The broadcast network anchors and reporters were almost as giddy as Barack Obama over liberal Democrat Ted Kennedy's endorsement of the presidential candidate. ABC, CBS and NBC all led Monday night with it and ABC's David Wright adopted campaign slogans as he enthused about how “today the audacity of hope had its rendezvous with destiny. The Kennedy clan anointed Barack Obama a son of Camelot.” CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric teased, “Passing the torch: Barack Obama is tapped as the candidate to continue the Kennedy legacy.” NBC's Lee Cowan, who earlier this month conceded “it's almost hard to remain objective” when covering Obama, showed he also has a soft spot for the Kennedys as he radiated over how “the endorsement brought the Kennedy mystique to this campaign, not in a whisper, but a roar.” Viewers then got a soundbite of Kennedy yelling during the event at American University.
[UPDATED with Nightline, 1:05 AM EST: With “New Son of Camelot” on screen over video of Obama and Ted Kennedy, anchor Terry Moran trumpeted the “new son of Camelot. Ted and Caroline Kennedy pass the torch to Barack Obama to carry the legacy of JFK.” Moran soon hailed how “the political world was transfixed by the spectacle of the most powerful Democratic family of the 20th century christening a new torch bearer for the 21st.” David Wright repeated his “the audacity of hope had its rendezvous with destiny” line before championing the “merging ideals from two different eras” as “Obama is now an adopted son of Camelot.”]
Seemingly relaying the perspective of the press corps more than the public at large, NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams led by contending: “It's been 45 years since a Kennedy has been in the White House, and yet because of the American fascination with the family name, and the family business of politics, the Kennedy name still has the power to grab the attention of millions of Americans.”
Jeff Greenfield's CBS Evening News story was the most restrained of the three networks and only CBS limited itself to just one story on the endorsement. ABC's World News featured a brief interview with Ted and Caroline Kennedy about why they picked Obama.
Though all but CBS aired multiple segments on the Kennedy endorsement of Obama, none found time to mention the arrest order issued Monday for Tony Rezko, a big Obama donor up on charges of fraud, extortion and money laundering. “Indicted Obama Fundraiser's Bond Revoked,” read the headline over a Monday afternoon AP dispatch, which began:
CHICAGO -- A judge revoked the $2 million bond Monday for indicted businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who has raised thousands of dollars for Barack Obama and Illinois politicians.
U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve said she grew concerned after learning Rezko received $3.5 million from a company in Lebanon; he had claimed that he had no income. St. Eve said she feared Rezko could be a flight risk.
The real estate developer and fast food magnate was arrested Monday morning at his home in suburban Wilmette. At an afternoon hearing, the judge ordered him into custody and scheduled a Tuesday hearing where Rezko's attorneys will attempt to get bond reinstated.
Rezko has pleaded not guilty to charges of fraud, attempted extortion and money laundering, and is scheduled to stand trial Feb. 25. He is accused of pressuring businesses seeking work before two state regulatory boards to make campaign contributions and payoffs.
Rezko had long been a fundraiser for Gov. Rod Blagojevich and for Obama, the presidential candidate and senator from Illinois. Neither Democrat has been accused of wrongdoing in the case...
Some snips from the Monday, January 28 evening newscast excitement in the shows all done from Washington, DC since the anchors were in town to visit the White House before the State of the Union address:
# ABC's World News, Charles Gibson teased: “Two generations of Kennedys give Obama a rousing endorsement...”
DAVID WRIGHT BEGAN HIS LEAD STORY:
Today they gathered by the thousands at American University, sensing a moment of history. John F. Kennedy gave the commencement address here five months before he was shot. And today the audacity of hope had its rendezvous with destiny. The Kennedy clan anointed Barack Obama a son of Camelot...[last phrase over video of President Kennedy holding his son John Jr.]
# NEW, 1:05 AM EST, ABC's Nightline:
TERRY MORAN:
Tonight on Nightline, new son of Camelot. Ted and Caroline Kennedy pass the torch to Barack Obama to carry the legacy of JFK...
Good evening, everyone. I'm Terry Moran. And tonight, on a night when the President gave his final State of the Union address, he was overshadowed. The political world was transfixed by the spectacle of the most powerful Democratic family of the 20th century christening a new torch bearer for the 21st...
DAVID WRIGHT:
Today, the audacity of hope had its rendezvous with destiny. No mere endorsement this, more like a political anointment from the Kennedys, merging ideals from two different eras....
Obama is now an adopted son of Camelot. His candidacy blessed not just by the Lion of the Senate, patriarch of the clan, but by JFK's daughter.
# CBS Evening News, Katie Couric teased: “Passing the torch. Barack Obama is tapped as the candidate to continue the Kennedy legacy.”
# NBC Nightly News, Brian Williams teased: “Passing the torch: Tonight Barack Obama gets an endorsement Hillary Clinton wanted badly, but will it translate to votes?”
WILLIAMS LED:
It's been 45 years since a Kennedy has been in the White House, and yet because of the American fascination with the family name, and the family business of politics, the Kennedy name still has the power to grab the attention of millions of Americans...
WITH “CAMELOT EFFECT?” ON SCREEN, LEE COWAN ASSERTED:
Of all the memorable images of this campaign, Barack Obama has never had a moment quite like this: Two generations of Kennedys, the standard-bearers of the best-know political name in Washington, standing behind one young Senator from Illinois....The endorsement brought the Kennedy mystique to this campaign, not in a whisper, but a roar.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center





Today they gathered by the thousands at American University, sensing a moment of history. John F. Kennedy gave the commencement address here five months before he was shot. And today the audacity of hope had its rendezvous with destiny. The Kennedy clan anointed Barack Obama a son of Camelot...[last phrase over video of President Kennedy holding his son John Jr.]
Tonight on Nightline, new son of Camelot. Ted and Caroline Kennedy pass the torch to Barack Obama to carry the legacy of JFK...














Editor at Large
Comments Policy
So much for the "Change
January 28, 2008 - 22:04 ET by general companySo much for the "Change theme" . The audacity of the same crooks that have made DC the joke it has become.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
Kennedy myth
January 28, 2008 - 22:08 ET by j17ghsIf BO is to continue the Kennedy "legacy," then we can expect ...
... more blatant cheating to win elections, as JFK's dad did for him in Chicago;
... more drunken debauchery and womanizing;
... more botched attempts at regional and global stability (Bay of Pigs and Vietnam);
... and a media even more fawning and oblivious than these syncophantic useful idiots are today.
Then, of course, there are all the many problems a Marxist Muslim in the White House under the control of Nazi George "Soros" Schwartz would cause for us. Oh yeah, let's trust Ted Kennedy and get carried away with BO. Of course, if you don't, you could wind up sleeping with the fish.
We can now move forward....
