ot- obama, hillary, the media

i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count. anyway, i get my
news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
just wondering who you democrats are supporting?

also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
i am.

On Feb 28, 8:26*am, ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:

> i am not intensely following the primary action. *i'm still pissed
> that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count. *anyway, *i get my
> news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
> just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
>
> also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
> it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
> type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
> that i had seen. *any thoughts on that? *especially interested in
> hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
> i am.


No, it's not your imagination. The media's treatment of her has been
disgraceful.

From what I understand, when Bill Clinton was in office, they were not
friendly with the media, so now it's time for the media's revenge.

It's so sad to see what they're doing to her.

It is so blatant that Saturday Night Live even did a skit on it
showing the favoritism shown to Obama and the dirt done to Hillary.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/77752/

On Feb 28, 6:52 pm, marcy <ngtybtn...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 28, 8:26 am, ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
> > that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count. anyway, i get my
> > news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
> > just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
>
> > also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
> > it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
> > type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
> > that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
> > hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
> > i am.
>
> No, it's not your imagination. The media's treatment of her has been
> disgraceful.
>
> From what I understand, when Bill Clinton was in office, they were not
> friendly with the media, so now it's time for the media's revenge.
>
> It's so sad to see what they're doing to her.
>
> It is so blatant that Saturday Night Live even did a skit on it
> showing the favoritism shown to Obama and the dirt done to Hillary.
>
> http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/77752/

marcy, i think i was deleting my original as you were posting your
reply. i didn't want to offend anyone in the group by diving into
political waters. but i really appreciate your response & your
perspective on this. it is always interesting to me how much the media
can frame opinions & influence people. on the daily show last evening
they ran a bit making fun of clinton for charging media bias, but from
the limited amount of things i have seen, it really seemed to me that
there was obvious slanting going on. which happens all of the time,
of course.

marcy wrote the following on 2/28/2008 6:52 PM:

> It is so blatant that Saturday Night Live even did a skit on it
> showing the favoritism shown to Obama and the dirt done to Hillary.
>
> http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/77752/

That link appears to have been changed to
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/election08/77752/

Karen R.

"ellen" <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c24f068a-87c0-4c50-913e-8f7c2eec1dc3@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
> that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count.
---------------
They *shouldn't* count, since only one person's name was on the ballot.
That's bullshit. It wasn't a fair contest. Nobody bothers with write-in
votes.
-----------------
anyway, i get my
> news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
> just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
--------------
I'm supporting the person who can actually get elected--Barack Obama.
----------------
> also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
> it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
> type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
> that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
> hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
> i am.
------------------
She's digging her own grave with all this whining, IMO. How is this woman
going to lead an army? She can't even control her own husband. She ought
to get the hell out of the way and let Obama unite the Democratic Party and
lead us to victory. If they nominate her, they might as well hand the
country over to McCain and prepare for 100 more years of war and financial
ruin. Too many people (including me, as you may have discerned) hate her
and will not vote for her no matter how loyal to the party they are. I
didn't start off hating her, but I do now, because of her atrocious
spoiled-brat behavior during the campaign....and plus, I don't want that
sleazeball Bill Clinton anywhere *near* the goddamn White House.

Eva

I voted for Hillary in the Primaries. I like both candidates and don't have
any negative feelings toward either of them. I just like Hillary's
experience...however that said, if she should loose ,I will be voting for
Obama...After all it is about getting a Democrat into the White House. We
are very lucky this time around to have two good candidates running for my
party Hateful and Negative Feelings to not help the party band
together..which we really need to do to keep the Republicans out of office.
Jacquie...climbing off soapbox...

"ellen" <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c24f068a-87c0-4c50-913e-8f7c2eec1dc3@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count. anyway, i get my
news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
just wondering who you democrats are supporting?

also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
i am.

"jacquie" <happikat694@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:13set59b0kbs1ce@corp.supernews.com...
>I voted for Hillary in the Primaries. I like both candidates and don't have
> any negative feelings toward either of them. I just like Hillary's
> experience...however that said, if she should loose ,I will be voting for
> Obama...After all it is about getting a Democrat into the White House. We
> are very lucky this time around to have two good candidates running for my
> party Hateful and Negative Feelings to not help the party band
> together..which we really need to do to keep the Republicans out of
> office.
> Jacquie...climbing off soapbox...

Yep, same here, on all counts.

