|
Post by Seattle Taz on Jan 21, 2008 7:43:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 21, 2008 7:56:23 GMT -5
Shochu! And, I'm buying. Love you, sweet heart! Mike
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jan 21, 2008 10:17:48 GMT -5
This is from an article at newsmax.com about a fundraiser for Huckabee at Chuck Norris's ranch.
"After repeating his stump speech to the rural Texas crowd, the band joined Huckabee on stage for some classic rock tunes, kicking off with 'Only in America.'"
Did they think it was really good, or was it for the benefit of latecomers?
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Jan 21, 2008 14:39:02 GMT -5
Not trying to change the subject but did newsmax also use the accent immediately followed by the quote? I don't think i've ever run into that...or even seen it.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 21, 2008 19:04:20 GMT -5
You mean the quotes? In American English, the title of articles and poems is enclosed in double quotes. But when the poem or article is referred to within a spoken quote, then the internal title gets single quotes. The same would be true if it were a quote of someone quoting another person.
Roges said, "I'll be durned if I'm gonna listen to Gail say, 'I used to teach English' one more time!"
I can tell you a bunch more stuff about this because I think it's fun. It's all just arbitrary rules that are supposed to make things easier on the printed page. But it is truly arbitrary - everything I said above is reversed in UK English. (Unless I'm wrong about that, and Brit will no doubt tell us.)
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jan 21, 2008 20:21:48 GMT -5
One of the frustrating things for me about attending the German high school with my cousin was my poor grades in English! Precisely because of such things as the punctuation differences you mention gk, plus my spelling errors (color not colour), pronunciation, and my poor grasp of idiomatic usage.
After a few weeks of excellent grades in science and math, I realized that I was a native speaker of American, not English, a hopeless handicap. The teachers did cut me slack in German class, however, since I was not a native speaker of that language either.
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Jan 21, 2008 20:49:40 GMT -5
//Roges said, "I'll be durned if I'm gonna listen to Gail say, 'I used to teach English' one more time!"//
I'll take a lesson from you any day honey!
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Jan 22, 2008 2:13:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 22, 2008 5:18:59 GMT -5
Dude! Thanks for the link... great entertainment! I have started to become interested in the white guy; oh sorry that's probably not PC, but hey, the other two people seem to have an edge on him (not to mention the money). Anyway... let the games continue. These so called debates must be pissing off those Hollywood writers. Mike
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 22, 2008 10:29:42 GMT -5
I'm so mad I could spit. Edwards has been my favorite all along, though he has a couple of weak spots. The spectacle last night was enough to make we want to whip the other two. And I suspect Wolf Blitzer was enjoying every second, refusing to put the brakes on when it was his job to keep things civil. It's easy for you to laugh, Mike, you don't live here.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 22, 2008 17:11:16 GMT -5
John Edwards said that he was the only viable candidate amongst the democrats that could go toe-to-toe in every State with John McCain and win. Well, if this is so, and Edwards wants to be President badly enough, he should switch parties and run against McCain as a republican in the primaries. Then if he really does succeed in beating McCain, he can take on the winner of the Hillary/Obama slug feast.
I figure that it doesn’t matter what party a candidate represents, come November, they’ll all be promising the same things anyway – except maybe John McCain, that is. The one thing that Edwards has that McCain doesn’t is youth and a full head of magnificently combed hair. Although, I noted in the debate he seems to be dumbing down his hair style a little – smart move. I know that McCain’s got the whole POW thing that Edwards is lacking, but that didn’t do much for him last time around, so, I think it won’t be a factor this time either. Yep, Edwards has what the Republicans need.
Mike
P.S. I laugh at funerals too!
|
|
|
Post by Trusty on Jan 22, 2008 18:43:22 GMT -5
It's not the end of the world as we know it... It's the beginning of the world as we're going to hate it. Oh well, the sun will come up, tommorow! Meet me in the bar, Mike Wait! Brit, you and I have more important things to worry about!
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 23, 2008 17:57:50 GMT -5
It seems to me that the media is painting a picture of the democratic primaries that I simply sum up like this: It’s down to a 3 way race between a woman, a black guy and a white guy. If we choose to vote for either the woman or the black guy we are participating in an historic event. If we choose to vote for the white guy, it’s just ho hum, business as usual.
From the beginning I had been interested in Obama because of what he was saying, not because of his color. Recently I’ve also become interested in Edwards; I think I’ve underestimated the guy. I’m not too fond of Hillary. All of my opinions are based on what these people have said and done… period. I hope that the media quickly drops this “woman, black guy and white guy” hype and simply focuses on the candidates as candidates.