January 28, 2008 - 22:18 ET by motherbeltThe MSM Obama acolytes act like the country has been waiting with bated breath for 40 years, waiting for the day that....finally....Ted Kennedy would "anoint" someone as his brother's successor. To hear them one would think the entire country has been in limbo, or drifting aimlessly...or, dare I say, wandering in the desert for 40 years, waiting for the one who would lead us to the "Promise Land." (Missing "d" is intentional)
The Kennedy family has spoken. The country can go on, now.
Wait a minute
January 29, 2008 - 00:10 ET by KC MulvilleWasn't Teddy supposed to be his brother's successor? Bobby might have been, but Teddy just plain lost.
Well at least Teddy didn't
January 28, 2008 - 22:16 ET by Airforce_5_OWell at least Teddy didn't take him for a drunken mid-night drive.
At least
January 28, 2008 - 22:18 ET by DEVILDOCMOMnot yet. :)
maybe he and Teddy's boy
January 28, 2008 - 22:24 ET by Airforce_5_Omaybe he and Teddy's boy can go pop some Oxycodones and whiskey and drive around DC. You know, hanging like back on the block.
Well, who knows,
January 28, 2008 - 22:45 ET by DEVILDOCMOMperhaps that is how the deal was sealed. They just were not caught.
Apparently the NOW gang
January 28, 2008 - 22:19 ET by DEVILDOCMOMis all in a tizzy over this endorsement. "Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal. Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard." (NOW release and it continues on, of course).
I sure become upset when this group implies they speak for all women. They should say "Our tiny group of misguided women..." I find the whole Kennedy thing quite amusing.
Caught a typo in previous post.
Teddy
January 28, 2008 - 22:27 ET by Cool ArrowBetraying women? This is a first for Teddy. At least he reported the accident 9 hours after sinking Mary Jo.
♣ a seal
WOW
January 28, 2008 - 22:42 ET by DEVILDOCMOMdid he report it that quickly? And here, all these years, I had been thinking poorly of him.
supporting misogynist Bill & enabling Hil
January 28, 2008 - 22:30 ET byseems to be yet another cognative dissonance within that pretentious organization.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Clear vision
January 29, 2008 - 16:49 ET by docbNOW quit speaking for many feminists when they allowed Bill and Hill to slander/ slime/ threaten and generally destroy the lives of women he was attacking and raping and exploiting. That organization had better look at their track record..it is dismal. Caroline and Ted see the future and are no longer willing to be held hostage by the slime of the past. Perhaps NOW should look to the future ,too.
Take a really good, close look at the picture at the top.
January 28, 2008 - 22:28 ET by R D HelmI appears Obama is poking Caroline in the ear.
Either that, or planting subliminal messages.
Captionfest, anyone?
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Sickening
January 28, 2008 - 22:35 ET by iveseenitallAll the books about the Kennedy's, from the old WWII dad on down. Read 'em and weep (for America). Yet the "liberals" love the bastards. Figures.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
I'll admit I'm
January 28, 2008 - 22:36 ET by BlazerI'll admit I'm confused. I thought being anointed by a Kennedy meant getting drunkenly fondled and then recieving a tidal creek Baptism.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
Yeah, just what this country (and the world for that matter) ...
January 28, 2008 - 22:37 ET by drillanwr... need right now ... Another "celebrity" president.
I'm sorry. I gotta say it. Finally, the oh-so civil rights oriented Kennedy Klan has a "token" worthy of its nod. An empty suit by which Teddy can fill with his own ideology and live the presidency vicariously through.
This is really bad for
January 28, 2008 - 22:44 ET by MidAmericaThis is really bad for hillary. Do not underestimate the power of the kennedy myth in the democrat party. Hillary now has to not only deny the first viable black candidate she has to deny everyone a renewal of Camalot. Even if she wins she's a wounded candidate.
This is the senior far left
January 28, 2008 - 22:59 ET by jdhawkThis is the senior far left socialist, Ted "the swimmer" Kennedy, and his acolyte, bambi, joining forces.
Why did Kennedy align behind bambi? It is simple, bambi is the most far left of the two front runners in the defeatocrat field.
If there was ever a time for conversatives to get out the vote, even if McCain gets the nomination, this is it.
By the way, Teddy has spent forty odd years tearing to shreds this so-called Camelot BS with womanizing, boozing and murder. He is a disgrace to their name and embarrassment to the American people.
A word about President Kennedy: If you look at the policies of President Kennedy, you would recongnize him as a conservative in many areas by today's standards. He fought for freedom across the globe, passed tax cuts, etc. If he was running today, he would have to change to the Republican party to have half a chance of being elected.
Well said jd, especially
January 28, 2008 - 23:16 ET by BlazerWell said jd, especially about JFK, spot on. Unfortunately I would vote for Paul before I would McCain and I cant' believe I just typed that.
At any rate these old-socialist, ant-establishment dim-wit's, who long for thier hey-day's of the sixties and early seventies when they were most effective at tearing down America, are getting to that time in the sunset of thier irrelevant lives, when they have to pass the dimly lit torch of liberalism.
But then we all know how Obama is for change in the old D.C. blue blood establishment and will not let the lobbyist's dictate his policies (whatever they are), but what does he do? Take the torch and the most coveted (liberal) endorsement from an old blue blood establishment politician who has let all of his policies be dictated by lobbyist's, go figure. But hey that's "change" for ya'. Kinda remind's me of straight talk.
When he means "change" is he talking about his underwear?
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
Somebody's dreaming, and it ain't us!
January 28, 2008 - 23:02 ET by SATerp"...the Kennedy name still has the power to grab the attention of millions of Americans.”
Only in the tiny little minds of the media....
I'm Digging It!
January 29, 2008 - 00:03 ET by Intellectual HonestyThe neo-left is in a tizzy and it will only become more so. You have members in good standing of two PC groups duking it out: female vs. black. It's the first real battle of two privileged groups with the same excuse if their candidate doesn't win: the underlying prejudice (racism or sexism) of the American electorate.
One of the greatest satires on the PC craze was on South Park. It starts with kids accusing other kids of sexual harrassment, then kids accusing teachers, teachers accusing teachers, parents accusing teachers and on and on until a big court room scene with all the accusers packed in. After the judge takes his seat the bailiff declares: "And now for the opening arguments of the case: Everybody vs. Everybody."
Kennedy and Ma Politics
January 28, 2008 - 23:25 ET by Scrapiron= crime, so what is new. The Kennedy family found out B Hussein Obama has connections to the Il mafia and want in.
Obama or Hilary would win landslides over McCain
January 28, 2008 - 23:57 ET by Daniel BakerWhy would people vote for a pseudo liberal when they can get the real thing.
Daniel, this may be a first in the history of NB.
January 29, 2008 - 00:04 ET by R D HelmThis is the first time I have ever agreed with you totally.
And the reason Broom Hilda or B. Hussein Obama would trounce McCain is that, if he is the republican nominee, I will be voting for his opponent. As will many of us true conservatives.
Better to have a democrat sign amnesty, tax increases, environmental nuttiness, etc. into law instead of McCain.
At least the republicans will have something to run against in 2012.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
McCains electability constituency needs an education
January 29, 2008 - 00:16 ET by Daniel BakerPlease go and spread the word
Can there be an doubt.