Cathy


>
> "ellen" <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c24f068a-87c0-4c50-913e-8f7c2eec1dc3@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
> that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count. anyway, i get my
> news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
> just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
>
> also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
> it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
> type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
> that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
> hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
> i am.
>
>

On Feb 28, 9:36 pm, "Eva" <EvaDStructio...@NOverizon.net> wrote:
> "ellen" <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c24f068a-87c0-4c50-913e-8f7c2eec1dc3@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...>i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
> > that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count.
>
> ---------------
> They *shouldn't* count, since only one person's name was on the ballot.
> That's bullshit. It wasn't a fair contest. Nobody bothers with write-in
> votes.

what i meant was - as a voter i was disenfranchised.

"Cathy F." <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote in message
news:0LadnRAcuuXuHVraRVn_vwA@giganews.com...
>
> "jacquie" <happikat694@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:13set59b0kbs1ce@corp.supernews.com...
>>I voted for Hillary in the Primaries. I like both candidates and don't
>>have
>> any negative feelings toward either of them. I just like Hillary's
>> experience...however that said, if she should loose ,I will be voting for
>> Obama...After all it is about getting a Democrat into the White House. We
>> are very lucky this time around to have two good candidates running for
>> my
>> party Hateful and Negative Feelings to not help the party band
>> together..which we really need to do to keep the Republicans out of
>> office.
>> Jacquie...climbing off soapbox...
>
> Yep, same here, on all counts.

Oops - not on one count: I didn't vote in the NYS Primary. Am on the fence
re: Hillary & Obama - I'm happy with either one winding up as the nominee,
for different reasons. And one other count, too, come to think of it: I
think Hillary has more in-depth background knowledge, but some Americans
absolutely hate her, so she could prove to be divisive without even trying.
Whereas I think Obama can work re: cohesion, but doesn't have the broad base
of knowledge she's been able to glean over the years.

Cathy

On Feb 28, 8:57*pm, "jacquie" <happikat...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> I voted for Hillary in the Primaries. I like both candidates and don't have
> any negative feelings toward either of them. I just like Hillary's
> experience...however that said, if she should loose ,I will be voting for
> Obama...After all it is about getting a Democrat into the White House. We
> are very lucky this time around to have two good candidates running for my
> party Hateful and Negative Feelings to not help the party band
> together..which we really need to do to keep the Republicans out of office..
> Jacquie...climbing off soapbox...


I agree - I voted for Hillary in the Primaries, but will vote for
whichever Democrat gets nominated.

We not only need to keep the Republicans out of office, but we need to
protect the Supreme Court (from anymore Republican appointed, right-
wing judges) .

"marcy" <ngtybtnice@aol.com> wrote in message
news:5c102f14-06c1-4eb9-8f69-eec78462b2a3@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 28, 8:26 am, ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:

> i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
> that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count. anyway, i get my
> news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
> just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
>
> also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
> it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
> type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
> that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
> hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
> i am.


No, it's not your imagination. The media's treatment of her has been
disgraceful.

From what I understand, when Bill Clinton was in office, they were not
friendly with the media, so now it's time for the media's revenge.

It's so sad to see what they're doing to her.

It is so blatant that Saturday Night Live even did a skit on it
showing the favoritism shown to Obama and the dirt done to Hillary.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/77752/


Only one comment, because I can't resist. Media treatment of Hillary
throughout 2007 was akin to a coronation. Now it's reversed, and it's as
if everyone's forgotten the she was the assumed nominee for 11 months.

"Peahen" <Peahen1955@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fq9ag0$e2$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> "marcy" <ngtybtnice@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:5c102f14-06c1-4eb9-8f69-eec78462b2a3@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 28, 8:26 am, ellen <epdps...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
>> that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count. anyway, i get my
>> news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
>> just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
>>
>> also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
>> it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
>> type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
>> that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
>> hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
>> i am.
>
>
> No, it's not your imagination. The media's treatment of her has been
> disgraceful.
>
> From what I understand, when Bill Clinton was in office, they were not
> friendly with the media, so now it's time for the media's revenge.
>
> It's so sad to see what they're doing to her.
>
> It is so blatant that Saturday Night Live even did a skit on it
> showing the favoritism shown to Obama and the dirt done to Hillary.
>
> http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/77752/
>
>
> Only one comment, because I can't resist. Media treatment of Hillary
> throughout 2007 was akin to a coronation. Now it's reversed, and it's as
> if everyone's forgotten the she was the assumed nominee for 11 months.
>
>
>
>
Hmmm, don't know why marcy's post wasn't indented. The last paragraph was
mine.