I am… forever a naive dreamer. Mike
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 24, 2008 0:06:25 GMT -5
The time will come, Mike, though maybe not while we're still around. A friend told me about a couple she overheard in a casino bar. Well, not exactly overheard because he was very loud. The news came on TV and Obama was on the screen. This ape says to his lovely wife and everyone else in the bar, "Ain't no n----- ever gonna be president of this country!"
Minnesota is not Redneck Crossing, Tennessee. It's astounding that anyone, no matter how drunk, would belch out that word in public. I'm afraid race and gender are bubbling just under the surface all over this country.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Jan 26, 2008 23:28:13 GMT -5
Now it's getting interesting. What happens if Edwards wins enough delegates to be able to determine the nominee?
And what if Obama is the nominee, either from getting the majority of delegates outright or with Edwards' support? How long will it take for the voters to realize that he is too inexperienced to be President?
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 27, 2008 20:53:48 GMT -5
Now it's getting interesting. What happens if Edwards wins enough delegates to be able to determine the nominee? And what if Obama is the nominee, either from getting the majority of delegates outright or with Edwards' support? How long will it take for the voters to realize that he is too inexperienced to be President? Joe, I mentioned in detail a few posts back that Edwards should switch parties to the republicans. Maybe he did so without bothering to tell anyone. I’m curious how long he’ll be able to get votes that some people maybe perceiving as rightfully belonging to Hillary? People are popping up all over the place to endorse Obama. I wonder what’s going through Howard Dean’s mind. Mike
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 28, 2008 0:47:23 GMT -5
Obama is extraordinarily smart and can find good advisors. He hasn't exactly been living in a bubble. Brains, judgment, honor, steadfastness - we all know the qualities of a good president. Having been around the block only means that you know that block.
|
|
|
Post by Gracie on Jan 29, 2008 10:12:05 GMT -5
I have liked Edwards since he was on the ticket with Kerry. He is STILL my choice, and I am glad we're still early in the year, because anything can happen. The whole thing can do a 360 and turn on its ear....
I have apparently surprised those who thought Hillary was my automatic pick (because I voted for Bill? because she's a woman? no one ever says, now that I think about it) and I do think she is fiercely intelligent, determined, a lot of good qualities. She still isn't my first choice.
And I don't know why I don't feel good about Obama but I don't. He just does not seem to have enough experience, yet...it's not all about chronological age. Again: smart man, intelligent, determined...many good qualities.
But Edwards is the one I want.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 29, 2008 11:56:31 GMT -5
Me, too, Gracie, but I don't think he'll make it. Still, I'm glad he's staying in because what he has to say is important and - when he does get time on camera, not nearly often enough - he says things that need to be heard.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 30, 2008 10:03:04 GMT -5
At noon John Edwards will officially announce he's dropping out. I am very sad about him.
He came to MN for a rally last night. I meant to go but wasn't up for even a short drive by myself in 35-below wind chill and blowing snow. I figure poor John faced the bitter winds figuratively and literally and just said no.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jan 30, 2008 13:23:55 GMT -5
Since I'm home today (finished my 7 am administrative meeting, no clinic hours), I'll watch his presentation shortly. I watched part of Rudy's "concessionary" speech already (no loss to the race, IMHO).
He's too populist for my tastes, but I appreciate Edwards speaking out for New Orleans, and for the pressured middle class. I have not seen convincing data on worsening poverty, but there is quite a bit about the shrinking middle class, and their (at best) stagnant financial status over the past 20 years. And they are those hit hardest by the mortgage crisis.
|
|
|
Post by Gracie on Jan 30, 2008 13:24:45 GMT -5
Dammit.
I just read this, too....in a very gracious, gentlemanly e-mail from his campaign headquarters.
I kept hoping. It IS only January, after all.
But I think he's an incredible man, I think he'll do wonderful things for Habitat, just as Carter has done (I bet those two like each other a LOT) and I know Elizabeth's health and their children mean a lot to him, too.
Still don't think we've heard the last of him, and he's got my support wherever and whatever.
Sad, sad day here.....Gracie has the blues.
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jan 30, 2008 17:17:09 GMT -5
I beleave what I heard Edwards say on the radio was “I’m suspending my campaign”. Is there some hidden meaning in his use of the word suspending instead of ending? A technicality that will allow him to resurface if he chooses too? Why he would do that I have know idea – I’m just thinking out loud.
For what it’s worth, Edwards was starting to grow on me. I don’t think we’ve heard the last of him.
Mike
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Jan 30, 2008 17:23:55 GMT -5
It's OK Gracie. Edwards is in reserve just in case in becomes apparent that the bigots rule and a black or female can't win.