January 29, 2008 - 00:04 ET by ScrapironThat we no longer have any news organizations. They are all now anti-american left wing political hack machines. If enough Americans would wake up and turn them off and notify their financers they would go the way of print media, streight to the grave yard. I refuse to watch or listen to them and anything I accidently hear them say is automatically put in the 'lie' catagory. It's a he!! of a thing when the entire Lame Stream Media in America has became worse than Pravda under the hard core communist, but they have.
The Two Kennedy's Who Know
January 29, 2008 - 00:22 ET by Lame CherryTeddy Kennedy knows very well who murdered his brothers and John jr as does Caroline. They also know those forces are the ones who put Bill and Hillary into office with one of the expressed purposes of destroying the party Jack Kennedy built.
For all the whining Junior Reagan did over George Bush claiming the Reagan legacy..........how would your family if it was Kennedy in smoking ashes like to know that Bill Clinton's biggest achievement was being a sex pervert like Jack and Bobby.
This is payback for the Kennedy's as they now understand and have permission to hammer Hillary. They have run out of Kennedy's and long to anoint a successor to carry on the calling. Barak Obama is that dream of RFK and JFK in the civil rights package and liberalism.
As the above notes though the Kennedy's have a rude awakening in store for while being the little tyrants on the block, the big tyrants of the cartel who installed Bill and have abandoned Hillary have not anointed Obama.
If Obama "clears" in the meaning that no Patrick Fitzgerald charges are filed on him, then it means that Barak Obama has sold his soul to the Rockefeller order like John McCain has.
Rezko just didn't show up with a sweatheart deal for Obama. What the Rockefeller's create they also create a failsafe switch to blackmail or bring down that which they use.
Obama was only supposed to be the black guy let in for the one meal to make blacks think they were part of the process. He has though grown and unless he does exactly what the Rockefeller cartel orders him to.........he will go down faster than Hillary.
One only has to look at who the hedge fund operators are backing. The hedge fund operation is run by George Soros for the Rothschilds. Number one is Hillary Clinton. Number 2 is Barak Obama and number 5 is John Edwards in funds.
What the Rockefellers create, the Kennedy's might attach to........but in the end it is old man David who decides by blackmail or indictment if Obama stays in the race.
The cartel is still backing Al Gore in now tamping down global warming and his buddy Mike Bloomberg. Perhaps too many posts here have them changing strategy. Time will tell.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
David Brooks, the token NYtimes...
January 29, 2008 - 02:20 ET by Parker1227..."conservative" is now swooning over the Kennedy/Obama mystique (insert gagging noise of choice).
Pop-stars make teenagers tremble and yearn too.
Will someone please tell me what Obama is bringing that is "new" - besides the childish wish that diametrically opposed interest groups should just drop their raison d'etre for the sake of political civility?
Politics, being the fight for power that it is, has always been and always will be angry and at times even uncivil. As long as bullets remain verbal ones - all is well. Grow up people!
Isn't Obama minus the oratory, just a down-the-line Left Democrat on almost every issue?
You know, the fascination
January 29, 2008 - 02:32 ET by Gary P JacksonYou know, the fascination with the Kennedys is just incredible to me.
You had Joe Kennedy, who was into all sorts of "questionable" dealing.
Joseph P Kennedy was killed when his plane exploded. on a dangerous WWII mission.
John F Kennedy (Jack) was a Navy hero, Congressman, and President of the United States. He also left Cuban Nationals to die in the Bay of Pigs when he went back on his promise of air cover. Many men were killed, and Fidel Castro has now been in power for nearly 50 years.
Was hooked on pain killers after treatment for injuries in WWII. Was a womanizer (see Bill Clinton) Presided over the start of the Vietnam War that was unsuccessfully executed because of mistakes in Washington. Was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, who was a Cuban sympathizer.
Bobby Kennedy was Jack's Attorney General, and ran for President. Womanizer. It was said that he and Jack were sharing a bed with Marilyn Monroe, and may have had something to do with her death. Was assassinated while running for President by Sirhan Sirhan a 24 year old Palestinian.
Ted Kennedy, Senator, drunk. Had mistress in car after a party. Crashed car on the Chappaquiddick bridge. Swam out of car leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to drown. Kennedy waited nearly 17 hours before reporting the accident, no doubt waiting to clean up, and sober up. Kennedy pled guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and received a suspended sentence of two months in jail. Still Roaming the halls of the Senate.
Rosemary Kennedy, lobotomized.
John F Kennedy Jr., successful magazine publisher, died young in a plane crash.
*******************************************************
I'm sure if you look in any family you'll see there are folks they ain't proud of! So lets look at another fairly successful family, say, the Bushs.
*****************************************************
George Herbert Walker Bush, was the son of Senator Prescott Bush. He was a Navy Pilot during WWII. After completing a successful bombing mission, with the engine on fire, he and his crew bailed out. Bush was the only survivor. He received the Distinguished Flying Cross, Air Medals, and the Presidential Unit Citation.
After that, Bush was a United States Congressman from Texas. He then became United States Ambassador to the United Nations. Then he was Chief of the United States Liaison Office to China.
After that, he became the director of the Central Intelligence Agency.He ran unsuccessfully for President in 1980 and the winner, Ronald Wilson Reagan, asked him to be his Vice President. Eight years later, became President of the United States.
Successfully conducted Operation Just Cause, in Panama, capturing Manuel Noriega, and freeing the citizens of Panama. Successfully conducted Operation Desert Storm and drove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. Rescuing them from a brutal dictator.
He is the oldest living President and at 83 he still enjoys jumping out of planes!
George W Bush, Bachelor Degree in History, Yale University. MBA, Harvard.
Was in the Air National Guard, and flew Convair F-102s. After finishing school, worked in family oil business. Ran unsuccessfully for Texas Congressional seat. Went back into the oil business Becoming senior partner and CEO of several ventures.
Became part owner of the Texas Rangers Baseball Team, and managing general. Paid 800,000 to buy into the team. After helping make numerous changes, sold his part for $15M.
Was elected Governor of the State of Texas with a 52 to 47 percent victory over popular Ann Richards. He almost immediately passed the largest tax cut in the history of the state. Increased educational funding. Sponsored tort reform bill. Set higher standards for schools and criminal justice. Executed a record 152 prisoners.
Became first Texas Governor to win two consecutive 4 year terms, by winning re-election in a landslide with around 69 percent of the vote.
Successfully ran for President in 2000. Held the country together after brutal attacks on 9/11/2001, the first major attack on US soil since December 7th, 1941.
Has successfully kept America safe from further attacks, which the experts said was impossible. Is Commander in Chief of all United States Forces, and in his capacity, has aggressively prosecuted the war on terror, and the battles in Iraq and Afghanistan. And has freed 10's of millions Iraqi and Afghani people, who lived under great oppression.
Successfully elected to another term. Carried 31 of 50 states with an Electoral College total of 286 becoming the first President since his father to win the outright majority of the popular vote. Kept the Republican majority of Senators and Congressmen, the first time a sitting President maintained control of both houses of Congress since Calvin Coolidge's election in 1924.
