General Music Chat

I quite agree with you, Robin. There are some things that should be off-limits in any situation.

I thought it was ridiculous when they did it to Cheney, too, but then, after thinking about it all, his party stance on gay marriage made it impossible to ignore.

I'm much more interested in her using her religious affiliations to her advantage (while she attacks Obama's religious affiliations), & her attempts to use fear & hate to defeat Obama, & her overall lack of knowledge about issues, & her inability to answer the easiest questions when she's stuck in front of a camera. If she's this inadequate to handle things well during the election process, how in the heck can we or anyone expect her to rule if & when the time comes?

I can only imagine what Cheney's daughter went thru. I can see your point though. But on some level I didn't agree with anyone using the child against the parent. Deep in my soul that just isn't right. That is probably why I would never run for any office. I cannot see putting my children, no matter what their age, thru any of this crap!

My god, the stuff they are saying about their mom or dad! It blows my mind. I have to get away from this topic.

Thank god it is almost over.

I agree Robino, but this is unfortunately politics. Even McCain insulted Chelsea Clinton making a joke in public about Janet Reno being her father...

This is nothing new, people just want everyone to suddenly think it is.

doesn't make it right.........

outta here for now till i cool off

What a ridiculous assumption: that a misguided child wears an offensive t-shirt makes ALL women losers.

No Phil,

The kid's shirt was her WAKE UP call about what is going on. It is a SYMPTOM of the current atmosphere of political anger turning into personal attacks which are sexist in nature.

Far from being "ridiculous" the writer, has realized that condoning the environment of hatred that Palin is suffering, could very well condone or even increase abuses against ALL women. That is how ALL women potentially LOSE in this situation.

It is like the famous poem...

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.


I don't find this sentiment "ridiculous" in the least, but instead, very troubling, considering how serious an issue, violence against women is. It has been reported that 1 in 3 women in the world have been or will be, victims of violence and abuse.

1 in 3 - Think about how many women you see in a single day. Now consider that as many as 1/3 of them are victims or will be.


U.N. REPORT

New York - Violence against women is "severe and pervasive" around the world, with at least one in three women subjected to intimate partner abuse during her lifetime, according to a UN report released on Tuesday.

"There is compelling evidence that violence against women is severe and pervasive throughout the world," said UN chief Kofi Annan's report titled 'Ending violence against women: from words to action'.

The study cited surveys on violence against women conducted in at least 71 countries showing that "a significant proportion of women suffer physical, sexual or psychological violence...On average, at least one in three women is subjected to intimate partner violence in the course of her lifetime".

Sexual violence

A World Health Organisation study in 11 countries found that the percentage of women subjected to sexual violence by an intimate partner ranged between six percent in Japan and Serbia and Montenegro, and 59% in Ethiopia.

Murders of women often involve sexual violence, with between 40% and 70% of female murder victims killed by husbands or boyfriends in Australia, Canada, Israel, South Africa and the United States, Annan's report said.

Genital mutilation

It noted that more than 130 million girls have had to go through female genital mutilation, a practice most prevalent in Africa and some Middle Eastern countries but also found in immigrant communities in Europe, North America and the Australia.

Female infanticide, prenatal sex selection and systematic neglect of girls were said to be widespread in south and southeast Asia, North Africa and the Middle East.

Harassment

The study also highlighted the fact that women experience sexual harassment throughout their lives, with between 40% and 50% of women in the European Union reporting some form of sexual harassment.

- AFP

Hey, ya know what? I'll bet that there are more than 9.7 out of every 10 MALES in the world who have been "victims of violence" at some point in their lives. As soon as you start talking "women's rights," or "African-American's rights" or "children's rights," you lose my interest. How about "basic human rights?" It matters not who is being downtrodden, it is our job as citizens of this country to stop it. The more we concentrate on our differences, the more this kind of junk will continue.

Yes, violence against women is bad. Violence against men is bad, too.

"Psychological abuse?" Gimme a break! We ALL of us suffer from that, to varying degrees. I know because I have experienced it a helluva lot, from both my parents, from my wife, from the cop on the corner...the list goes on & on. It's part of the experience of being human, & it makes us either stronger or weaker, depending upon the situation & the individual.

