[Rhodes22-list] HOW TO SAVE MILLIONS (Political)
Rik Sandberg
sanderico1 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 6 21:15:38 EDT 2008
Brad,
Hmmmm.... Guilty as charged.
Rik
Ayn Rand was a prophet - - it isn't my fault
Brad Haslett wrote:
> Rik,
>
> The rocket fizzled? You're probably just racist. Here's the test.
>
> Brad
>
> --------------
>
> 25 Reasons You May be a Racist [Peter Kirsanow]
> The tendency of Obama supporters to see racist impulses behind every
> criticism of their candidate has evolved into absurdity. Now even the
> first black president feels compelled to declare he's not a racist. By this
> measure, nearly every American is at risk of being branded a racist at some
> point in the campaign. To assess whether you're at risk just consult the
> list below ( apologies to Jeff Foxworthy ):
>
> 1.If you think Obama's the most liberal member of the senate you...may be a
> racist.
>
> 2.If you object to Obama raising your payroll, capital gains and
> estate taxes you...may be a racist.
>
> 3.If you'd prefer a president have at least some foreign policy experience
> you...may be a racist.
>
> 4. If you're in favor of drilling for oil and building nuclear power plants
> you...may be a racist.
>
> 5. If you think "Vero Possemus" is Latin for "Massive Ego" you... may be a
> racist.
>
> 6. If you wonder why Obama was hanging around William Ayers and Bernadine
> Dohrn you...may be a racist.
>
> 7. If your pastor is nothing like Rev. Wright or Father Pfleger you... may
> be a racist.
>
> 8.If you don't want the majority of justices on the Supreme Court to be like
> Stephen Breyer you...may be a racist.
>
> 9. If you're not impressed with Obama's 100% NARAL rating you...may be a
> racist.
>
> 10. If you're not sure whether Obama opposed or supported FISA
> reauthorization you...may be a racist.
>
> 11. If you don't think America is a "downright mean" country you...may be a
> racist.
>
> 12. If you think Obama should've visited wounded troops at Ramstein and
> Landstuhl you...may be a racist.
>
> 13. If you think the surge is working and that's a good thing you...may be a
> racist.
>
> 14. If you oppose racial preferences in employment, school admissions and
> contracting you...may be a racist.
>
> 15. If you think "we are the change we've been waiting for" is a line from
> a Monty Python skit you...may be a racist.
>
> 16. If you prefer that a president have a smidgen of executive experience
> you...may be a racist.
>
> 17. If you're appalled that Obama voted against treating infants born after
> an abortion attempt the same medically as other infants born alive
> you...may be a racist.
>
> 18. If you were proud of your country even before Obama's candidacy
> you...may be a racist.
>
> 20. If you don't think American troops are just "air raiding villages"
> you...may be a racist.
>
> 21. If your grandmother isn't a "typical white person" you...may be a
> racist.
>
> 22. If you don't think rural, working class people are bitter and "cling to
> guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them" you...may be a
> racist.
>
> 23. If you're not sure invading Pakistan is a particularly good idea—what
> with their nuclear weapons and all— you...may be a racist.
>
> 24. If you don't want the president to meet without precondition with the
> leaders of state sponsors of terror you...may be a racist.
>
> 25. If you don't care how Hollywood or the European elite think you should
> vote you...may be a racist.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 10:16 AM, Rik Sandberg <sanderico1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Dave,
>>
>> It looks to me like the "fat lady" (Hillary) may have just stood aside
>> to let the rocket fizzle on it's own. I doubt we've heard the last from
>> her yet.
>>
>> Rik
>>
>> Ayn Rand was a prophet - - it isn't my fault
>>
>>
>>
>> David Bradley wrote:
>>
>>> Can only hope that the Clinton campaign comes out of "suspend" mode...
>>>
>>> I thought the fat lady sang at the opera.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 3:58 AM, Brad Haslett <flybrad at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Chris,
>>>>
>>>> "Church ain't out 'till the fat lady sings!" I'm not convinced that
>>>> Chocolate Baby Jesus will prevail in Denver. If the Hillary supporters
>>>>
>> get
>>
>>>> their way and a roll call, O'baby will get dumped. It appears the bloom
>>>>
>> is
>>
>>>> off that rose.