Jeb Bush at 17 traveled to Leon, Guanajuanto, in Mexico, as part of his school's student exchange program. He spent his time there teaching English, and it was there that he met his future wife.
Bush attended the University of Texas, at Austin., where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa with a Bachelor's degree in Latin American Studies in 1973, taking only two and a half years to complete his work, and obtaining generally excellent grades. He registered for the draft, but the Vietnam War ended before his number came up.
Became successful in Florida real estate.
Was Florida's Secretary of Commerce. Was elected Governor of Florida and successfully helped manage many disasters, such as Tornadoes and hurricanes.
Considered a good bet to be President someday.
******************************************************
Looking at these two incredible families, one has to wonder which family really deserves a "Camelot" type of mystique, and which family's history reads like a Greek tragedy!
I'll take "Handsome
January 29, 2008 - 02:40 ET by tracheostomyI'll take "Handsome Glamourous Bad Boys of the White House" for 500, Alex.
Listen. I love Bush. I want to meet him someday. I want the talking action figure. But he's got nothing on the awesomely powerful and purely subjective Kennedy "star power" and ability to impress our self-centered; celebrity-centered nation.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Republicans hate when I say this, but...
January 29, 2008 - 02:46 ET by sarcasmoOne of the reasons $800,000 magically turned into $15 million is called "stadium welfare from taxpayers," and it's the exact opposite of the rosy capitalism in your word-picture. But it's the ugly truth.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
→ Stadium Welfare
January 29, 2008 - 02:59 ET by Cool ArrowFunny how you don't hear Texans complaining about that magnificent structure.
♣ a seal
Oh yeah?
January 29, 2008 - 03:04 ET by sarcasmoI'll bet I could find a Texas Taxpayer who'd happily complain about stadium-welfare for Bush (or anyone else) before sundown. Wanna take that bet?? I doubt it...
This is one of those issues like the Mark Rich pardons for the Clintons, buddy. The best advice I have is to try the cloak by ignoring strategy on this one, because it's socialism, like it or not, that you seem to be defending here...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Sarc You do realize that
January 29, 2008 - 03:39 ET by Gary P JacksonSarc
You do realize that every High School, College, and Professional stadium, gym, court, what have you, is payed for by tax payer monies?
I'm just pizzed off you can't get a city to help build a racetrack, that will attract more people!
But back to the investment. Let me say this in the very nicest of way: You obviously have little understanding of how capitolism really works. Mr.Bush handed over $800,000 to the Rangers Ball Club. By doing that, he expected to make money, just as if he had put it in a Certificate of Deposit (CD) at the bank. Obviously with the shape the ball club was in, that $800,000 was at some risk. Just like investing in high risk stocks, you can lose it all, or make a pretty nice chunk of change.
Mr.Bush worked hard to get the Ranger going. The stadium itself is magnificent, and is a multi purpose facility hosting car shows, swap meets, and any money making deal. Since the Rangers lease the place, there is money coming in. The financial impact to the area is huge.
Mr. Bush's efforts help get the team and the stadium in pristine condition. His efforts made the Team worth more, and the stadium worth more.
In simpler terms, say you got an old car, it's a classic, but it is rough with a capitol "R". At best, it's worth $1000. So, you pull the body off the frame. You completely refurbish the frame, replacing bushings, steering parts, what ever is needed to make it new, Then you go through the body, fixing dents, replacing rusted out panels, then painting it with a really slick job. You put the same effort into the drivetrain, and the interior.
Now your $1000 dollar car is worth $100,000. Minus expenses incurred to restore the car, you will make $25-50,000
Scale that up, and that's what Mr Bush, and loads of hard working folks did up in Arlington.
Capitalism
January 29, 2008 - 03:46 ET by sarcasmoDoes NOT work with stadium subsidies. Taxpayers invariably lose, and if I buy an old car for restoration, taxpayers ARE NOT on the hook for my expenses under capitalism. I repeat, what happened with that stadium was welfare, not capitalism. The fact that schooling is also socialist is a separate topic, so I complain about it separately, but it doesn't function as an excuse for stadium-socialists. The capitalist answer, whether it's stadiums or schools, is no tax-money spending.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
→ sarc
January 29, 2008 - 03:59 ET by Cool ArrowWas that sales tax increase imposed without a vote?
♣ a seal
See the Reason articles linked below
January 29, 2008 - 04:14 ET by sarcasmoStadium-welfare votes are timed for elections when pro-tax voters are likely to vote on them. And if tomorrow 50%+1 of us decided it would be a good thing to steal part or all of Warren Buffett's money, that wouldn't suddenly make it a good (or moral, or non-socialist...) idea. Stadium-socialism is wrong. It's not a "hate Bush" thing with me, it's a "hate socialism" thing instead.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
→ It's wrong?
January 29, 2008 - 04:23 ET by Cool ArrowIs it legal to steal Warren Buffet's money? Show me the statute.
Is it illegal to float a bond issue or put a sales tax up for vote? Again, show me the statute.
I don't understand why I should have a say in how Arlington runs its government. I don't live there.
♣ a seal
Sure it's legal.
January 29, 2008 - 04:44 ET by sarcasmoIt happens every April 15th for me, and quarterly for Warren I'm sure. And it would be very easy to write an alternative tax law which explicitly went-after Warren and very rich folks like him. If the law passed, it would indeed be legal. Remember, for nutty libertarians like me taxation is theft, even if not everyone agrees.
I simply don't want municipal governments' fiscal irresponsibility imposing inflation-tax penalties on our grandkids. I find it a bit odd that you seem to oppose that view, because it's my impression that's how conservatives feel, or used-to-feel about government spending on things that look a lot like business-not-government.
Why not make stadiums the old fashioned way, where a willing bank takes a risk instead of unwilling taxpayers getting stuck with it? This seems an odd one for you to defend if you're just reflexively-defending Dubya, too. I'm sure that with very-little digging I could find you an instance of similar stadium-welfare helping partisan Democrats. It won't change anything for me, of course, because welfare's welfare, but would my doing that help you to see that this is wrong?
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
I don't want to say
January 29, 2008 - 04:49 ET by Gary P JacksonI don't want to say something to hurt you feelings, and I'm not trying to
impugn your intelligence. But you don't get it.
Cities build stadiums to attract fans, lots of fans, They get a cut of every ticket sold, and generally lease space to food vendors, and also get a cut of their take.
When The Rangers aren't playing, the city has all sorts of events that bring in tons of money. So you now see the direct monetary benefit to the city. It will be in the millions (gross)
But there is also a very indirect benefit to the city. The stadium is a destination for travelers. Be it a Rangers game, or a Hot Rod car show, or a Sami Show, not only are people coming from out of town to the event and putting money into the kitty, more often than not, they are buying gasoline, going to a nice restaurant, and maybe even spending the night.
All along the way, these folks are paying taxes in the city of Arlington.