I am also guilty, as all of us are, of perpetrating psychological abuse in some form.

Wake up call, indeed! This is just another rant from someone with an axe to grind concerning their own personal cause, & one which you seem to enjoy, as well.

You want to stop it? Teach overall respect, for everything & everyone. Start with your leaders, & the nation & the world will hopefully follow suit. Who in this election is showing any respect? Who is showing the most respect? Perhaps we should start there.

You seem to think that this shows only one form of disrespect - the disrespect this individual has for women. I counter that by saying that it shows a lack of respect for his school, for the children that may see the shirt, for the religious & the simply decent among us who would be offended, & he's also thumbing his nose at our entire society by simply showing disrespect for ANY of its members.

When it's looked at like that, one can twist this around until it is a far more serious problem than simply the disrespect someone has for women. That would be shown in the privacy of his home & in his one-on-one relationships. This shows that he feels perfectly free to flaunt his disrespect for a citizen in all of our faces. That, sir, offends me far more than his little stupid statement.

If I had a small 1st or 2nd grader with me at the school, & had to explain to that child what that idiot was saying with his plackard, I would feel the urge to kick his little ass right in front of my child to show him what happens to ppl who flaunt any form of disrespect in our society.

That student should have been immediately suspended from the school, at the very least, or perhaps even expelled for this disgusting display, & the school should definitely have the right, nay, the duty, to do just that.

The more we try to make this a single issue about women, the more we make women into victims, & that, my friend, is the very last thing they need. They do NOT need to be made to look small & defenseless in the face of the overpowering male influence. That destroys the entire idea of feminism & equality. So don't make women weak in the eyes of the world, but expose the idiots for what & who they are. It doesn't matter WHO is disrespected. Ppl need to learn that it will NOT BE TOLERATED ANYMORE!

The sooner we wake up to this trend, & actually try to do something about it other than beat our breasts & moan about the 1st ammendment, the sooner we will begin to solve the problems of violence in our world. Anyone who promotes disrespect & violence should be shown how disrespect & violence affects others.

Let's start with our leaders, shall we?

I must say that this disgusting display does NOT make all women losers. It makes all AMERICANS losers, as long as we tolerate it, because it will not & has not stopped with this single stupid act.

In closing, I must reiterate that this is an exciting time for us all, in that we are getting to see the benefits of allowing minorities to reach their full potential in this election. This is still a very good thing for us all. These may very well be the beginnings of the last gasps of intolerence against women & blacks, if anything goes right for us. Let's hope for the best as we try to improve our society.

Another word on this topic -

I think it's time we stopped making the status of "victim" so popular.

Instead, we should concentrate on reducing & eliminating & publicly vilifying the ppl who make victims out of others. Anyone who deliberately hurts another should be publicly scrutinized & punished, but do not publish their names to make them famous, either. This would cover thieves, physical abusers, etc. Make their punishments public to show ppl what happens to those who would hurt anyone with malice aforethought.

As far as the victims are concerned, they should be taken & treated for whatever violence was perpetrated, but in silence, out of the public's eye.

We try too hard to make heroes out of ppl for nothing other than their victim status, & that is frankly a very stupid thing to do. It's making the state of victimhood to be one that is actually sought out by some ppl.

Being a victim is not anything that anyone should try to achieve, yet it happens each & every day in our sick world.

"Look at me! Look what happened to me!"

No. Instead we should look at what the evil-doer did, & publicly humiliate that one. Then they should be forgotten as quickly as possible.

The victim should be treated with fairness, with compassion, etc, yes. But why in the world would anyone want to publicly celebrate their being used or abused in any way?

I don't know, but it's become very popular in this country these days to be a victim. You get to be on TV, to be interviewed & written about & talked about by famous ppl all the time.

What a ridiculous thing to be famous for!

It used to be, in some cultures, that if you committed suicide, your name & your deeds were erased from history. It was the thought that if you figured this life wasn't worth living, then your deeds, your name, your history weren't worth anything to anyone. Your name wasn't even spoken anymore. I think that's a perfect way to handle suicide, myself. Kind of takes the sting out of hurting ppl by ending your life if you're simply going to be forgotten & never spoken about again, doesn't it?

