Slave? Anyone?
 

No wonder you are so angry all the time. You're "talents" are not truly appreciated in backward ass PA.

There was a debate????
 

I got several myself. They came directly from McA. It was the righty story of the debate night.

There was a debate????
 

The idea that the campaigns are distributing talking points is not a story.* Nothing wrong with that. The idea that putatively independent journalists are regurgitating them is a story. The people who repeated the RNC's talking points are hacks. I would be curious to hear who repeated the DNC's stuff.

* Except to the extent that it suggests that McAuliffe hired someone with a pulse.

The argument for a big win
 

The quote was: 'The Right will scream "voter fraud" everytime a Hispanic person votes, and the Left will be screaming about voter intimidation and voting machines.'

How does the governments focus on electoral groups for homeland security issues have anything to do with a suggestion that the Right will later scream something everytime a Hispanic person votes. Sorry, but that is just a shrill and absolutely repulsive charge to level without support. Either people should explain what they are talking about (even you haven't explained what he might be talking about to the point that I or anyone would understand it), or they should keep these comments to themselves. Its no wonder someone in Texas would get a pit in their stomach reading it.

That said, what homeland security efforts are you talking about? What are they doing?

There was a debate????
 

Sorry. I was only responding to your query re: did we do that?

Seems I saw all of those points, in nearly the same language, in most of the big-city papers the next day or two.

There was a debate????
 

I am. But it's generally telling me to write to my newspaper and participate in on-line polls. It's not telling me specifically what to say. I should have cut and pasted the one from after the VP debate.

Here's the letter from McAuliffe sent earlier today:

Since we're talking about domestic issues ....
 

Please, please, PLEASE someone raise this in tonight's debate.

WaPo

Holy shit. Bush is contemplating cutting Homeland Security, veterans affairs and education??

Read the rest of the article, too. It's pretty damning stuff as a recounting of how GWB set his fiscal policy, and how we'll be royally fucked if foreigners decide to stop lending us money.

Enjoy the debate, all.

The argument for a big win
 

I honestly don't know exactly what Atrios is talking about, and since he's far to my left I'm not sure I'd be able to explain it to the likes of the Right.

What I did a poor job of describing is that I have read a few articles that homeland security types are hassling voter registration in Hispanic neighborhoods and outside of naturalization ceremonies for new Hispanic citizens. In other words, not cracking down on Hispanics in general (this is not a profiling issue) but rather voter registration. Here's an article from the WaPo, although it is not the one that i read at the time.

Those protesting asked the good question of why would voter registration be a target for homeland security law enforcement activities. Some (including Atrios, I would suppose) think it's setting the stage for such a voter fraud charge, as in "the huge number of illegals we found by staking out the voter registration table indicate that there was more widespread fraud."

I agree the charge is shrill, and even based on the above is probably excessive. I was just observing that it wasn't necessarily the gratuitous "Bush is a Nazi"-type insult you see on the lefty blogosphere, and probably had a place in a blog post predicting a protracted partisan fight after the election.

.... Meanwhile, the books burn.
 

Lyyne Cheney orders destruction of Dept. of Education booklets. Nice.

Rumour has it that the books were "destroyed" on the front lawn of the Naval Observatory in DC, with kerosene and a match. The Vice President was also reported to be in attendance, although the shadows cast by the flickering light of the bonfire, and the obscuring of his features by the tall upward collar of his black robe, caused reports on the sighting to differ.

Seriously, I wonder what the reaction would be if something like this were to have occurred at any time during the Clinton Administration.

Since we're talking about domestic issues ....
 

I'd like to see the actual numbers since - as you are well aware - "cut spending" has become shorthand for "reduce increases in spending"

Since we're talking about domestic issues ....
 

I thought that usually happened when members of the opposition party got ahold of it, but whatever.

Since the article didn't give the exact figures, I guess we'll have to wait until the spring of 2005 in GWB II to see if there's anything to worry about here on fiscal policy, no?

The argument for a big win
 

Homeland Security took over all duties of the INS, which includes preventing fraud by immigrants (legal and otherwise). It's a legit activity for the dept., though I agree their efforts would be better targeted at other aspects of their duties in the run up to the election. Like keeping shit from blowing up.