As for Bush's investment, which was risky, meaning he could have lost every penny, was NOT in the stadium, but in the ball club itself. Again, by hard work and some common sense, he made the Texas Rangers baseball franchise worth a whole lot of money. And it just so happened, someone was willing to pay George's price. But the money he made did not come from "welfare". His money came from the ball club. It would be just like the food vendors who have a contract to operate there had decided to sell the rest of their contract to someone else at a profit.
Don't know if you are a racing fan or not. But if you know NASCAR, you've heard the name Bruton Smith. He owns the nicest race tracks on the circuit. Including the one in FT Worth. In fact, out side of a few tracks Bruton's SMI and the France family's ISC own all of the tracks. The France family own NASCAR.
Now Bruton has built world class drag strips at almost all of his roundy round tracks. He has this track in Charlotte, Lowes Motor Speedway. It sets on about a thousand acres. This is hometown for every NASCAR Sprint Cup team. They have two NASCAR events a year, plus other events, putting in $100,00's of millions into the local economy.
Smith decided to start building the most incredible drag strip in the sport. A real world class facility. http://www.nhra.com/...
Since he already had zoning for a race track, he broke ground. Then the good city folk started whining about extra noise, traffic, blah, blah, blah. Typical BS. The track was in the country 50 years ago, and now that people have built houses near it, they think their needs are more important than the racers and fans,
This little riff between the city, and Bruton shook the racing world. If he couldn't build his track here, he would tear the entire facility down, and move his entire operation.
Bear in mind, Smith is a self made multi-billionaire. And while this was going on, he paid $320 million CASH to buy a track in New Hampshire!
As all of this went on, the city commissioners went crazy. He was offered thousands of acres free to move to one location. He was even offered to move from North Carolina, to South Carolina.
And honestly, he was looking to do a face lift on the round track anyway, so he could have built an entire, brand new deal somewhere else for only $20 to $30m more! All of the new locations offered generous incentives over and above the free land. Tax abatements were on the table.
Now think about it, why were all of these people scrambling to get this track in their city? One hint, $100's of millions. And bear in mind, Bruton's money was paying for everything, right down to the toilet paper in the rest rooms! (excluding the land)
In the end, the track will stay where it is, the city will help with road construction around it. And Bruton got some serious tax breaks!
So again, when you look at Bush's deal separate the ball team he owned part of, from everything else. They are two separated things.
BTW, have you ever wondered why a city goes nuts when a pro ball team threatens to leave town if they don't get a new place to play? It's all about the millions upon millions the fans that visit the stadium, or race track leave at local business when they come to town!
If they're that-good of an idea...
January 29, 2008 - 04:58 ET by sarcasmoThen they wouldn't need subsidies, not to insult your intelligence.
This kind of central planning never works in the long run. The way cities and towns should compete is just low taxes & low spending, not giant socialist stadiums from massive debt. Do the Yankees need or deserve $1 Billion in tax subsidies? I think not.
Conservatives need to get re-aquainted with the idea of less-spending in reality -- not just in rhetoric at election-time -- if they truly want less government. As this thread shows, it's not going to be easy...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
→ The ghost town
January 29, 2008 - 05:09 ET by Cool ArrowHow well are the businesses along the original Route 66 doing?
How about those towns that were unable to get the railroad to go through in the early days?
Citizens have a choice:
The proposal is attractive so I will vote "yes"
The proposal is not attractive so I will vote "no"
♣ a seal
→ NASA is Stadium Socialism
January 29, 2008 - 05:29 ET by Cool ArrowGoing to the moon? On the taxpayer dime? Nonsense.
We need to dismantle that boondoggle immediately. Of course the residents of Florida might have a problem with it since they've been sucking off the government teat for so long they wouldn't know how to act. <sarcasm intended>
Regardless of the benefits of the NASA program, sarc's logic dictates he condemn NASA as well, even though private enterprise is only now making baby steps in that direction.
Come on sarc. Rationalize NASA.
♣ a seal
I (almost) totally-agree.
January 29, 2008 - 06:04 ET by sarcasmoMost of NASA should be dismantled. It bungles things frequently, as we've all seen over the years. If you look at aviation's model of decentralized (relatively) businesses competing but not really under direct big government control and then look at aviation's brilliant progress since the Wright Bros, the accomplishments of the Space Program, or at least the manned version of it, kinda look pale.
NASA is probably my very favorite government program, and not just because it benefits this area & employed my parents when I was born, but I've always been FOR cutting it if that's what it takes to get a smaller government, with 2 exceptions.
Near-term, I'd keep up all the Voyager style robots simply because they're cool, but I'd look for some business like GEICO to sponsor them ASAP. I think such sponsorships should be encouraged, and as quickly as possible a recreational space industry should happen, which means ultimately no more monopoly for NASA.
Here's one area I depart entirely from libertarians. I'd also suggest doing a modified version of SDI that looks OUTWARDS, toward the asteroids [one of which killed all the dinosaurs!!!]. I can't see a way besides government of doing this, even though the business of not-going-extinct should be a no-brainer for everyone. Needless to say, "Deep Impact" made me very happy when it went off without a hitch.
I do not think a missile defense system can work against a determined adversary, though, so this system won't be like the endless and hyperexpensive military boondoggle the defense industry collectively imagines with SDI's wet dream$. With borders this-porous for this-long, any determined adversary/s probably already stores a weapon of mass destruction or 3 inside the USA by now. An enemy might also send a freighter or container rigged so that the inspection process itself triggers a device.
Compared to defending against human adversaries, and especially in light of the success of Deep Impact, I have high hopes that a rudimentary asteroid-defense system can be erected. A six mile wide meteorite hitting Iran or North Korea, etc. would NOT be good news for the USA, much-less the rest of the planet. But overall, if you're trying to get me to say we should spend more on anything, you've failed. We shouldn't, and NASA's a prime example of an agency that could get-by on less.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Sarc, understand, to
January 29, 2008 - 06:14 ET by Gary P JacksonSarc, understand, to attract a major business to a city, they often offer tax abatements, may build better roads, help with drainage, what ever it takes, as long as it makes sense.
I live in medium size Texas town. We are on I-35, about 60 miles to Austin, 30 miles to Waco, and just a few miles further from the President's Crawford Ranch.
Toyota is an interesting company. They still have "importers" basically regional franchises.And they still do things like they did when they used to ship iron over from Japan.
Anyhow, Gulf States Toyota, the"importer" has a huge facility in the Houston Area, close to the port. It's called a processing center. They may install tape stripes or air conditioners, luggage racks, what ever. They also do a PDI (pre-delivery inspection), something the traditional dealer would do at the dealership to make sure the car was in good working order, and ready to be sold.
Toyota's sales are doing very well, and they have out run their capacity in Houston. So, they went looking for a new area to build in. Lot's of cities were in the hunt. But Temple has a great development zone, and they do their job attracting serious businesses to town.
Temple, which gets it's name from a railroad executive, won the Toyota project, because we are a railroad hub, and the city offered aggressive incentives. This will create several hundred new jobs, well paying jobs. Temple competed very hard for this business. Tax incentives were given, but the net effect is the city will end up with more tax money in the kitty, and businesses in town will make more money.