It's also a good way to handle evil-doers. Erase them from our mind. Hurt them for their deeds & then forget them as soon as possible, lest others be tempted to follow in their footsteps.

Once ppl know that their names & deeds will be erased from history, perhaps ppl will stop emulating the morons, like they have with the cult-hero murderers at the Columbine incident. Terrorism would be eradicated if the perpetrators knew that they would NOT become famous for their deeds. What's the point of losing your life in a deed if no one remembers who committed it?

We should concentrate our media on the positives in our society, rather than the negatives. Show how ppl overcome things rather than how they succumb to them. That's what a society that wants it's citizenry to be healthy would do.

I nominate Philbymon for Pres.

Nah...I'm too disrespectful...but I AM running as a write-in for WV governor!

Phil,

Understanding these things, requires some degree of empathy or at least sympathy. It seems like that is not on your agenda currently. You aren't happy so, f*ck anyone else for whining, I guess?


The state you are in, I guess you won't find that sympathy anytime soon.


But your response, at it's worst, is simply appalling to me.


Comparing the abuse women often suffer, to whether affirmative action has filled it's course or not, or whether gay couples will ever get the widespread public approval they seek, is incomprehensible.

Which in essence is what you suggest, cause you are just going to lump half the world's population together with all the other "whiners".

I don't think you can get more insensitive than that.

I don't really know what to say.

Your lack of sympathy is shocking.


Look...

When "ANY" group is targeted en masse, simply because they belong to a certain category, i.e. women, minorities of color, homosexuals, etc...

When a GROUP is selectively targeted it merits special attention and corrective measures. Yes, common decency must be extended to all, on an individual level, but when entire GROUPS are targeted, it becomes, or threatens to become, institutionalized. When things become institutionalized, they become little more than a cultural blurb because of society's blind eye, and it is far easier for those who victimize others to continue doing it, unchecked.


Do you believe somehow, that a majority of Germans are hardwired, in their DNA, for collectively cooperating in the attempted mass extinction of an entire RACE of people?

I've known at least 5 Germans personally and closely, who were living in America when I knew them. They are really no different than you or I or anyone else. It is hard to imagine any of them participating in such atrocities, and yet, how many millions just like them, did just that? Of course there were numbers of Germans who took great risks to rise above the culture of the time, and they helped Jews escape or hide, at a serious threat to their own lives. They are heroes and some even martyrs. This story is not about the small minority that did such things, but about the many millions who engaged in this horrible section of history.

Why did they do it?

It makes no sense, that they are inclined toward such atrocities, naturally.

It is a group dynamic at play.

People in groups are often capable of things they would not even believe themselves capable of. That is how a protest starts off peacefully and then erupts into violence and chaos.

As individuals, there are countless Korean students, for example, who would normally not dream of setting fire to a building, let alone end the human life inside it, but in a group, they may find themselves burning down a police headquarters, and all the police inside with it. Being in a group, literally means, for some, the difference between living life according to their normal values, or literally becoming murderers. The group dynamic, temporarily justifies the extremism. Everyone else around me is as mad as me, and they are rioting, so I may as well too.


Like it or not, there is really no argument to this.


When offenses are overlooked, because a group dynamic is at play, some people (far too many, sometimes) follow the crowd and resort to their most base nature in how they conduct themselves. Even after the fact, they justify their actions because it was politically motivated or motivated by some supposed "higher" purpose they attribute it to, but it is simply a lack of values, and an unwillingness as an individual to rise above the group and stand for what is right, even if you are standing alone.

That is EXACTLY what has occurred with John McCain and particularly Palin. And you are seeing it from the Republican crowds as well now..

Hatred over the war and economy (the supposed greater good) has trumped human decency, and a group dynamic is at play, allowing YOU and countless others, to FOLLOW the crowd, and jump on the bandwagon, without thoughtful consideration FIRST.

