winning the majority of the vote in 92 but didn't make a peep in 2000 when Bush became the first appointed POTUS.

I guess Cindy is peeved off at Babs & Co:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

This was the first time that McCain had to answer real questions about the issues and the positions he has taken with his campaign. And now the crying starts. Aren't Repubs supposed to be the "tough" ones? Funny when given a taste of their own medicine, they start whining.

I don't recall Obama making any fuss over the way Bill O'Reilly was asking him questions. Hmmm.

[Greg's GL]

This is an interesting item from Face The Nation yesterday:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/14/...in4448077.shtml

And yes, I know it's a Dem arguing against a Repub, so take of it what you will. However, there are other voices heard supporting her such as Kay Hutchison.

There is a good point to be made here. Even though SP is a female, there isn't much discussion of women's issues thus far in this campaign. The only one that staked a claim in this arena is Obama, stating several times that he supports equal pay for equal work.

What is McCain's position on this? Since the media is shouting from the rooftops that white women now are supporting McCain, how would this affect this support?

I can't imagine a Democratic, socially liberal woman all of sudden switching to McCain simply because he has chosen SP. Just as much as I couldn't see a Republican socially conservative African American voting for Obama simply because he's black.

[JackPeyton]

Again, just proves that hypocrisy runs both ways.

[Roman]

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/200...mpaign-tactics/

Obama, Biden Declare War

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26709927/

Wall Street scrambles as Lehman, Merrill falter

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/

First Read

[Jess]

The Lehman, Merrill articles are terrifying. I think America is in for a really tough time economically. I would very much like for BOTH presidential candidates to get serious about this.

[Roman]

Hopefully they can, once the bullshit is left behind. I heard this morning that there are insurance caps on money people have in these institutions. Anything over $100,000 and over $500,000 for investment firms could have been or either was lost.

Shameful.

[Jess]

Both of them are huge in retirement accounts.

[Wales2004]

What does hypocrisy running both ways have to do with anything unless you're under the impression that supporters of one candidate think such candidate is a saint and the other is not?

If supporters of McCain think he's full of straight talk and is the answer to the country's problems does hypocrisy matter then?

Are all lies equivalent? If a kid lies about breaking a window would you consider that the same thing as a kid lying about being drunk and hitting a pedestrian while driving?

I don't even get the significance of what Obama said in 2004 versus his making a decision in 2006/2007 since it's not even an indication of hypocrisy as much as it is an indication of his arriving at a point where he felt comfortable enough to run. What you're indicating is that if a person at one point said I don't think I'm qualified to do such and such but then gains whatever knowledge he/she feels is needed in a year or more span of time the person has no righ to change his/her mind and move forward. That tp me is a lot different than a person making such a statement and then turning around in a matter of days or a couple of months backtracking.

It is also different from someone standing around launching accusations about that which he/she is guilty, at the time they're launching accusations.....especially without acknowledging his/her guilt.

And is it possible that Jimmy Carter thinks differently since there's a difference between someone not thinking something and someone making a declarative statement as in he definitely doesn't?