Peahen

Eva wrote:
> "ellen" <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c24f068a-87c0-4c50-913e-8f7c2eec1dc3@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>> i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
>> that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count.
> ---------------
> They *shouldn't* count, since only one person's name was on the ballot.
> That's bullshit. It wasn't a fair contest. Nobody bothers with write-in
> votes.
> -----------------
> anyway, i get my
>> news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
>> just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
> --------------
> I'm supporting the person who can actually get elected--Barack Obama.
> ----------------
>> also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
>> it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
>> type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
>> that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
>> hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
>> i am.
> ------------------
> She's digging her own grave with all this whining, IMO. How is this woman
> going to lead an army? She can't even control her own husband. She ought
> to get the hell out of the way and let Obama unite the Democratic Party and
> lead us to victory. If they nominate her, they might as well hand the
> country over to McCain and prepare for 100 more years of war and financial
> ruin. Too many people (including me, as you may have discerned) hate her
> and will not vote for her no matter how loyal to the party they are. I
> didn't start off hating her, but I do now, because of her atrocious
> spoiled-brat behavior during the campaign....and plus, I don't want that
> sleazeball Bill Clinton anywhere *near* the goddamn White House.
>
> Eva
>

8~) I wasn't in her camp even early on, because i don't think
her health care plan is the best, and because i've never thought
she was electable either. Too many people dislike her and Bill.
Her brat behavior has only made it worse. What it says to me
is that she is out of touch with the US citzenry and is relying on
campaign tacticians who are f-ing IDiots to make tactical
decisions for her. Not good.

But i have to laugh at the idea of women controlling their husbands!
If you find a way for women to do that, you can market it and
make a fortune ... and p-l-e-e-e-e-e-e-a-s-e notify me when the
IPO will be !!


--
pax,
ruth


Save trees AND money! Buy used books!
http://stores.ebay.com/Noir-and-More-Books-and-Trains

nickelshrink wrote:

> 8~) I wasn't in her camp even early on, because i don't think
> her health care plan is the best, and because i've never thought
> she was electable either. Too many people dislike her and Bill.
> Her brat behavior has only made it worse. What it says to me
> is that she is out of touch with the US citzenry and is relying on
> campaign tacticians who are f-ing IDiots to make tactical
> decisions for her. Not good.
>
> But i have to laugh at the idea of women controlling their husbands!
> If you find a way for women to do that, you can market it and
> make a fortune ... and p-l-e-e-e-e-e-e-a-s-e notify me when the
> IPO will be !!

I've tried very hard to warm up to H. Clinton - I'd love to see a
woman elected President in my lifetime. She's a strong woman
with political ideals that align pretty well with my own. But
the ideals are at variance with what she does, at times.

She undercuts her credibility by claiming things like 35 years of
experience. I'm near her age, and I have 35 years of experience
too... sure, she was _in_ the White House, but she wasn't holding
the reins (afaik). I'd credit her with a couple of years of
relevant experience there due to her exposure to Things of Power,
and another seven in the Senate - and that doesn't add up to
anywhere near 35. And I can't believe that she thinks that people
will buy 35 when she says it. (Then again, the whole tenor of
American Politics seems to have become, "If I say it often
enough, they will believe it." Works for the Republicans, why
not for the Democrats?) She also undercuts her credibility by
blaming some of the slurs on Obama on people in her campaign. If
she didn't know about it, she still has some responsibility
because she sets the tone.

And I think the Republicans want to see Hillary get the
nomination, and that scares me; it implies that they believe she
is defeatable.

"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" - no, I don't think I'll be
voting for McCain.

So I'm pulling for Obama. Of course, if my past history is any
clue, if he wins, I'll hate him after a year or so in office.

FurPaw

--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

"marcy" <ngtybtnice@aol.com> wrote in message
news:adccb4bd-75ee-4c8a-b9a0-f9c42d906789@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 28, 8:57 pm, "jacquie" <happikat...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> I voted for Hillary in the Primaries. I like both candidates and don't
> have
> any negative feelings toward either of them. I just like Hillary's
> experience...however that said, if she should loose ,I will be voting for
> Obama...After all it is about getting a Democrat into the White House. We
> are very lucky this time around to have two good candidates running for my
> party Hateful and Negative Feelings to not help the party band
> together..which we really need to do to keep the Republicans out of
> office.
> Jacquie...climbing off soapbox...