>>>>
>>>> Brad
>>>>
>>>> ----------------
>>>>
>>>> Pundits Begin to Worry About Obama
>>>>
>>>> August 6, 2008 - by Jennifer Rubin
>>>>
>>>> In the aftermath of Barack Obama's overseas trip, the liberal
>>>>
>> punditocracy
>>
>>>> has begun to [1]
>>>> fret.<
>>>>
>> http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=0e0dbc4f-000d-4d75-9f23-614ae8d06494
>>
>>> Certainly
>>>
>>>> there is reason for concern. Obama's poll numbers are within the
>>>> [2] margin of error <http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls> in a year
>>>>
>> in
>>
>>>> which a generic Democrat would be beating a generic Republican by double
>>>> digits. And the storylines which dominated the news since the trip have
>>>>
>> been
>>
>>>> ones unfavorable to their chosen candidate: his [3]
>>>> ego<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mopkn0lPzM8>,
>>>> the snub of [4] wounded German
>>>> soldiers<
>>>>
>> http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/07/24/obama-snubs-injured-soldiers-workout-will-media-care
>>
>>> ,
>>>
>>>> a potential flip-flop on [5] offshore
>>>> drilling<
>>>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080103199.html
>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>> a poorly received attempt to play the [6] race
>>>> card. <http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/08/01/1240112.aspx>
>>>>
>>>> [7] Richard Cohen<
>>>>
>> http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/what_has_obama_accomplished.html
>>
>>> was
>>>
>>>> one liberal pundit who emerged from the fog of Obama-mania. Cohen
>>>> threw
>>>> cold water on the notion that a liberal Senate candidate from Hyde Park
>>>> showed political courage by opposing the Iraq war, and then recited
>>>>
>> chapter
>>
>>>> and verse on the flip-flop orgy:
>>>>
>>>> He has been for and against gun control, against and for the recent
>>>>
>> domestic
>>
>>>> surveillance legislation and, in almost a single day, for a united
>>>>
>> Jerusalem
>>
>>>> under Israeli control and then, when apprised of U.S. policy and
>>>>
>> Palestinian
>>
>>>> chagrin, against it. He is an accomplished pol — a statement of both
>>>> admiration and a bit of regret.
>>>>
>>>> But what really irked Cohen was Obama's "tissue thin" record and the
>>>>
>> nagging
>>
>>>> sense that despite Obama's attractive packaging Cohen was "still not
>>>>
>> sure,
>>
>>>> though, what's in it."
>>>>
>>>> But Cohen wasn't alone. [8] Ruth
>>>> Marcus<
>>>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/31/AR2008073102804.html
>>
>>> ,
>>>
>>>> no conservative cheerleader either, also was not pleased. For her, the
>>>>
>> issue
>>
>>>> was one that Obama critics had long dwelled on: [9] what's he
>>>> done<http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/18511>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> After reviewing the *[10] New York
>>>> Times'<
>>>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30law.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
>>
>>>> * examination of Obama's career as a law lecturer, Marcus mused that it
>>>>
>> was
>>
>>>> "a reminder of Obama's essential elusiveness, and how little we
>>>>
>> understand
>>
>>>> about how the candidate himself would resolve these thorny problems."
>>>>
>> What
>>
>>>> nagged her was the sense that "in the hardest cases, I'm not always sure
>>>> where Professor Obama, or President Obama for that matter, comes down."
>>>>
>>>> Over at *Huffington Post *[11] a prominent liberal
>>>> voice<
>>>>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/on-having-your-political_b_116059.html
>>
>>> fretted
>>>
>>>> that maybe the Left's faith in Obama was overblown and as misplaced
>>>> as the belief (before the blue dress) that Bill Clinton had not had an
>>>> inappropriate relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
>>>>
>>>> And of course all this followed the rage from the [12]
>>>> Left<http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/21/obama>over the
>>>> appalling (to them) reversal on FISA and the [13]
>>>> disgust <http://community.washingtonpost.com/ver1.0/Direct/Process>
>>>>
>> over
>>
>>>> Obama's decision to renege on his public financing pledge (which was
>>>>
>> then
>>
>>>> followed by his ludicrous effort to blame the Republicans for
>>>>
>> *his*mendacity).