This is how things work in the real world. Theory of things is great when you are just discussing something. But in the real world, you gotta get aggressive!
When you look at this, you see just how screwed up our federal government is. Despite Ron Paul's vision, we live and trade in a global market.
Politicians piss and moan about jobs leaving America, when it is their fault! They put so many regulations, silly environmental restrictions, the highest corporate taxes out there. They let union thugs dictate policy. And the list goes on.
A smart business man in charge, who will take this problem in hand. To attract businesses back to America, and even new foreign businesses here, we've gotta relax useless restrictions. We've got to give tax breaks. And we have to stop doing stupid things like setting almost unreachable CAFE standards on cars and light trucks, while not drilling for a drop of oil! That kind of crap will kill the American automobile industry, and finish Michigan off for good!
I could go on, but I figure you get it!
Not really...
January 29, 2008 - 06:34 ET by sarcasmoAs I don't "get" where Ron Paul has ever said we don't live and trade in a global market. Quite the contrary, in fact.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
What Ron Paul doesn't get
January 29, 2008 - 08:08 ET by Gary P JacksonWhat Ron Paul doesn't get is this: America is the greatest force for good in the world. We have freed more oppressed people. Deposed more tyrants, sent more aid around the world than any other Nation in the history of the world.
And to be able to be this we have to be engaged. For that matter, in order to trade with the world, we have to be engaged.
Ron Paul wants to pull our troops out, all over the world and "stay out of foreign entanglements". That may have been wonderful advise in 1790, but it doesn't work well in today's world. Not when the bad guys can hit us from overseas with no problem.
I listen to Paul, and on some things, he's in the ballpark. But when he goes down this road he sounds like some wet behind the ears kid, who has zero life experience. Naive is not a strong enough word.
Anyhow, no worries. Ron Paul will not win our party's nomination, and he most certainly won't be asked to be VP.
Not everyone sees it that way...
January 29, 2008 - 08:39 ET by sarcasmoIf we were truly all you say, we'd be a hell of a lot more-popular. What we do is support a variety of brutal dictators (see the Saudis or Pakistan just for starters, but we can go back in history right to Saddam himself, if you want...) when it's convenient, and then talk a good game on freedom, just as you did above. It's BS. If you mean empire, say "empire" honestly. Don't spout "engaged" and pretend trade can be forced by military conquest, when Ron Paul is so much more for free (in reality) trade than all the others put-together. A borrow and spend warfare-state isn't any different than a tax and spend welfare-state in my eyes.
And you (like the rest here) have no idea what's going to happen at a brokered convention, but I'll tell you all again. If it's not Ron Paul on the ticket, the Democrats are gonna win. Not only will they win, when it happens (you guessed it) you're gonna be seeing those same 4 hated words from me once again, just like happened with inflation. And whether or not RP's going to win, it's clear that bustin' the massive quantities of media bias surrouding Dr. Paul is pretty damn popular. NB might want to try it. The Alexa-graph shows that there was clearly a vacuum in that category, just as I'd been saying here for months...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
So Ron Paul fans are all dumb enough to have Alexa installed?
January 29, 2008 - 08:50 ET by PopularTechSo Sarc you are telling me that Ron Paul supporters are all dumb enough to have Alexa installed on their systems? So you just proved NewsBuster users are more computer savy than Ron Paul supporters.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Not exactly...
January 29, 2008 - 08:59 ET by sarcasmoFrom my limited understanding, Alexa only works on IE. In fact, all the Firefox users like me who never use Internet Explorer would, if anything, make both Ron Paul sites' total-traffic-dominance of NB even bigger/funnier.
And speaking of unintentional humor, this might be the first time the RP crowd's being accused of being non-geekly! (Recall, we're also supposedly "spammers" and "hackers" capable of defeating any poll's honesty with a single click!) Can't have it both ways, unless, that is, it's bias against Ron Paul -- then anything-goes!!
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Limited Understanding about Alexa is Correct
January 29, 2008 - 10:16 ET by PopularTechAlexa has a Firefox add-on called sparky. You simply get all the fanatics to install it and the rest who use IE to leave it enabled and you can quickly manipulate Alexa. Especially considering most Anti-Malware tools disable this in IE. Thus Ron Paul supporters are either incredibly clueless (I don't buy it) or they are again manipulating online statistics.
Yes Ron Paul supporters spam polls, this has been proven.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
Well, I don't use the add-on
January 29, 2008 - 10:27 ET by sarcasmoAnd not only that, Nystrom keeps buying new server-boxes about every 2-3 months, so if this is manipulation, it's not only uncoordinated, it's also costing the guy who runs the Daily Paul money, and lots of it. And I can only imagine how much the traffic costs over at the Forums, an info-firehose which dominates even the Daily Paul.
This isn't manipulation on my part, it's amusement. I've never seen them ask us to install the Alexa plugin, and if they did I probably wouldn't. Note the only time Redstate passes NB stats is when they got a spike of hits for banning RP supporters. Other than that one time, it's even-worse than NB, and both are obviously not going anywhere. I find it very funny, and even-funnier now that people here have noticed. :) Markets rule.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Alexa represents Jack
January 29, 2008 - 10:48 ET by PopularTechSo if they are not installing the add-on, which you cannot prove either way, then all it proves is more computer unsavy users are visiting Paul's sites, nothing more. This has no bearing on the number of computer savy users that visit because they would not show up in Alexa! What part of this do you not understand?
Alexa merely represents how many visitors to those sites have Alexa installed. It is meaningless for actual traffic. Buying more servers means nothing if the servers you are using are inadequate from the start. If you start with incredibly powerful servers and tons of bandwidth you don't need to add any. Not to mention sites like this are not going to advertise their backend operations like Ron Paul supporters do to exaggerate support.
Please stop using irrelevant Alexa statistics, all it shows is you have no idea about web traffic.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
→ Right sarc
January 29, 2008 - 03:48 ET by Cool ArrowThe Federal Government builds roads too. That's socialism.
Are you saying a local government doesn't have the right to attract businesses and tourists except it be by methods other than bond proposals?
Are you saying the DFW area will never recoup its investment?
Tell it to the Packer faithful who voted 2-1 for a bond issue to renovate Lambeau Field. I know nothing about Green Bay except it's the Home of the Packers.
♣ a seal
I call 'em like I see 'em.
January 29, 2008 - 04:10 ET by sarcasmoThese stadium "investments" (tax-spending) for some reason never seem to do as well for the taxpayers as they did for Mr. Bush. Can you find even-one "investment" which had that kind of return for the taxpayers? What I've seen is a series of socialist stadiums which effectively function as subsidies for already-rich team owners. And believe me, not all the beneficiaries are Republicans like Mr. Bush, the corruption problem is -- as usual -- bipartisan.