It is a thug mentality and not very different from rioters looting and tearing a city apart. It is the same group dynamic, the same lack of individual responsibility, which allows actions and remarks that are not weighed out logically or thoughtfully, and it is also realizing the same results. Namely, some people, now feel comfortable hurling the most vicious, base and disgusting insults, not even caring whether their insults are appropriate or even true! Many of them are saying things PUBLICLY and OPENLY, that they likely, would never repeat in front of their own parents or children.

But when everyone else, including the media, seem to be doing it, why not?


The clear and logical reason that certain groups sometimes need special attention or additional corrective measures to assist them is evident. When entire groups are being victimized, it is INSTITUTIONAL ABUSE, and not case specific. An environment of institutionalized abuse puts such abuses on the back burner. Society allows itself to become numb or blind to the abuses, and it becomes entrenched culturally.

THIS is the environment that hundreds of millions, if not billions, of women find themselves in today, worldwide.

Far from being "whiners" over a glass ceiling, most of these women are still looking for basic human rights and just safety and protection.

The reason this is relative to our discussion, living in a fairly modern and free society as we are, is that the group thuggery occurring right now, is how this all starts.

Referring back to Germany and Jewish people...

Jews weren't put into gas chambers right away. It was a much longer process.

There was a public and widespread humiliation campaign first. Jews were blamed for all of the world's problems, insulted daily by the national media, and sufficient hatred built up to where they were seen as animals or at least "less than human". When you dehumanize your foe, it is far easier to assault them and even kill them. They aren't really human after all. When the media is spewing this every day, and the citizens look around them, and their neighbors are buying into this hate campaign, that is the basis of what then lead to krystalnaught and far more serious and horrific consequences later.

Historically, you know what happened.

We all do.

But we would all do well to remember how easily and subtly it all first begins.

Today, the target is pro-life female politicians.

Maybe it will be liberal female politicians next?

Hey Phil,

In re-reading my response just now...

I didn't intend any personal assault. I hope you didn't take it that way. You have shared quite a bit over the last year that you are ANGRY at your circumstances, having made more money or having a better standard of living in the past. etc...


It is usually difficult, under such circumstances, to find the same sympathy we might normally have. And it seems like that just feeds over into this.

I could be wrong.

But I feel that under different circumstances, you might be more sympathetic.

So, please don't take any offense.

That said, though it appears we disagree on why "institutionalized" abuses are so serious, still, there were some jewels of wisdom in your response as well, and clearly you are agreeing to some extent, that such abuses and inappropriate discourse are wrong.

So, I found things to appreciate in your response, but was taken aback at how quickly you dismissed attacks on "women" as something less than it is, by comparing it to varying degrees of "whiners" of other issues.

At least that's how I took it.

I realize you provided a caveat, of "any abuse is unacceptable", but disregarding how much more damaging and widespread such abuses are when institutionalized, to me, is where you miss the mark in a big way.

It demeans the far more serious abuses women endure, when it is lumped together haphazardly, with issues such as parity of salaries.

That to me, is like saying that someone who commits an act of "civil disobedience" and someone else who commits murder, are basically the same, since they are both crimes, and both people were arrested and put in jail.

The degrees of the crimes are very different however, and none of us would suggest that a "political protester" suffer the same fate as a cold blooded murderer.

I believe you care about the country, and I believe you care about injustice as well.

I didn't want my response to be misconstrued, so just wanted to make that clear.

In closing, I must reiterate that this is an exciting time for us all, in that we are getting to see the benefits of allowing minorities to reach their full potential in this election. This is still a very good thing for us all. These may very well be the beginnings of the last gasps of intolerence against women & blacks, if anything goes right for us. Let's hope for the best as we try to improve our society.

I just had a discussion about this with a band member, coming home from our gig tonight. He is worried, as many are, including myself, that the prospect of an Obama presidency, and particularly a trifecta, which is likely, where one party controls the White House and BOTH houses of Congress at the same time, will mean the left is unchecked to run just about anything they want through Congress and have it all signed off by the President. That alone is of concern, let alone the fact that Obama is an extreme leftist liberal. That is indisputable factually, regardless of the nice political-speak he gives us all so he can get elected. He believes in socialism in practice. I don't care what he says. I see what he does, how he votes, and who his friends and mentors are.

Palin is extreme in her desire to protect life, even in the cases of rape and incest.