I agree - I voted for Hillary in the Primaries, but will vote for
whichever Democrat gets nominated.

We not only need to keep the Republicans out of office, but we need to
protect the Supreme Court (from anymore Republican appointed, right-
wing judges) .

Amen to this last bit! Scary! (IMO.)

Cathy

Fixing the post so it shows up more accurately - as to who said what...


"Cathy F." <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote in message
news:vM6dnVUaF4icBlXa4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
>
> "marcy" <ngtybtnice@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:adccb4bd-75ee-4c8a-b9a0-f9c42d906789@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 28, 8:57 pm, "jacquie" <happikat...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> I voted for Hillary in the Primaries. I like both candidates and don't
>> have
>> any negative feelings toward either of them. I just like Hillary's
>> experience...however that said, if she should loose ,I will be voting for
>> Obama...After all it is about getting a Democrat into the White House. We
>> are very lucky this time around to have two good candidates running for
>> my
>> party Hateful and Negative Feelings to not help the party band
>> together..which we really need to do to keep the Republicans out of
>> office.
>> Jacquie...climbing off soapbox...
>
>
> I agree - I voted for Hillary in the Primaries, but will vote for
> whichever Democrat gets nominated.
>
> We not only need to keep the Republicans out of office, but we need to
> protect the Supreme Court (from anymore Republican appointed, right-
> wing judges) .
> ------------------------------

Amen to this last bit! Scary! (IMO.)

Cathy

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:36:17 GMT, "Eva"
<EvaDStructionNO@NOverizon.net> wrote:

>
>"ellen" <epdpster@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:c24f068a-87c0-4c50-913e-8f7c2eec1dc3@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>i am not intensely following the primary action. i'm still pissed
>> that our democratic votes in michigan didn't count.
>---------------
>They *shouldn't* count, since only one person's name was on the ballot.
>That's bullshit. It wasn't a fair contest. Nobody bothers with write-in
>votes.
>-----------------
>anyway, i get my
>> news from a variety of sources & i've caught some of the debates.
>> just wondering who you democrats are supporting?
>--------------
>I'm supporting the person who can actually get elected--Barack Obama.
>----------------
>> also, it may be my imagination, but even before clinton griped about
>> it recently, i thought that the media was jamming her based on the
>> type of headlines, quick snippets, question handling during debates
>> that i had seen. any thoughts on that? especially interested in
>> hearing from those of you who have been following it more closely than
>> i am.
>------------------
>She's digging her own grave with all this whining, IMO. How is this woman
>going to lead an army? She can't even control her own husband. She ought
>to get the hell out of the way and let Obama unite the Democratic Party and
>lead us to victory. If they nominate her, they might as well hand the
>country over to McCain and prepare for 100 more years of war and financial
>ruin. Too many people (including me, as you may have discerned) hate her
>and will not vote for her no matter how loyal to the party they are. I
>didn't start off hating her, but I do now, because of her atrocious
>spoiled-brat behavior during the campaign....and plus, I don't want that
>sleazeball Bill Clinton anywhere *near* the goddamn White House.

You don't fote for people because of the plans they have for the
natiom? The impression is given that Amaricans fote for a person not
fot his/her plans. ( not by Eva but by the Dutch media)

R

Ratatosk, Jola

--

If you need to e-mail me, replace "don'tbother" with "zedicus"

x-no-archive: yes

ratatosk wrote:

> You don't fote for people because of the plans they have for the
> natiom? The impression is given that Amaricans fote for a person not
> fot his/her plans. ( not by Eva but by the Dutch media)
>


Unfortunately, most Americans vote based upon their visceral reaction to
the candidates and not based upon his/her proposed solutions and policies.

I'd hold my nose to do it, but I'd vote for Bill Clinton again for
president if I could, even though I agree he's a sleaze. I've never
forgiven him for allowing the execution of Ricky Rechter.

Clinton's the smartest, hardest working sleaze we've ever had in the
White House, and sleaze is a given with politicians, IMO. I'd rather it
be personal, not political sleaze.

Susan

"Susan" <nevermind@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:62rolnF24kqeoU1@mid.individual.net...
> x-no-archive: yes
<snipped>
> Clinton's the smartest, hardest working sleaze we've ever had in the White
> House, and sleaze is a given with politicians, IMO. I'd rather it be
> personal, not political sleaze.

Hear, hear!

