What bothers me the most...is the insinuation by E. Edwards that her husband
What bothers me the most is not the out of wedlock child, which doesn't bother me at all. The problem that I have is that Edwards would basically try to start a new family, with a woman without cancer, while his wife with cancer would basically be left with two children. What position does that put a woman in--keep quiet about everything, or I'll leave you with the kids and start a new wife. What does that say about a person like this.
We all the time b'tch and complain about what Gingrich did. Did Gingrich have kids at the time when his wife was in the deathbed? Not sure about that one.
Well here we have a man who was willing to basically trash his life for a 'better' one, thinking that he had enough 'support' that it wouldn't really matter. The fear of him leaving would shut any wife up--especially if she had cancer.
When I heard Elizabeth say that she had to think about her kids....you know what that meant to me? It said 'what relationship would a father who has millions have with kids of an estranged woman with cancer.'
I know I'm probably blowing this up, but this is what it says to me...just how easily thrown out women with kids are in this society, and how acceptible it is. You didn't hear anyone asking about the social and economic straits that Elizabeth and the kids would be in, if John left her. And, you know he only stayed with her for the photo op. You know that's got to be true.
The interesting thing is not that China and the East are rising again, but it's the fact that they've been following the West for the past 80-180-200 years.
In the history of the World, China and the East have always HAD the balance of power, wealth, inventions, prosperity, land control, dominance. It's only in the last two centuries where this has not been the case.
It's not because they've been better, smarter--it's just simply because these areas have always had large numbers of people to make more inventions, to build longer walls...and China has had a history of bureaucratic conscription in a form that has not ever been practiced in the West. Compounding the fact that the governmental and religious philosophies of the East were much more compatible with science and learning than the anti-pedagogic tendencies of the Christian Church and its hatred of education/science, the continued witch burnings and crusades, the East was always dominant.
I think that what we could learn from this is not to fear China, but to stop our own xenophobia and real ethnocentricism to realize that it's not about being the best--it's about peaceful coexistence.
As with China being the largest creditor now. There are theories that state that the reason why the Roman Empire 'fell' was because those in the East produced luxury goods (silk, tea, etc.), and would not purchase from the West--they would only take silver as payment. However, this was not China's fault, anymore than it's China's fault of being our greatest creditor (it was Japan and then Korea, etc.), it's our own fault. And, like the Roman's who were more interested in buying luxuy goods than stimulating their own peoples and economies, we will fall also if we don't learn.
I hate to tell you this, and I'm a blue blue Democrat... I would NEVER NEVER vote for Matthews. He's a Republican political hack, a kiss a**, a collaborator on the war, and an opportunist against Democrats. Having him there is nothing worse than having the worse of the worst Republican in that office. If I were in Pennsylvania, and I were Democrat, I would not vote for Spector, but I WOULD NOT VOTE FOR MATTHEWS EITHER, especially since he's pushed a real vindictive hatred aginst Democrats for year, and he's got this severe hatred, obscessive sociopathic hatred of the Clintons and against other Democrats from Pelosi on. He's nothing but someone who gains income from betraying his country and our future nightly.
I think you're right, because Broder and Friedman are the dickiest of dicks. I mean seriously, people still listen to Friedman after he's been wrong all this time--AND HE IS REPONSIBLE FOR A LOT OF THE OFFSHORING OF OUR JOBS. At best he's an idiot. At worse, he's a traitor and needs to be tarred and feathered. And Broder, he's just a dick.
I'm all for keeping LIEberman in the caucus which is what Obama wanted. The question here is whether he should keep any of his positions of power.
I think Obama will regret this decision. Liebeman will betray him and other Democrats just like he did before during and after his primary where he stabbed Obama in the back (when he supported his attempt to win his primary), and then kept voting with Bush, not to mention what happened this election. He is nothing but a traitor, with no allegances. Only this time, he will have oversight over Obama's Administration and provide an avenue for him and his Republican pals to win in futher elections by digging up dirt against Democrats.
You know to me this data about Prop 8 doesn't really matter to me, it's about how the community responded to the data.
1. Those who were racist were exceedingly angry at blacks calling them n****rs and other hateful speech.
2. Those who were racist already marginalized gay blacks and latinos within the gay community (and I gather this is one of the reaons why the latin and black communities sees the gay community as "white" and not multi-ethnic).
3. Those who assumed they were not racist and had never really dealt with the cultural aspects of racism, oh they blamed blacks (not latinos or the whites who voted for Prop 8, even though those groups outnumbered blacks by a significant amount).
4. We can bring up the assumed fact (not documented yet by actual voting data) that blacks voted 70% or Prop 8, but until you get the actual data, then you're really governed by your own prejudices as to how you respond.
5. The gay community does need to address the contaminating racism that pervades the community (and has for a long long long time), to such an extent that even in San Francisco, gays are divided racially--they go to different bars, they live in different areas (some races mix but it's generally on a white/asian, latin/black dynamic).
6. There is an aspect to the racism that pervades the gay community on a deeper level. By allowing racism to occur and continue, we have assumed that we are not "like them," that somehow we can distance ourselves from other minority communities politically and socially. Well, apparently, we can't. We are seen by the people who we assumed "accepted us" as a "political and sexual" minority community. It would do us a world of better for us to see ourselves in the same light--a light of reality. If that happens, if we start seeing ourselves as a minority, it is easier to make political connections with other minority groups on levels other than the margins.
7. Simply by blaming blacks as a group indicates that the gay community does not see its own members as black, we still only assume there are black people who are gay when there's gay pride. By putting out the 70% number diminishes the large number of blacks who voted against Prop 8, and the number of blacks who are gay/lesbian/bi, etc.
8. The response to the gay community against blacks achieved really only two goals: (a) it's provided lots and lots of blog and voice recordings that can be used by conservative churches against gay marriage to divided blacks and gays the next time that a Prop 8 measure comes about, and (b) it really makes other racial groups question the gay community's motives the next time such measures come around (will they be subject to the same vitriol and language).
9. I think that we can petition all we want, sue all we want, protest all we want, but until we get other groups on our side, we will fail. How do you get other minority groups on your side? By being on their side. (There was a recent anti-black incident with the chief of police of Palo Alto who is now fighting for her job due to really racist comments against blacks...why have gays not called for her dismissal? I think it's because the gay community leadership is exceedingly miopic, and which diminishes are actual political impact.
Okay, I'm done now. Now that I can piss a few people off and demand that gays work with racial groups rather than fighting them, I ca get back to my own work in writing an anthropology paper.
The thing I like about this is not the fact that Fox is being bashed in a joke. You want to know what it is? Democrats are finally so pissed that we're shedding the cloak of fear, and we're punching back finally. Why fear those who want to impose fear upon the free when you can knee cap them to show how cowardly they really are.
You're right.... Winning Georgia isn't the goal. Forcing Republicans to fight for Georgia is. Put that Reupublican money into Georgia. Make them fight for it. Make them spend their dough there so that they can't spend it in PA! And, after this election. Let's get Mississippi and Louisiana back on board, and let's go after Texas to make sure that the Republican never NEVER NEVER win again..EVER!
Could someone tell me if this is illegal, whether by using the mails to extort companies is illegal, and whether this classies under RICO statutes (for ProtectMarriage.com and its donors and volunteers could all be considered doing extortion in concert)?
If he appeals, he'll lose. This is exactly what the Supreme Court upheld in Ohio (to everyone who said the Ohio ruling was a travesty). It's not the best of all outcomes, but it is the best in this outcome for this year. We can clean up HAVA next year.