Change of pace: this would never happen today. I am going to guess this is 1973

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qWey8dVXG7c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

OMG, I'm a dumbass! Sorry, Wales! I got confused when I typed it... I meant to write your name down.

Seriously, this is what happens with limited sleep for two weeks. It's like when you are reading something and you say what you are reading as opposed to what you are thinking. Or is that the other way around...

Can you forgive my stupidity???

So, where is leave us is... maybe we're so far apart on politics that we are bumping into each other on the other side!

Eh, seriously... you're kind of cool and I enjoy reading your stuff, even when I don't agree. We'd probably get along pretty good in the real world. We obviously don't disagree on EVERYTHING... ;-)

This is how I feel right now minus the Coke

Republicans do not want a national system. It would take the ability to manipulate and suppress the vote of a segment of the population in specific states out of their hands. This is why they keep trotting out the few instances where voter fraud occurs, to try to bolster their lie that it is widespread when the evidence indicates otherwise.

Right. Voter fraud is not a problem -- but it theoretically could be, and that should be prevented. A national ID system like several European countries would solve it. What won't solve it is these state-by-state laws in an election year that are beng implemented to suppress likely Democratic voters.

Sorry. I didn't get a name since...

• He called me that in the library when I was seven. (That was the first time I'd ever been called that.)
  
• She said that to me at the mall when I was eight and throwing coins into the fountain
  
• He told me that the neighborhood pool was closed to "N-words" when I was ten
  
• He was a friend of mine in high school and said he considered Budweiser "N-word beer"
  
• She took me to a party sophomore year where the guy she liked to me not to N*****lip the cigarette
  
• When I talked to my friend for high school about his roommates he called one a "sand n*****" because he was Muslim.
  

I was the only black girl out of a high school class of 525. I had that word yelled at me in the hallways and screamed at me on the bus. My brother was called that word when he was working a temp job. My father, an engineer who worked for for [!@#$%^&*] NASA, got called that name by a coworker.

Anybody who thinks that all those people became fair, open-minded individuals the day Obama got elected is an idiot.

Any other questions?

I was just asking a question.

Conservative groups using imaginary and manufactured voter fraud as a strategy to suppress the vote: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/us/politics/groups-like-true-the-vote-are-looking-very-closely-for-voter-fraud.html?_r=1&hp&gwh=BD5D4BD314A8D3AD0A35617B43F97144

Conservative groups using imaginary and manufactured voter fraud as a strategy to suppress the vote: http://www.nytimes.c...A35617B43F97144

*Yawn*

The drumbeat grows weary. The fantasy of suppressing votes... the excuses as to why individuals can't get legal ID...

Honestly, Ann, the argument is getting old. There is absolutely no reason why an individual must present legal photo ID to get hired for a job, to claim any variety of government benefits, or do business at the bank or store... but NOT be required to do so to vote. Give me a freakin' break. After Bush/Gore, I can't even BELIEVE that liberals wouldn't want to ensure that all legitimate votes are counted!

As for the rush to pass laws before the election, making the desire to have voter ID in place before November -- it's straw man! The painful truth is that the move to make this all happen is more than 10 years in the making and constant court challenges by liberal groups, including the ACLU, and activist judges have blocked attempts to make presenting legal ID to vote a law.

As Romney goes through yet another revamp the media can swoon over, here's a look at the huge mess surrounding his RNC speech planning.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81280.html?hp=t1

As Romney goes through yet another revamp the media can swoon over, here's a look at the huge mess surrounding his RNC speech planning.

http://www.politico....1280.html?hp=t1

I read this article and a lot of if does not ring true. It certainly seems to be at odds with some of the insider articles about the well organized machine written earliear in Romney's campaign. It strikes me as one of those scapegoating articles that pops up just before the trailing Presidential candidate loses. Everyone in the campaign is looking for other work because they see the tell tale signs that they won't be working in the White House. They don't want to be painted with the loser brush so they are all pointing fingers away from them and at the most convenient target, the unpopular Stevens in this case.

Edited September 17, 201213 yr by Ann_SS

If Romney wins president I think I might move to Canada. Given his stance on rape and women's rights in general, I am baffled why any woman would want to vote for him. He's so going to set women's rights back like 100 yrs if he wins.

I'm not saying I'm all for Obama but speaking he truly is the "lesser of two evils"

Edited September 17, 201213 yr by dragonflies

Yeah but the reason stereotypes exist is because they make it easier for some people to make sense of the world.

But come on, how does it make sense of the world believing that Obama beat Hillary because the majority of Democrats hate women more than they hate black men or that Obama won the election because whites must hate white men more than black men or because of so called white guilt? I never thought there would be an African American President in my lifetime or ever really, but hearing these explanations for his victory totally blow me away.