Ok. Granted.

But Obama is extreme in his defending the right to "end life", even when the child survived an abortion attempt, and is BORN. Yes born, and existing OUTSIDE the womb! I assume he doesn't plan to stick the child's head back inside, so it can be killed "inside" the mother. What would that mean then? Clearly, it would just be killed OUTSIDE the womb, to finish the job. Is this supposed to be "less frightening" than Palin's position?

Killing a baby OUTSIDE the womb!

Is that scenario a pretty picture?

I don't care how staunch of a pro-choicer someone is, that should not be a "pretty picture" or even "a slight inconvenience". That scene should paint a TERRIFYING picture in someone's head.

I may not know with certainly, when "life" is considered viable or advanced enough to merit protection. But killing a child OUTSIDE the womb?

That's murder.

I'm crystal clear on that potential scenario.

That's frightening enough, but the prospect of altering our moorings by moving us toward a socialist state. That's scary too.

America is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

A candidate this extreme? The Democrats have shot themselves in the foot countless times over the decades by nominating the most extreme liberals they could find, only to be shocked when America rejects such extremism. Time after time, statistically, it is shown that the MAJORITY of Americans are CENTRISTS, with a slight bent toward the right, if they lean a little past center at all.

Clearly the Democratic leadership have not learned their lesson, but are about to get away with it this time anyway, because of the pervasive climate of hate which currently exists.

Everyone is so angry, they are about to throw many of the Republican Congressmen out with the president, and give ALMOST ALL THE POWER to one party. A party currently lead by a flip-flopping, lying, socialist leaning, radical liberal who is the least experienced candidate of the 4, but is so "sophisticated" that he doesn't even respect life OUTSIDE the womb!

Wow!

Why should I be surprised?

The Italians got so angry at their parliament (or whatever it is there) that they elected a porn star into office. That was her experience. She was a porn star.

This reaction, is one of the reasons the forefathers of America instituted a representative Democracy and an electoral college. They were fearful of the less educated and experienced among us, making irrational choices out of anger or whatever else, and causing the country to be diminished or even destroyed as a result of such a backlash.


In any event...


In my discussion with my band mate, I mentioned that having a black president, at least, would help tear down one of the last barriers for minorities.

That is a positive.

Even Carlos Mencia, well known comedian, was on Larry King (was it Larry King or AC360?) and said that Obama is pretty much off limits right now, but he looked forward to the potential of his being elected, because he thinks it would bring some parity finally, and the comedians can safely make racial jokes again, without fearing any backlash.

He is probably deluded about that, but who knows, he may be a little correct. When that ceiling has fallen, maybe everyone will lighten up a little, and stop assuming that everything "racial" is always "racist" or motivated by hate and mean-spiritedness.

But I hope for the best out of him, if he gets in.

It would be a shame for the first black president to do poorly, and not measure up to the challenges we face, whether militarily or economically.

That could potentially be more damaging in the long run, as some people would believe, incorrectly, that maybe they shouldn't elect another black candidate for awhile.

But I understand fully the mood of the country.

Everyone is upset and many are suffering.

Change is hopeful.

At least in the short term, just the hopefulness alone, will help the country to some degree. Obama represents change on many levels. He is a democrat, after what seems to be a failed two term Republican president. He is black, after an entire, centuries long, history of white presidents.

But he would also be one of the most liberal presidents to ever hold office. And he would certainly be the most diverse president in history regarding holding dual citizenships. As far as I know, only the forefathers were citizens of any other country than America, and that was with England. But those former ties were severed when they signed the Declaration of Independence. Well actually two days before, when they voted on it.

So, as far as I know, Obama will be the FIRST president to have held dual citizenship (He was a citizen of America and Kenya simultaneously, and in fact, held dual citizenship until his 21st birthday.)

But he may just hold this record for quite awhile, because Obama was not just a dual citizen, but was actually a citizen, at various times, of four different nations!

Four countries! Who here knew that?

Before Kenya returned to self-rule, they were a british colony, when Obama was a child. Through his father, he was a citizen then, of England though living in Kenya. When England severed it's colonial rule, the ones who remained in Kenya, reverted to Kenyan citizenship. Obama's citizenship changed along with it. Later, when he was adopted by his stepfather, he became an Indonesian citizen, which along with his birth in America (if true) adds up to citizenship of 4 different countries.