>>
>>>> But [14] Dana Millbank<
>>>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/29/AR2008072902068.html
>>
>>> really
>>>
>>>> opened the floodgates with a devastating column on Obama's enormous
>>>> ego and arrogance. Dubbing Obama the "presumptuous nominee," Millbank
>>>> described Obama's visit to Capitol Hill:
>>>>
>>>> Along the way, he traveled in a bubble more insulating than the actual
>>>> president's. Traffic was shut down for him as he zoomed about town in a
>>>> long, presidential-style motorcade, while the public and most of the
>>>>
>> press
>>
>>>> were kept in the dark about his activities, which included a fundraiser
>>>>
>> at
>>
>>>> the Mayflower where donors paid $10,000 or more to have photos taken
>>>>
>> with
>>
>>>> him. . . Some say the supremely confident Obama — nearly 100 days from
>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>> election, he pronounces that "the odds of us winning are very good" —
>>>>
>> has
>>
>>>> become a president-in-waiting. But in truth, he doesn't need to wait: He
>>>>
>> has
>>
>>>> already amassed the trappings of the office, without those pesky
>>>>
>> decisions.
>>
>>>> . . "I think this can be an incredible election," Obama said later. "I
>>>>
>> look
>>
>>>> forward to collaborating with everybody here to win the election." Win
>>>>
>> the
>>
>>>> election? Didn't he do that already?
>>>>
>>>> For those who had been following Obama's [15]
>>>> arrogant<http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/14811
>>>>
>>> utterances
>>>
>>>> and embarrassing show of presumptuous this was nothing new. But
>>>> coming from the pen of the acerbic columnist (whose vitriol is usually
>>>> reserved for conservatives), Millbank's column was a shocker.
>>>>
>>>> Over at [16] Slate<
>>>>
>> http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/xxfactor/archive/2008/08/02/obama-sells-out-on-offshore-drilling.aspx
>>
>>> ,
>>>
>>>> Melinda Henneberger on the XX Factor blog was irate that Obama was
>>>>
>> "selling
>>
>>>> out on offshore drilling." And just as when he reneged on public
>>>>
>> campaign
>>
>>>> financing, his excuse was the worst part. Henneberger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "The Republicans and the oil companies have been really beating the
>>>>
>> drums on
>>
>>>> drilling," Obama said in the interview. Which might give voters the
>>>> impression that anyone who beats the drums loud enough and long enough
>>>>
>> will
>>
>>>> get this same "Alright already!" response out of him. And it might give
>>>> those young voters he is counting on the idea that he's not only not as
>>>> different as they thought…but maybe, just not different enough."
>>>>
>>>> And then others chimed in. The *[17] New
>>>> Republic<
>>>>
>> http://tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=0e0dbc4f-000d-4d75-9f23-614ae8d06494
>>
>>>> * editors worried that somehow Obama's economic message isn't working
>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>> Obama isn't making the most of his chances. They write:
>>>>
>>>> "Yet, somehow, despite all this, McCain remains in the game. This is not
>>>> easy to explain — and it should cause a great deal of introspection at
>>>>
>> Obama
>>
>>>> headquarters. For all the many ways that the stars have aligned for
>>>>
>> Obama,
>>
>>>> he has yet to take full advantage of what historically has been a great
>>>> opportunity."
>>>>
>>>> The bottom line: liberal pundits — following months of analysis by their
>>>> conservative counterparts — had figured out that despite the best
>>>>
>> possible
>>
>>>> terrain for the Democrats to recapture the White House, the Democrats
>>>>
>> (with
>>
>>>> a whole lot of cheerleading from the mainstream media) have chosen a
>>>>
>> thinly
>>
>>>> experienced, irresolute, underachieving and obnoxious standard bearer.
>>>>
>> And
>>
>>>> his excuse-mongering just makes it all the more irritating.
