SuperJerk

Obama/Sebelius is too weird a combination of names for America. and yes I do believe that the "middle ground" voters are so superficial that would turn them off. nOt in an obvious way, it'll just be this 'feeling' that the ticket isn't right. A variation on that rationale might be why Richardson will probably be kept off of the ticket. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/19/oba...n.vp/index.html I like how Biden keeping his mouth shut is considered some huge clue.

A few sources are also claiming Kathleen Sebelius is still on the short list as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/us/polit...amp;oref=slogin Two observations: 1. Senator McCain, I do believe your pants are on fire. 2. Do you think his campaign staff uses the fact that he was a POW in regular conversation? "John McCain, a prisoner of war, will be arriving at 7:30." "John McCain, a prisoner of war, would like to meet with the governor on Tuesday." "John McCain, a prisoner of war, would like fries with that."

So what's the likelihood of an OMG SWERVE~! happening?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/america/19veep.php Ugh.

Only 1 week until the Democratic Convention. If the trend holds, Obama will name his running mate by the end of the week.

I'm just trying to figure out why he still thinks he can win by using Iraq as a campaign issue.

Did anyone watch the Saddleback Church thing Saturday night?

Hmmm... (I'm gonna pull a Fox News and put the conclusion I want the audience to come to in the form of a question.) Could McCain's fixation on Obama be because he has nothing to offer but the same old shit?

I think the words "card subject to change" could be applied here. It should also be noted that the nominee could also be someone none of us have thought of yet. The risk there is you could have the press hostile to the person because he or she isn't "nationally known."

A military background seems to be the biggest "must" for a potential VP at this point. I'm leaning towards Wesley Clark because I think he offsets Obama's weaknesses the best, though he does have a habit of sticking his foot in his mouth. Sam Nunn would be a logical choice as well, provided people can overlook the fact he's 69 years old, somewhat conservative, and has been out of office for over a decade. I'll say again that I think Bill Richardson's vast experience in foreign policy and as both a governor and cabinet secretary should also make him a top contender.

That was actually more coherent than the real movie.

That reminds me of how my parents tried to tell me they couldn't see the different between standard and hi-def, but they were comparing a digital cable channel to a HD channel broadcasting a SD program.

I agree Kerry screwed up by not directly addressing the rumors against him, but I don't think the people who were dumb enough to believe the Swift Boat crap were going to vote for Kerry anyways. In the end he lost by only 3 points to a president who, at the time, still had a thin majority of popular support for his post-9/11 leadership and the Iraq War.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080815/ap_on_...idates_religion It will interesting to see if the religious right has moved away from trying to make every election a referendum on abortion and gay rights.

Obama has learned from Kerry's mistakes... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080814/ap_on_...anti_obama_book

And don't forget, deregulation is wonderful for the economy.

Ahem. To be fair to McCain (who I'm no fan of) 1.) He's crippled too, and 2.) Isn't there a high divorce rate among war vets? Also... Isn't it safe to assume that anything that HURTS Obama HELPS McCain. But, in order for voters to condemn the Democrats for their sex scandals at the voting booth, they'll have to forgive the Republicans for theirs. Otherwise, its a zero-sum game where neither side is helped or hurt by these sex scandals.

First of all, someone already explained why you two were wrong: Secondly, you have to remember that McCain is essentially guilty of the same thing Edwards did, just decades earlier. He is also probably MARRIED TO one of the women he cheated on his ex-wife with. If anyone's bothered by adultery, are they going to vote for the adulterer over someone who just happens to be in the same party as an adulterer? If adultery bothers you, are you going to vote to make a woman First Lady who probably had an affair with a married man? DOES THAT MAKE ANY FUCKING SENSE WHATSOEVER? Furthermore, if you say guilt-by-association counts, but McCain's ACTUAL adultry does not, you need to recall that McCain is as close to Rudy Guiliani as Obama is to Edwards. In other words, your argument is so full of holes, so irrational, and so blatantly ridiculous you should probably just DROP IT before you embarrass yourselves further by continuing to talk about it while everyone else has already moved on to stories with actual substance.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/11/atl...taff/index.html So, to sum up...Hillary Clinton is indecisive and Mark Penn is a racist. Fortunately, we don't have to worry about either any more.

But he's a major player in the Democratic Party. What he's done reflects poorly on them, and on Obama's chances. Do we need to spell it out for you? (Congratulations, you've earned it.)

I doubt any movie will overtake Titanic in terms of domestic theater gross. That movie was released when the secondary market was based on VHS rentals and PPV (VHS sales were never near the amount DVD sales are). I could be wrong, but I think the home theater age has made people more likely to defer their potential multiple viewings until the DVD or blu-ray was come out and they can just buy the thing for the price of 2 tickets.

I was all set to argue this has nothing to do with his ability to be president, but then I remember that (a) he's not the president, and (b) he's not running for president.

To be fair to McCain (who I'm no fan of) 1.) He's crippled too, and 2.) Isn't there a high divorce rate among war vets? I don't think either thing is fair game, but there are going to be comparisons if Republicans were to go down that road. Is anyone claiming otherwise? I'm not naive enough to think this was his only affair, though, if that's what you're implying.

To be fair, the affair occured before her most recent bout with the disease. However, the affair did occur recently and with someone they hired to document his campaign for president. Republicans would be wise not to make a big deal out of this considering John McCain's marital history, though.