Cathy


>
> Susan

"nickelshrink" <nickelshrink@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:62reevF24bd9cU1@mid.individual.net...
> Eva wrote:

>> ....How is this woman going to lead an army? She can't even control her
>> own husband.....
>
> ....But i have to laugh at the idea of women controlling their husbands!
> If you find a way for women to do that, you can market it and
> make a fortune ... and p-l-e-e-e-e-e-e-a-s-e notify me when the
> IPO will be !!
--------
I have no clue; I've been divorced twice.

One was an abusive dope fiend and one was just a nut job, but neither one of
them cheated on me. (Too bad they didn't--I would have divorced them
quicker and saved myself a lot of grief and pain.)

Now at age 60 I'm contemplating, I say contemplating, the possibility of
getting married again. I can't "control" J.B., nor would I want to, but I'm
fairly sure he will never publicly humiliate me with the likes of a Gennifer
Flowers. And that's really what I meant.

Eva

"ratatosk" <ratatosk@don'tbother.tweakdsl.nl> wrote in message
news:n89hs3pg5ftmemviph4lbfvnjncpkc2dm9@4ax.com...

>
> You don't fote for people because of the plans they have for the
> natiom? The impression is given that Amaricans fote for a person not
> fot his/her plans. ( not by Eva but by the Dutch media)
--------------
Well, their plans for the nation are always somewhat grandiose, and we all
know that 98% of those plans won't pass the legislature anyhow. So we take
their "platforms" with a big grain of salt. These are their ideals, not
what will actually happen during their term of office.

Eva

Eva wrote:

> Now at age 60 I'm contemplating, I say contemplating, the possibility of
> getting married again. I can't "control" J.B., nor would I want to,

Really!!!! Now that's way cool! Even if you don't get married
again, He's always sounded like a keeper, especially when he
stuck with you through your BC and treatment.

FurPaw

--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

"Eva" <EvaDStructionNO@NOverizon.net> wrote in message
news:Pr3yj.28$H%3.5@trndny01...
>
> "nickelshrink" <nickelshrink@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:62reevF24bd9cU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Eva wrote:
>
>>> ....How is this woman going to lead an army? She can't even control her
>>> own husband.....
>>
>> ....But i have to laugh at the idea of women controlling their husbands!
>> If you find a way for women to do that, you can market it and
>> make a fortune ... and p-l-e-e-e-e-e-e-a-s-e notify me when the
>> IPO will be !!
> --------
> I have no clue; I've been divorced twice.
>
> One was an abusive dope fiend and one was just a nut job, but neither one
> of them cheated on me. (Too bad they didn't--I would have divorced them
> quicker and saved myself a lot of grief and pain.)
>
> Now at age 60 I'm contemplating, I say contemplating, the possibility of
> getting married again. I can't "control" J.B., nor would I want to,

:-) and ;-)

How long have you been together now? Several years? No matter what you
wind up deciding re: your relationship status, he's pretty well time-tested
by now, at any rate. :-)

Cathy



but I'm
> fairly sure he will never publicly humiliate me with the likes of a
> Gennifer Flowers. And that's really what I meant.
>
> Eva
>

"FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote in message
news:qLedneKrIv_BVVXanZ2dnUVZ_t7inZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Eva wrote:
>
>> Now at age 60 I'm contemplating, I say contemplating, the possibility of
>> getting married again. I can't "control" J.B., nor would I want to,
>
> Really!!!! Now that's way cool! Even if you don't get married again,
> He's always sounded like a keeper, especially when he stuck with you
> through your BC and treatment.

Agreed!!!

Cathy

"Cathy F." <clfrclfr@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote in message
news:BtWdncxtFa6rUFXa4p2dnAA@giganews.com...
>
> "FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote in message
> news:qLedneKrIv_BVVXanZ2dnUVZ_t7inZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Eva wrote:
>>
>>> Now at age 60 I'm contemplating, I say contemplating, the possibility of
>>> getting married again. I can't "control" J.B., nor would I want to,
>>
>> Really!!!! Now that's way cool! Even if you don't get married again,
>> He's always sounded like a keeper, especially when he stuck with you
>> through your BC and treatment.
>
> Agreed!!!
------------------
Yes, that was what made me reconsider my vow never to get married again.
We've been going together for more than 7 years now. Yesterday was "Sadie
Hawkins Day," and my co-workers were teasing me that I should propose to
J.B., but I couldn't quite bring myself to come out and do that.