And you, much like the other poster, are engaging in "he does it too" when you change the subject to roads and/or schools. They're separate socialist issues we can argue-about separately. Stadiums are businesses. Businessmen should fund, run, and own stadiums, not taxpayers. That's how capitalism works. If all this BS were such a good idea, why not have obese-government own the teams? Why is it always the taxpayers paying for crumbling stadiums-not-teams?? (And Green Bay is a special case, since individuals can buy shares in the team -- let's stick with pure socialism like we've seen at stadiums in Florida & elsewhere.)
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
→ sarc
January 29, 2008 - 04:19 ET by Cool ArrowYour opinion seems to be that local Government should do nothing to attract and keep business.
This "other poster" has already asked if the sales tax increase was imposed rather than put to a vote.
Arlington could have told the Rangers to shop their wares elsewhere, but here you seem to be saying local municipalities have no right to be autonomous.
In other threads you've championed States Rights. Are your opinions different when it comes to municipalities?
♣ a seal
Not "do nothing," do less & spend less.
January 29, 2008 - 04:33 ET by sarcasmoJust keep taxes and spending low by doing only the things that governments should do. We can argue later about roads, or I'll just grant you roads, but the idea that government does a good job at schools or stadiums is belied by a stream of contrary facts from the failure of socialism. If stadium-socialism were truly such a good idea, how come it's so-recent? Why is welfare and Soviet-style central planning needed now for stadiums, if for decades old-fashioned capitalism built & maintained them for the USA just-fine?? What changed???
And if/when these municipalities default on the massive bonds socialist stadiums soak up, it becomes a problem for FEDERAL taxpayers IMO, especially now that all the municipal bond insurors seem to be going tits-up. The deep pocket of last resort at that point always tends to be the average federal taxpayer's grandkids, because once-again obese government will wave a wand and make inflated dollars appear and obligations disappear, rather than raising taxes or (their last resort) cutting spending. This isn't capitalism, and it needs to stop for both moral and fiscal reasons.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
→ Packers
January 29, 2008 - 04:35 ET by Cool ArrowThe Packers are not a special situation because again, the bond issue applied to all residents of Green Bay regardless of their individual team ownership status.
Unless you can demonstrate that every Green Bay resident is a stockholder, your argument isn't correct there either.
♣ a seal
Ok, then.
January 29, 2008 - 04:50 ET by sarcasmoI think the stadium bond there is wrong, too, even though the spread of benefits makes it look a lot different from normal stadium-welfare to a single rich owner to me. What can I say?? I like the Packers, even though I think their fans are insane to live there. But stadium welfare's wrong in Green Bay, too, and if there's a default on that bond followed by a default of the bond-insurer, *somebody's* still going to be on the hook. To quote Jesse Jackson, albeit a bit sadly, "I am somebody."
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Sarc the Texas Taxpayers
January 29, 2008 - 06:44 ET by Dan The Man 2Sarc the Texas Taxpayers did not fund the stadium, the city of Arlington taxpayers did and I am one of them. And you really dont know the particulars behind it so shut up and give your money to a loser from Texas ... Ron Paul. I have an insight in the Libertarian party and they say Paul is signed for a run on their ticket, I even saw the documents.
I know you could get one of your Paulites who were not old enough and probably not even residents during that vote to stand up for your bet.
I for one went into that deal with eyes wide open and fully aware of most of the ramifications. For our taxes we gained tourism, name recognition for a while Ballpark at Arlington, and some cold hard cash. The benifits outwieghed the money by a wide margin. The loan was paid in 7 years. We voted for a new Cowboys stadium also and it will also pay off big.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Dream on, buddy boy...
January 29, 2008 - 06:54 ET by sarcasmoBut the only one capable of shutting me up here is named Matthew Sheffield, so I'll say what I want, when I want, and how I want, as usual, as far as you're concerned. And if you've got proof Ron's running third party, either show it or shut up yourself. I've never seen you display the first bit of Libertarian insight of any sort, so this would be a first if it's true. Your stadium was financed with taxpayer-welfare, plain and simple, and stadiums shouldn't be done by governments, period. Oh, and by the way, if Ron Paul ain't on the ticket, expect whatever Republican's there to LOSE to the Democrat, and then expect me to say "I told you so." Again.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
I admit I just wanted to
January 29, 2008 - 07:36 ET by Dan The Man 2I admit I just wanted to poke you with the Paul running Libertarian and you did just as I wanted. But I as a taxcpayer in the City of Arlington for the last 24 years know a bit more than you about teh local politics. BTW I do challenge you to drum up an a taxpayer that voted in the poll for building the Arlington Stadium. At teh time the politicians were determined to spend a 1 cent tax left in local taxes. So we could vote on another boondoggle called Johnson Creek, the politicians told the Corps of Enginners who were gonna fix the problem to take a hike, to "bueatify it at taxpayers expense.
Johnson Creek was not going to solve any problems and generate no income or prestige, the only thing it was designed to do is increase property values for a select group of homeowners on Johnson Creek. So since the politicians were set on spending the money on that or some other stupid project when this came up it passed overwhelmingly.
Public funding is at the whims of the people when they are asked to do so. Interestingly enough the people of the USA recently spoke and teh politicians listened. Even McCain said he would listen to the people as they had spoken "Build the Fence and they will not come"
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
If (fill in the blank) ain't on the ticket...
January 29, 2008 - 08:46 ET by Hero SquadYou are certainly welcome to say it; however, it would hold no more validity then if I were to say at the same time that the Republicans would've won had Fred Thompson been the nominee.
Fun fodder, but ultimately unprovable.
But I do believe that Romney or McCain could beat Clinton or Obama. Huckabee, probably not. Giuliani? Before I would've thought he'd be a solid run, but I think it's going to soon come to light that his strategy backfired.
Ron Paul? I think you might have something of a beer goggle effect going on there. :-)
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
Unprovable, maybe...
January 29, 2008 - 08:53 ET by sarcasmoBut the prediction's still an easy one to make. I think you're the one with the beer goggle effect, and that Ron's the ONLY one with a chance because at this point, like it or not, he's the only conservative left. Republicans tend to lose when they run away from conservatives. Read Chuck Baldwin's words over in the forum.
I think for myself, which means in this case I'm totally against the conventional 'wisdom,' but as you just-experienced with dollar inflation, that's not gonna stop me from sayin' those 4 hated words when what I predicted comes-exactly-true. This stuff is just preparing the ground so nobody's surprised when I say them and the whine-fest begins...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Don't misunderstand what I
January 29, 2008 - 09:09 ET by Hero SquadDon't misunderstand what I said. I'm not saying I'm confident Fred Thompson would've won (though I certainly would've liked to have seen him get the nod.)
If the Giants lose to the Patriots in the Super Bowl, Cowboys fans may say, "we would've won that game." Well, maybe you would have, and maybe you wouldn't have. But you didn't come through when you needed to and you didn't earn a trip to the Super Bowl, so we'll never know for sure.
Now Sarc, if you predict, say for example, double-digit inflation over the next year; now you've given us something measurable. If it comes in at 10% or higher (heck, I think you'd still get credit if it was close, say 8% or higher), how could we disagree with you then?
But I know, disagreement is part of the fun.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
I think Fred would have had a chance...