If Romney wins president I think I might move to Canada. Given his stance on rape and women's rights in general, I am baffled why any woman would want to vote for him. He's so going to set women's rights back like 100 yrs if he wins.

This is exactly why you stay here and fight with the rest of us for rights of women, poor, disabled, and our fellow citizens who do not have a voice. I am never giving over my country to these right wing conservatives with their anti-woman, anti-diversity, and warmongering beliefs.

Edited September 17, 201213 yr by Ann_SS

But come on, how does it make sense of the world believing that Obama beat Hillary because the majority of Democrats hate women more than they hate black men or that Obama won the election because whites must hate white men more than black men or because of so called white guilt? I never thought there would be an African American President in my lifetime or ever really, but hearing these explanations for his victory totally blow me

I want to know who said democrats hated either Hilary or Obama. That's like saying folks hated Elizabeth Dole because she wasn't nominated as a republican nominee when she ran..

All it says is our society is less ready to have a woman as a leader than an African American male. And perhaps if Hilary didn't come across as polarizing(and I like her) and the Clinton baggage had passed, she might have been a more fominitable opponent. Time heals all wounds as is evidenced by the fact the democratic party are back to embracing the Clintons, which hasn't been the case for a long time.

All it says is our society is less ready to have a woman as a leader than an African American male.

I just don't buy that Hillary lost because our society is less ready to have a woman leader. I think she was poor candidate who struggled to convey her ideas and failed to inspire enough support. Politicians have to persuade people to vote for them, it is not just enough to show up. I am not the biggest Obama fan, but I can see why he won; a combination of him being a strong campaigner, good orator, and a struggling economy.

As Romney goes through yet another revamp the media can swoon over, here's a look at the huge mess surrounding his RNC speech planning.

http://www.politico....1280.html?hp=t1

Exactly which media are you referring to, Carl? This fantasy that the media is having a love affair with Romney is laughable. They spent the better part of last week crucifying him for criticizing the President's botched middle eastern foreign policy - instead of focusing on the botched foreign policy that resulted in the mess we have over there now.

Is this the same media that continues to blame some rotten YouTube video for radicals gone wild? Is this the same media that fails to focus on contradictory statements coming from the White House regarding whether or not Egypt is actually an ally? Or perhaps it's the same media is glosses over the fact that we have just experienced the first terrorist attack against Americans on American property since 9/11 - all under Obama's watch?

I just don't buy that Hillary lost because our society is less ready to have a woman leader. I think she was poor candidate who struggled to convey her ideas and failed to inspire enough support. Politicians have to persuade people to vote for them, it is not just enough to show up. I am not the biggest Obama fan, but I can see why he won; a combination of him being a strong campaigner, good orator, and a struggling economy.

Im going based on stats, and in the US for example, women still struggle to get recognition over men, examples, look at how many women are CEOs or executives across the workforce, to who has influence in the entertainment industry, etc. Women represent over 50 percent of the population but when you look at leadership in various facets of our society, it's no where near equal. I'd call that as great an imbalance as any minority has had to deal with to date.

I don't know where anyone is saying Obama didn't run a better campaign and that the time wasn't ripe for his candidacy. Not everything is about hating the opposition, sometimes someone just does a better job. And I still say if Hilary was a man the rules wold have been completely different for her.

Edited September 17, 201213 yr by JaneAusten

Exactly which media are you referring to, Carl? This fantasy that the media is having a love affair with Romney is laughable. They spent the better part of last week crucifying him for criticizing the President's botched middle eastern foreign policy - instead of focusing on the botched foreign policy that resulted in the mess we have over there now.

Is this the same media that continues to blame some rotten YouTube video for radicals gone wild? Is this the same media that fails to focus on contradictory statements coming from the White House regarding whether or not Egypt is actually an ally? Or perhaps it's the same media is glosses over the fact that we have just experienced the first terrorist attack against Americans on American property since 9/11 - all under Obama's watch?

I know that the liberal media does not love him but that doesn't stop some of them from letting him dance around direct questions.

I can't recall ever hearing a president be blamed for acts of terrorism. Even when Osama Bin Laden wasn't pursued when Bill Clinton was in office (after that initial attack on the World Trade Center) and the attacks on 9/11 took place, I didn't hear anyone suggest that it was Bill Clinton's fault for not having Osama Bin Laden captured nor did anyone blame George W. Bush for it being under his watch.

I would like to know what botched foreign policy Barack Obama has in place that has resulted in what's been taking place in certain nations overseas. Please enlighten me.