I'm fairly worldly, but this bothers me a little.

There is a reason the forefather's required candidates for president to be "Natural Born" Americans, and that is, because as the leader of the country, the highest office, they wanted someone holding that office who was BORN HERE, as a potential safeguard to national loyalty by the president. While certainly not fail safe, most people have a special feeling toward their country of birth, and that may make it less likely for them to sell us out, or have competing loyalties toward other countries, over their "home" or "birth" country.

Obama may be the only president EVER, past or future, to be in such circumstances.

It is a highly unusual set of circumstances, unlikely to be repeated in our lifetime, if ever.

But aside from having been a citizen of 4 different countries, Obama is having a little hiccup as we speak, because he is a defendant, I believe, in 3 different lawsuits now, requiring him to produce his birth certificate. Rather than produce it, he has challenged the lawsuits and is fighting them. He already lost the main one, I believe, and is appealing to the Supreme Court.

So, while this all may be proven to be nothing, there is a possibility that Obama is not legally qualified to even be running for President right now, let alone hold office.

One has to ask, why?

Why not produce the documents and end the controversy?

I can only assume that his lawyers are merely handling this by the book, and just protecting his interests legally, as a matter of precaution. Much as someone completely innocent, may still have a lawyer telling him what he may or may not divulge during interviews. In other words, the client may be completely innocent, but if something else is discovered through the interrogation process, whether related to the case or not, he may be found culpable for the newly discovered infraction. A good lawyer is going to try and shield him from that.

This may be what Obama's lawyers are doing?

You would think his legality would have been properly vetted? But perhaps not?

He filed a motion to dismiss (this was rejected) and also filed a motion to PREVENT discovery being divulged publicly.

What is he afraid of them finding?

Or is it just legal protocol?

When simply producing the document in question would end all of this...

Why not do that and be done with it? Why fight it all the way to the Supreme Court?

That makes it a little suspicious to me.


Too bad I am not a conspiracy affectionado!

Cause this would be easy pickings...


"Obama is actually not qualified to run for president, so he fights the lawsuits all the way to the supreme court, by which time he has already been sworn in as President, and before it has a chance to be corrected (or maybe even discovered) the "manufactured crisis" that Biden says Obama will face within his first 6 months, and that we "may not understand or agree with Obama's reaction to and handling of, this crisis, but should just TRUST Obama during this time" as Biden says. But maybe that "manufactured crisis" is not just "manufactured" by our enemies alone? And maybe it is an excuse, a set-up, to implement martial law, effectively giving Obama all power, and making him immune from any prosecution or impeachment efforts. By then, we are well on our way to being a socialist country, like the academic left wishes for, so that their "superior" intellects, are then free to micro-manage all aspects of our lives, to "help us" become as enlightened as they are."


Far fetched, but makes for a decent conspiracy theory.

Stranger things have happened in history though.

Although, you would expect the martial law part to be the domain of Republicans. LOL

When Kennedy was running as our 1st Catholic candidate, rumors were widespread that the Pope would be running the country if he won. Innumerable other rumors & predictions accompanied this ridiculous statement in that election. Did that make any of them true? History has proved otherwise.

I go by the things I can actually see. What I see is very disturbing, on both sides of this election, but I have far too many fears about the Rep candidates that give me pause.

1st & foremost of my fears, is that we will once again be ruled by fear & misdirection & outright lies, as we have been for the last 8 yrs.

The biggest mistake any candidate could make in this process, at this point in time, is to further play on our collective fears.

Ppl are TIRED of being told to be afraid, to watch our stupid color-coded "terrorist watch"reports from our gov't as they continue to erode our privacy rights behind our backs, or blatantly in our faces. We are TIRED of a pres who would be emporer by writing his own little additions on many many bills that become law (which also increase his powers & further erode the Constitution). We are TIRED of our country looking so bad to the world at large. We are ASHAMED of how the current administration has made us look to the world after an unprovoked war that WE started, after all the embarassing gaffs made by Bush's refusal or inability to even speak our language like an educated individual, & after seeing his lack of compassion in foreign & domestic affairs.