January 29, 2008 - 09:16 ET by sarcasmoFor the same reason as I think Paul now has the only chance. Whenever Republicans try to "triangulate" the American people go for the real socialist instead of the RINO. This will be especially true if Obama's the candidate -- Republicans wishing for that remind me of the Democrats who wished for Reagan. "Experts" wanted someone who ended up most-likely to make them lose. I see it happening again this election. I just wish this site would do a better job busting antilibertarian bias, and for some reason saying-so with Alexa-stats instead of just words seems to have struck a nerve this morning. Good.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
You mean Alexa Related Propaganda and the True Rankings
January 29, 2008 - 11:05 ET by PopularTechAll statistics from Alexa shows is how many people have Alexa installed when visiting a site they in no way represent actual web traffic and to try and claim they do is dishonest and propaganda. I have expected no less distortions and exaggerations from the Ron Paul crowd.
Now for some REAL statistics about web sites:
NewsBusters.org Ranked 30791
DailyPaul.com Ranked 118433
Sorry but DailyPaul is no where near as popular as NewsBusters.
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
→ Hero
January 29, 2008 - 08:58 ET by Cool ArrowHero, this is not directed at you, it just seems a good place to post this.
With the way Ron Paul has been thoroughly thrashed in this blog, others and talk radio, we can figure on some backlash from his supporters.
We've seen the same treatment of evangelicals ad nauseum. Seems there are a bunch of people who consider themselves the only true conservatives.
We're looking at what? 5% polling for Paul, and still we find time to gather round and make jokes about him? Is he still so much of a threat we need to be rude?
Honestly, I would understand if, for this reason alone, Paul went third party.
♣ a seal
If Ron Paul sincerely wants
January 29, 2008 - 09:58 ET by Hero SquadIf Ron Paul sincerely wants to make an impact, he will offer his support and services to the candidate who wins the nomination, and try to influence policy in that regard.
The candidate who wins the nomination, likewise, would do well to extend an olive branch to Paul and encourage him to join the campaign.
If Paul merely takes it upon himself to run a third-party campaign, it's nothing more than an ego stroke and smacks as more than just a bit of sore losership. I would hope he's a bigger person then that and would act in the best interest of the greater good.
But CA, I agree, there's no need to be rude to Ron Paul or his supporters. Joking around? That's fine with me. As long as it stays at a reasonable level and is presented in a dish-it-out-and-take-it manner and doesn't devolve into personal attacks.
Personally, I respect Sarc's passionate support of Ron Paul, even if it seems at times to be a borderline man-crush. (sorry, was that rude? :-)
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
thank you for a refreshingly-reasonable message.
January 29, 2008 - 10:16 ET by sarcasmoPlease have an unbiased, open-minded look at what Chuck Baldwin says. We're heading for a brokered Republican convention, and now how ALL sides behave matters a lot at this point. I make a sincere effort to reflect the respect I get here, which is why some entities here get polite messages & some don't.
Am I thrilled with all RP supporters or with the official RP campaign? Get real. Am I somehow "worshipful" as suggested by the frankly-clueless? Go look at the Daily Paul. I'm pretty damn easy to find over there, just look for a "sarcasmo" who puts "JMR" at the end of each message and see the truth for yourself about us "robots," and you'll see why I use the word "clueless" above with all due respect...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Okay, that "New Son of
January 29, 2008 - 03:53 ET by tracheostomyOkay, that "New Son of Camelot" blurb there is more than stretching it. Right or wrong, it's really difficult to fill JFK's shoes.
And yeah. That clip snapshot there is media bias in a nutshell.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
I was a little kid when JFK
January 29, 2008 - 05:00 ET by Gary P JacksonI was a little kid when JFK was shot. But here's what I know. Just like today, the press was in cahoots with the President. Absolutely no one knew he had such a bad back he was bed ridden at times.
They did the same for FDR. Few people know he was in a wheel chair. With his braces, he could kind of stand. He would do that for the photo opps, and speeches.
JFK was a good man, be he never deserved the Camelot mystique. Like every other man, he had his flaws. He did inspire the Nation, but it's debatable on how well he did, and what he accomplished.
But if you look at his resume against Barrack Obama, it's easy to see Obama is an empty suit. He's not even through his first term in the Senate! Still wet behind the ears. It's simply not his time.
Meaninglessness abounds
January 29, 2008 - 06:13 ET by ArchConservativeWhat does 'audacity of hope' mean anyway? It's meaningless drivel. Hope is something that you think about but don't put any action behind so are we to believe that just because Obama gets into office that rainbows magically will sprout and bunny rabbits will fill the fields? It's an ignorant slogan designed to get the libs to feel good about something instead of hanging on to actual substance.
He's gone from 'change' to 'hope'. What next?
You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.
Camelot!
January 29, 2008 - 08:49 ET by Hero SquadIt's only a model.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
... Not yet anyway.
January 29, 2008 - 10:28 ET by Hunter12"Rezko had long been a fundraiser for Gov. Rod Blagojevich and for Obama, the presidential candidate and senator from Illinois. Neither Democrat has been accused of wrongdoing in the case..."
... only a mysterious "Public Official A", which I think is the guv, but maybe not.
Do they have prisons in Camelot?
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Do they have prisons in Camelot?
January 29, 2008 - 11:08 ET by Jack BauerWell, I've been to the ruins of Tintagel Castle, and though I didn't see the cells, I'm sure they had them.
For the traditional torturing, and other groovy Medieval stuff!
I wrote something
January 29, 2008 - 11:56 ET by Hunter12I wrote something insightful and witty, but the site ate my posting.
Consistency in a story is key.
I think Obama is too clever to do jail time for campaign contributions. I like how you can take the money, do the favors, and then if you get caught, or the donor does, just hand the money back, or to some charity, and all is forgiven. "Sorry voters, I didn't realize the bill I ramrodded through the legislature for the Rezko Hog Farm in Millenium Park would benefit Mr. Rezko exclusively. The 50 grand he donated to my campaign for President in no way influenced my decision. I thought the chance to buy organic fertilizer and visit Navy Pier on the same day trip would be a boon. I'm donating the contribution Mr. Rezko made to my campaign fund to the BHO Home for Wayward Girls."
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
Camelot, schamelot
January 29, 2008 - 10:33 ET by SeptemberI am always amazed at how easily we humans are willing to dive right back into an illusion (witness my brother, now married and divorced 3 times). It's great for fiction writers but not so good in real life.
Today an Obama lovefest; tomorrow, reality.
At the end of the the
January 29, 2008 - 10:59 ET by Jack BauerAt the end of the CBS/NBC/ABC news was there a picture of Mr Obama with the following audio.
And if this Camelot Redux, is Obama playing The Black Knight?
'Rendezvous with Destiny'!?!?!?
January 29, 2008 - 11:44 ET by Sua SponteLast time I heard those words, they where used by HONORABLE MEN...
"We have a Rendezvous with Destiny. Jump right out to the sky of blue, keep your eyes on the job to be done. We are MEN of the 101st, and we'll fight till the battles won"