But in any event it would be a *very* long engagement, because I'm not
retiring for another 6 years (if I live that long), and I can't move across
the river till then. It would be way too long a commute.

Eva

On Feb 29, 5:12*pm, "Cathy F." <clfrc...@adelphiadotdashdot.net>
wrote:
> "Susan" <neverm...@nomail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:62rolnF24kqeoU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> > x-no-archive: yes
> <snipped>
> > Clinton's the smartest, hardest working sleaze we've ever had in the White
> > House, and sleaze is a given with politicians, IMO. I'd rather it be
> > personal, not political sleaze.
>
> Hear, hear!
>
> Cathy
>
>
>
>
>
> > Susan- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I agree that a politician's sex life should be the least of our
worries. Remember how bewildered Europeans were when Bill Clinton's
affair dominated the U.S. in the late 90s? Only us puritanical
Americans would ignore important problems in favor of a Monica-type
circus. I agree that Hillary is unelectable, though she probably
would've made a good president. I'm dreading Obama's upcoming
character assassination, but don't think he'll take it lying down the
way John Kerry did.
I'm afraid the Supreme Court is already ruined; there have been some
very bad decisions lately. But every Republican appointee is another
nail in the Roe v Wade coffin. If one of the moderate judges goes and
we get another Scalia, it'll be good-bye environmental laws and hello
theocracy.
As long as we're being controversial here, does anyone else consider
it hypocritical to be pro-life, anti-family planning, and anti-welfare
at the same time? My brother-in-law says birth control, abortion, and
welfare should all be banned. It seems logical that compulsory
pregnancy should at least come with a safety net.
Les

sage hen wrote:

> I agree that a politician's sex life should be the least of our
> worries. Remember how bewildered Europeans were when Bill Clinton's
> affair dominated the U.S. in the late 90s? Only us puritanical
> Americans would ignore important problems in favor of a Monica-type
> circus.

Stirred up into a proper feeding frenzy by the American media, in
their inimitable way, we might add.

I agree that Hillary is unelectable, though she probably
> would've made a good president. I'm dreading Obama's upcoming
> character assassination, but don't think he'll take it lying down the
> way John Kerry did.

It will be bloody, all right. I don't think Hillary would take
it (hers) lying down, either. I just hope the two don't do too
much damage to each other before one emerges as the nominee. I
want to shake them both right now and say, "Just talk about how
you would be the best candidate, and stop digging up dirt on your
opponent!!!!" The Republican machine doesn't need any help in
that regard!

> I'm afraid the Supreme Court is already ruined; there have been some
> very bad decisions lately. But every Republican appointee is another
> nail in the Roe v Wade coffin. If one of the moderate judges goes and
> we get another Scalia, it'll be good-bye environmental laws and hello
> theocracy.

Yeah, the Supremes are a big concern. At least two will be
appointed by the next pres., probably in the next term.

> As long as we're being controversial here, does anyone else consider
> it hypocritical to be pro-life, anti-family planning, and anti-welfare
> at the same time? My brother-in-law says birth control, abortion, and
> welfare should all be banned. It seems logical that compulsory
> pregnancy should at least come with a safety net.
> Les

Throw in being in favor of the death penalty, and you have the
completed square. Hubster has had many an argument about this
with his aunt, and her arguments echo those of the radio
talk-show hosts she favors. She sees no disconnects or hypocrisy.
She has also hinted that she doesn't think compulsory
sterilization and burning at the stake are really all that bad.

FurPaw


--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

x-no-archive: yes

sage hen wrote:

I agree that Hillary is unelectable, though she probably
> would've made a good president. I'm dreading Obama's upcoming
> character assassination, but don't think he'll take it lying down the
> way John Kerry did.

I don't believe that Hillary is unelectable. That was the book on her
in NY for the senate race, when *any* unnamed opponent had favorable
polls against her. Then she went on her "listening tour" and won over
arch conservative upstate NYers. She works her butt off for constituents.

I just think Obama is more electible because folks respond to style over
substance. He may be a great president if he runs the country as well
as he runs his campaign, but he's awfully light on specifics, and that
bugs me because I vote based upon policies, not personalities.


> I'm afraid the Supreme Court is already ruined; there have been some
> very bad decisions lately. But every Republican appointee is another
> nail in the Roe v Wade coffin. If one of the moderate judges goes and
> we get another Scalia, it'll be good-bye environmental laws and hello
> theocracy.