The only thing the Rep's seem to have in their arsenal in this election is more of the same. They are STILL playing on the fears of ppl. I like that quote I've read so often that says "ppl shouldn't fear their gov't - gov't should fear the ppl." Not only does our present administration not fear us, they show outright disrespect for us & for our precious Constitution on a daily basis. The conservative party is now promising not only more of the same, but an escalated version of it, if the way they still play on our fears is any indicator.

Yes, I'm hurting, and so is every American, rich or poor. There ia a lot to fear out there right now. The INTELLIGENT approach is to calmly assert a plan for each issue that faces us, & then follow through with those plans, & alter them as necessary, until the situations are resolved.

McCain is anything but calm. He is anything but reassuring. He has no plan other than to get into office & stop the godless liberals from ruining things.

Palin is not calm, if her interviews show anything at all about her. She balks when asked what frikken NEWSPAPERS she reads? Oh yeah, I'm sorry, that was a trick question! Her record also shows the same type of croneyism that our present administration has used to the detriment of this country.

I tell you, I would be far more attentive to the GOP if they were to calmly tell me what they are going to do, instead of spouting how horrible things will be if they are not the winners in this election. I am not alone in this. If the present administration were PERFECT IN EVERY WAY, their approach to this campaign would put us off of them like we were collectively put off by Gore's scaring us over so much, when he ran against the current idiot in chief.

If the GOP hasn't figured that out yet, they are not fit to run this country. Their methods may work with little old ladies & others who have so much to fear every day, but the rest of us are vital ppl, who want an actual plan, who want a calm hand at the helm as we pass through the various storms that face us.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On the issue of whiners & such:

When you take a group that is having troubles with other groups, & you make laws specific to protect that group, & only that group, that shows preferencial treatment. Laws are written to protect ALL of us, or they should be.

You shouldn't have to write separate laws to stop ppl from using the "n" word, then the "c" word, then each & every other word used to put down any group of ppl. How stupidly wasteful & time-consuming is that?

"Basic human rights," Craig. That covers whites, blacks, women, homosexuals, ANYONE who is human.

Don't give me the flavor of the day, & don't make the victims into heroes by the mere coincidence of their existence.

As long as you're celebrating our differences, you're separating us as PEOPLE, & the idiots have won. We need to learn as a society that we are all one, & that that which harms one of us, harms us all. There cannot be this continued parlaying of laws which tend to assert our separateness & individual differences.

When a woman is abused, is it any worse than when a child receives that same treatment? Any worse than a man or homosexual or even an illegal alien? NO!!!! Simple plan old human rights is what we should constantly strive for, for ALL of us.

You speak of group mentality attacking other groups. In my way of handling things, each individual case would be handled equally. In your way, it would be worse, & therefore more punishable, if you hurt a woman than if you hurt a man. What a ridiculous way of looking at things!

Handling the group is no different than handling an individual. You simply punish the entire group - each & every individual who participates in an unlawful action. If you break the law, then you pay. It's as simple as that.

Otherwise you merely continue to show that we are NOT all one, that we need different types of protection. Sorry, but that doesn't cut it with me. How dare you give more protection to a woman than you do me, simply because of a chance of birth! Am I of less worth in the eyes of the law?

Yes, it's stupid of us to allow our media to question the paternity of Palin's children. There are laws that should protect her from these attacks on her character & her family, but we allow far far too much from our media. She & her "1st man" should be allowed to sue those publications for the horrid effects on their character.

Likewise, that idiot (Idon't remember his name) that has spread so many outright lies about Obama being or having been a moslem, etc., should be muzzled & sued, & any publication that has the stupidity to print & distribute those lies should also be punished.

Should we write laws to specifically protect public figures from such attacks? Hell no! I deserve that protection as well, Craig, & so do you, as an American citizen, or any human being.

Promoting separateness promotes group mentality, Craig - us versus them. Promoting oneness makes us all equal, all equally protected by law & by a healthy society.

Philby, I'll write you in for WV governor.. lol

Why, thank you, Cap. I only wish you could!