>>>>
>>>> It is not clear what provoked the soul-searching or why reality didn't
>>>>
>> dawn
>>
>>>> on the pundits sooner. After all, they knew all along that he had
>>>>
>> virtually
>>
>>>> no experience and that he often sounded [18] bizarrely
>>>> confident<
>>>>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-exclusive-audio-on_b_96333.html
>>
>>> about
>>>
>>>> his nonexistent credentials.
>>>>
>>>> Some might conclude that they were so [19]
>>>> blinded<http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/4651>by
>>>> their bias against Hillary Clinton and eagerness to shove the Clintons
>>>> off the national stage that they ignored any signs that The Chosen One
>>>>
>> was
>>
>>>> deeply flawed. And, indeed, many of the faults that are potentially so
>>>> dangerous in Obama — his [20] predilection to
>>>> lie<http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/18841>when
>>>> the heat is on and his lack of core principles — were even greater
>>>> liabilities for Clinton in the media's eyes.
>>>>
>>>> It is also true that the McCain camp has shamed the media into
>>>>
>> recognizing
>>
>>>> their infatuation with Obama. By [21]
>>>> mocking<
>>>>
>> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/channel-08/2008/07/mccain_mocks_medias_crush_on_o.html
>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> press, the McCain camp has made the argument in convincing fashion
>>>> that
>>>> the mainstream media has been in the tank for Obama. The McCain camp's
>>>> message: "Your boosterism has become painfully obvious." So it's not
>>>> surprising that there might be some course correction and recognition
>>>>
>> that
>>
>>>> they've gone too far in building up The Ego and concealing his flaws.
>>>>
>>>> But Obama has done his share to lift the veil from the pundits' eyes.
>>>> Sometimes the accumulated evidence is too much even for the mainstream
>>>>
>> media
>>
>>>> to ignore. And it is ironic (but [22] not altogether
>>>> surprising<
>>>>
>> http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/media-misses-big-story-of-obama-trip>)
>>
>>>> that the tipping point may have been the Berlin rally — an explosion of
>>>>
>> ego
>>
>>>> and meaningless rhetoric which attained the level of self-parody.
>>>>
>>>> Moreover, there is nothing that irritates the media more than a
>>>>
>> hypocrite.
>>
>>>> So the temptation is great to point out that the New Politics looks an
>>>>
>> awful
>>
>>>> lot like the Old Politics of flip-flopping, broken promises, lack of
>>>> accountability, and [23]
>>>> fudging<http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/18841
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> facts.
>>>>
>>>> It remains an open question whether the punditocracy has really begun a
>>>> course correction in assessing Obama or is simply evidencing a mild bout
>>>>
>> of
>>
>>>> remorse for its own excesses.
>>>>
>>>> But the question of whether Obama could forever retain his Teflon
>>>>
>> coating
>>
>>>> and stifle concerns about serious weaknesses in his record and character
>>>>
>> has
>>
>>>> been answered. The answer we have learned, from liberal pundits no less,
>>>>
>> is
>>
>>>> a resounding "no."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Chris Geankoplis <napoli68 at charter.net
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Great Idea,
>>>>> but what if McCain croaks during his presidency (he is a pretty old
>>>>> Geezer), why a state funueral would cost a lot more than OBama's
>>>>>
>> pension;
>>
>>>>> therefore voting for O
>>>>> Bama might make more economic sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris G
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Hank" <hnw555 at gmail.com>
>>>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:23 PM
>>>>> Subject: [Rhodes22-list] HOW TO SAVE MILLIONS (Political)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> This makes economic sense to me!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hank
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *HOW TO SAVE MILLIONS** !*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *We should be into saving money** !*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *A president's pension currently is $191,300 per year**.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Assuming the next president lives **to age 80** -*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Sen McCain would receive ZERO pension** as he would reach 80 at the
>>>>>>
>> end
>>
>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> two terms as president.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Sen Obama **would be retired for 26 years after two terms and **would
>>>>>> receive $4,973,800 in pension**.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Therefore it would certainly make economic sense to elect McCain in
>>>>>> November** !*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *How's that for non partisan thinking???*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list