And I'm sure we haven't heard the last of him, as he remains a strong voice for the neglected, and he will compel the eventual nominee (if he is not drafted) to address the needs of the poor and the shrinking middle class.
Interesting that the pundits assume that only Evangelicals vote for Huckabee. He's mentioned only as an afterthought in the hubbub over Giuliani's withdrawal from the race. Among the Republican candidates, Huckabee is the only one who has veered from The Economy/Pro-Business and Homeland Security topics to discuss the everyday needs of the non-wealthy.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Jan 31, 2008 10:01:27 GMT -5
I'm posting this to every board I frequent. After last night's Republican debate, in which McCain showed just how nasty-snarky he can be, it's a good read for people on all sides, even if you wouldn't dream of voting Democratic:
What would Molly do? By SUSAN LENFESTEY
January 30, 2008
It's been a year since Molly Ivins died, leaving us to slog through the political landscape without her sanity-saving blend of insight, humor and outrage. Unlike Maureen Dowd, who delights in snippy wordplay, with Molly you felt the words erupting from her soul, ricocheting off her funny bone and then passing through her brain to be arranged in a way that made sense -- an enormous challenge when dealing with the non-sense of the president she called "Shrub."
As Super Tuesday closes in with the fate of -- oh, just about everyone -- at stake, I keep wishing I could open my paper and find Molly's take on it all. What fun she would have had with the entire Republican slate, from the moribund-on-arrival Fred Thompson to the 12th-century worldview of affable Mike Huckabee to the transformation of "America's Mayor" to America's meltdown.
And she wouldn't have let John McCain's resemblance to an ermine -- a short-legged weasel who changes color with the seasons -- go unnoticed.
On the other side I imagine she'd have taken a few jabs at Dennis Kucinich for toe-tapping with a UFO and at John Edwards for his pricey girly-man haircuts -- yet slapped them a high-five for the truths they dare to speak. She encouraged veracity no matter how eccentric the package; she just couldn't tolerate "clever straddling," as she put it.
She would have donned a hazmat suit to deal with the hydra-like beast called Billary that clawed its way to defeat in South Carolina. She was clear on where she stood on the Clintons, calling Bill "as weak as bus-station chili" and writing in January 2006, "I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president. Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation."
So as millions of us trudge off to caucuses and primaries next Tuesday, I'm wondering: What Would Molly Do?
Referring to the death of Gene McCarthy in that same 2006 column, she gave a pretty good idea of where she stood.
"There are times a country is so tired of bull that only the truth can provide relief. If no one in conventional-wisdom politics has the courage to speak up and say what needs to be said, then you go out and find some obscure junior senator from Minnesota [or Illinois -- my add] with the guts to do it."
Well, McCarthy didn't win, but he also wasn't much of a candidate. I knew and admired Eugene McCarthy, but I think it's safe to say he was no Barack Obama. But by coalescing the young and the antiwar voters, he forced those who did win to put an end to America's other mistake of a war.
So Molly would rail at us not to let Bush Co. -- and any lily-livered so-called leader who is up for election -- tell us that this war is no longer an issue.
With plans for permanent military bases throughout Iraq and likely Republican candidate John McCain's comfort with 100 years of occupation -- not to mention the obscene daily loss of life and treasure -- we are a nation that will continue to bleed out until we die.
So do what Molly would do. Go to your precinct caucus on Feb. 5, not because your candidate's political future depends on it, but because your nation's future depends on the candidate you choose. Go with Molly's words ringing in your ears: "We want to find solutions other than killing people. Not in our name, not with our money, not with our children's blood."
Susan Lenfestey lives in Minneapolis and writes at the Clotheslineblog.com.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Feb 4, 2008 10:41:09 GMT -5
Keillor endorsed Obama.
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Scheuzger on Feb 4, 2008 10:55:30 GMT -5
Obama called the office last week and talked to Garrison...
|
|
|
Post by liriodendron on Feb 4, 2008 13:40:22 GMT -5
So, if I were to endorse him, he'd give me a call, too?
|
|
|
Post by joew on Feb 4, 2008 13:49:56 GMT -5
So, if I were to endorse him, he'd give me a call, too? The question is, "If he called, would you give him your endorsement?"
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Feb 4, 2008 14:36:54 GMT -5
gk, I knew Susan Lenfensky wrote, but not that well. I sat with her at a Polish dinner/poetry reading a couple years ago. I know (slightly) her husband, Jim, which is how I ended up next to Susan. Jim was reading along with my poetry guru John Minczeski. Both Ace and I have been thinking about McCain, but we now have words to repel us. otoh, there's something about everyone that doesn't suit each person.
|
|