Do we have any environmental laws even left???

> As long as we're being controversial here, does anyone else consider
> it hypocritical to be pro-life, anti-family planning, and anti-welfare
> at the same time? My brother-in-law says birth control, abortion, and
> welfare should all be banned. It seems logical that compulsory
> pregnancy should at least come with a safety net.

I find it more hypocritical that anti abortion, anti birth control folks
are so often pro death penalty.

Susan

"FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote in message
news:xqmdne8EVIOcTlTanZ2dnUVZ_rqlnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> sage hen wrote:
<snipped>
>> As long as we're being controversial here, does anyone else consider
>> it hypocritical to be pro-life, anti-family planning, and anti-welfare
>> at the same time? My brother-in-law says birth control, abortion, and
>> welfare should all be banned. It seems logical that compulsory
>> pregnancy should at least come with a safety net.
>> Les
>
> Throw in being in favor of the death penalty, and you have the completed
> square. Hubster has had many an argument about this with his aunt, and
> her arguments echo those of the radio talk-show hosts she favors. She sees
> no disconnects or hypocrisy. She has also hinted that she doesn't think
> compulsory sterilization and burning at the stake are really all that bad.
>
> FurPaw

One of the illogical pairings: Against birth control but compulsory
sterilization probably okay... No disconnect there?? (rolling my eyes)

Cathy

i appreciate everyone's thoughtful responses & further questions. i
am so cynical. i want to just be a reasonable realist. this
discussion made me go back & listen to some early 80s bruce cockburn -
i was in college at a time when everyone was getting business degrees
& no one seemed to care about anything beyond there own needs.

there hasn't been a time in my adult life that i have felt inspired by
our country's policies & leaders. but funny how that tiny hope still
resides inside.

ellen wrote:
> i appreciate everyone's thoughtful responses & further questions. i
> am so cynical. i want to just be a reasonable realist. this
> discussion made me go back & listen to some early 80s bruce cockburn -
> i was in college at a time when everyone was getting business degrees
> & no one seemed to care about anything beyond there own needs.
>
> there hasn't been a time in my adult life that i have felt inspired by
> our country's policies & leaders. but funny how that tiny hope still
> resides inside.

I understand both the cynicism and the flicker of hope.

Yesterday I was at an education conference at which a
30-something sociology prof was talking. The talk he gave had
little to do with the title he'd submitted; I don't think it
would have been accepted at this rather staid conference if he'd
used the real title.

He was talking about how the current generation of students is
the world's last hope; he claims that if we lose them, we're
pretty much lost as a species. And that they need to be turned
away from the rampant corporatism that pervades our current
society, in which we're not so much educating people as training
them to be producers and consumers and technicians. And not
doing such a hot job of even that. How critical thinking is
becoming a lost art. How we need to take back the education
system from the corporate beast that's focused on bottom-line
numbers that it is becoming.

Anyhow, he looked like a 60s radical - long dark hair, dark
beard, wire-rim round-lens glasses, jeans and an ill-fitting
sports jacket that probably came from a Goodwill store. Spoke
like one, too - very intense, very articulate, full of things to
say and not enough time to say them all.

I wanted to leap up and throw my fist into the air and shout,
"Power to the People!" But I resisted the impulse. I did tell
him at the end that, and I meant it in the best way, he took me
back to the late 60s, and that I was happy to see younger people
with his energy saying what he was saying. I didn't tell him
that I largely think he's spitting into the wind.

FurPaw

--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

Cathy F. wrote:
> "FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote in message
> news:9_6dnbQ1uqHEv1fanZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> <snipped>
>
>> I wanted to leap up and throw my fist into the air and shout, "Power to
>> the People!" But I resisted the impulse. I did tell him at the end that,
>> and I meant it in the best way, he took me back to the late 60s, and that
>> I was happy to see younger people with his energy saying what he was
>> saying. I didn't tell him that I largely think he's spitting into the
>> wind.
>
> Ths last being age-acquired cynicism vs. the idealism of the young. IMO.

Oh, yeah. Most definitely.

FurPaw


--
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched,
every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense
a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

To reply, unleash the dogs.

"FurPaw" <furrealpawdog@gmaildog.com> wrote in message
news:9_6dnbQ1uqHEv1fanZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..

<snipped>

> I wanted to leap up and throw my fist into the air and shout, "Power to
> the People!" But I resisted the impulse. I did tell him at the