If the loser raises the cry of "recount! recount!" after this election I will probably be made sufficiently sick by the self serving cesspool of US politics that I will puke on my shoes. That's why I kept maintaining last time that challenging the FL results and demanding repeated recounts was pernicious and foolish. "Oh," everyone kept telling me, "how can it be a bad thing to be sure every vote is counted accurately, when so much is riding on it?" "Because there will be a next time," I said, and here it comes.

BR(I say we adopt the rule in the british system - no recounts, ever, and if there's a fuck up you just suck it up; otherwise the whole system descends into anarchy every time some idiot marks two names by accident)C

The argument for a big win
 

Well, in the spirit of bipartisan compromise that y'all will need to survive my bootheel after November 2, 2004, I will go on record saying that nobody should be hassling anybody outside of a naturalization ceremony. That seems like a particularly despicable thing to be doing, though it would not itself seem to relate to voting fraud charges. Who is doing the hassling here anyway? This is the kind of thing that would get the Right and the Middle going if they were informed of it, so maybe somebody should try publicizing this insanity now rather than waiting to use it as a post-election charge later.

The voter-registration thing is another story though. What better place to catch someone who you might be looking for, than a voter registration place.

Hello

PS For the purposes of clarity, I adopt the remainder of your post which is thusly not addressed.

for Shapey
 

Progressive Review, via Tapped

The argument for a big win
 

2

liberal media continues to paint an overly gloomy picture of Iraq
 

for Shapey
 

Ja? Und?

liberal media continues to paint an overly gloomy picture of Iraq
 

These unwashed hippie illiterates are all traitors and should be taken out and shot in the interest of advancing civilization. They are a blight on face of Lady Liberty.

Oh wait....never mind.

liberal media continues to paint an overly gloomy picture of Iraq
 

I'm not sure what bothers me more -- the shaking of my paradigm (which was to recognize the truth that only traitors and French people thought that things were not A-okay, hunky-dory in Iraq), or that Ty reads the National Review.

The argument for a big win
 

OK. I'll have my people check to see if there's a paper with a larger circulation than the WaPo who might want to pick this story up.
I agree, assuming you're looking for high school nerds with fake IDs.

Because Penske Ain't Here
 

"Yeah, he'll be mad because I didn't say it was the biggest one I ever saw."

-- Attorney Bob Bennett, as quoted by CBS News' Bob Schieffer in TV Guide and his new book, after describing "a part of Clinton's anatomy" as "normal in size, shape and direction."

Because Penske Ain't Here
 

dissent. It has pointed in the directon of some things I don't find normal. no offense ykw,

Why does Senator Kerry acknowledge only one of our internets?

You're resorting to name-calling. Kerry must be losing.

Speaking of losers, god did Anaheim suck. Kudos to your beloved Sox*


* not really. fuck 'em in the ear.

At least I'm not yelling. Then you'd know I was toast.

And not Vlad. He didn't suck.

Well, I'm just relieved that President Bush won't appoint a Supreme Court justice who believes Dred Scott is good law.

I'm not saying crap. Something about the fat lady.

And I mean baseball...not the Effete Liberal Snob*

* where is that sock? where Penske, where?

Now this is something new.

Need Some Wood?
 

Both were really strong and I think it was partly due to the format of the debate. The way the questions were asked (this guy over there wants you to explain....) made them seem like challenges and so we got more fiery responses. I like when the judge hearing your motion asks you pointed questions and you have to really argue your points, as opposed to a judge that lets you drone on. It always works out better.

Bush highlights:

Getting up off his chair quickly and decisively to answer a question. No more long delays and mumbling.

Pointing out BOTH thought there were WMDs and both wanted to bring Saddam down.

Santions were not effective and the UN had not been effective.

The Kerry Plan sounds familiar b/c it's the Bush Plan (train troops, etc.).

Recognizing unpopularity -- "I have made decisions that caused people to not understand our values and I know it's been unpopular internationally". Noting his Israel decisions (dissing Arafat) also aren't popular in Europe.

Warning that we may not WANT to necessarily be "popular" in Europe.

North Korea: we are acting multi-laterally which is what Kerry has been saying he wants us to do.

Suggeting Kerry wants socialized medicine.

You want to cut punitive damages, Kerry? Then you should have showed up and voted on the bill; instead you put a trial lawyer on the ticket.

Deficit -- levelling with people: look, we had a stock market downturn and we're at war, for chrissakes.

It looked to me that Bush gained confidence by doing well, and the confidence let him go even further. And made him more relaxed....so he could do that bit about "I own a timber company? Ya need some wood?" I do think Bush got mostly cake walk questions. (Question: were audience participants warned not to react or show facial expressions when the debaters talked? That would be hard to do).

I wish Bush took Kerry to task when Kerry answered the question, "What would you do about Iran?" and he droned on but his only direct answer was "I'd get tough." Bush should have said something to the effect -- do you see how he answered the question? Where's the beef?

Overall, although I think both did well, Bush was able to shine brighter possibly because it was such a change from the last debate. Kerry did well, but his performance was essentially the same (i.e., excellent) as the last debate.

Just my $.02.

I'm Pleased
 

I think that Kerry did very well, and came across well to the viewers. Bush was _much_ better than last time. The format suited him, but who would have guessed that it suited Kerry too?

It seemed to me that Kerry handled the issue of contradictions well, and handled some of the difficult domestic policy questions well and sensitively (stem cell research and abortion rights).

Bush obviously hates being challenged though. I'm pretty sure Kerry oftem looked directly at Bush and spoke at him while answering to try to provoke a reaction. He got some. At least three times Bush practically jumped out of his chair, spoke over the moderator, and seemed angry during his 30 second extensions.

I suppose I'd give the debate to Kerry, if I had to pick. Bush may have done well enough to enable his side to claim victory, but I can't see it. The most important thing, at this point, is that the debate surely did not hurt Kerry, and probably helped -- and that's what he needs right now.

S_A_M

The only way anyone will appoint a Supreme Court Justice ever again is if the Senate balance slants. that means that if it goes like its looking, you'll have people on the Supremes who think Dredis bad law, but for the opposite reason you think so. When you look in the mirror tonight, thank yourself.

Tale of Two Internets
 

Because the second one is still a "multi-lateral" effort in progress. Technically speaking we still only have the one Comrade Gore created.

I'm Pleased
 

another take? the last time bush looked lost. this time not. the "looking lost" cost him big. does the "not lost" regain it for him? we will see.

Need Some Wood?
 

This would be a highlight if it weren't true, but it's wrong. The report released yesterday -- written by someone picked by the Administration -- makes clear that the sanctions were working. Iraq's WMD capabilities were "diminishing," not growing.

Be grateful that I reply to you so much.

You see, when I quote you [like this post], all of those people that have you on "ignore" get the opportunity to see your wry, underappreciated wit.

A "second bite at the apple," if you will.

I'm Pleased
 

A good analysis. I think who won will come down to who people trust and who has credibility. Obviously, I give greater credibility to Kerry; I thought it was a slam dunk. I think Bush has become a broken record with shallow one-liners about flip-flopping, and that at this point they hurt him. Kerry was great at turning around the question on his voting record on healthcare and pointing, and much more in control of facts and figures. He more often answered the question and more often answered it more thoroughly - to hear Bush tell it, he still won't tell you anything he's done wrong and how he'll fix it. How about "No child left behind"? He isn't willing to fund when he pushed, so there must be something he thinks is wrong with it. So tell us, already!

But, I want to see data on the undecided -- they get to choose the winner. I'm expecting to see data going Kerry's way over the next 24-48 hours.

Need Some Wood?
 

And Kerry's response that sanctions were working because there were no WMD's would be a highlight for him if only the response made sense. Did the sanctions cause Saddam to comply with UN resolutions? No they did not. The sanctions were not working.

I'm Pleased
 

This, I will agree with. Even I rolled my eyes when I heard the same "flip flop" soundbite.

I'm Pleased
 

Further proof of the predisposition of the listeners.

I laughed aloud at Kerry's tough defense claims and his small government soundbites.

What the Left fails to realize, is that the ABK vote has grown so strong that it almost rivals the ABB vote.

I'm Pleased
 

It would get old, if he stopped.

But now he's flipped on the global test.