|
Post by LS on Aug 30, 2004 23:41:50 GMT -5
I lost track of her on Saturday. And we were supposed to meet up for the UPJ march yesterday, but there were just too many people and I had enough trouble trying not to get seperated from the family. She's been living for this chance to vent and she's not out to cause trouble, but if she gets pushed she's going to push back. My bet's she's just fine and is out there holding her own giving them hell. ;D Lol...yeah- it was just a little tough gettin' around and trying to stay together. I was totally blown away by the turnout considering the heat...imagine what it would've been if it hadn't been so friggin' blistering hot...that probabably kept a lot of people away who might've wanted to take part. Yep that and if they wind up instigating problems...it ain't gonna help in their contract negotiations. But yeah- outside of the skirmish on Friday- they've been great so far.
|
|
snizz
Full Member
I'm sure I'd be more upset if I weren't quite so heavily sedated
Posts: 322
|
Post by snizz on Sept 1, 2004 0:43:05 GMT -5
LS don't need no stinkin' bail!! ;D snizz got that one right...I've been livin' for just two things for the past 4 years- the invasion of the GOP- and election day so I can cast my re-vote to re-defeat this court appointed idiot-in-chief...so I had plenty to keep me very busy. I just finished cruising the boards and there's some mighty scary shi-t going around! What the hell is the media reporting in the rest of the country? What I've seen these people claiming is going on here ain't even what's remotely going on here! Mucho truth in your words. They don't get it. This isn't "the face of the Democratic party" or partisanship at all. What's going on here is the face of DEMOCRACY! Why does that scare the hell out of them?
|
|
|
Post by Roughneck on Sept 1, 2004 16:14:03 GMT -5
The Bush Twins, Ready to Party
By Ann Gerhart Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, September 1, 2004; Page C01
NEW YORK, Aug. 31 -- They had a hamster, too, okay?
Once, the daughters Bush were reclusive, and their mother excoriated People magazine for putting her darlings on its cover. Last night, in front of a packed Republican convention and a prime-time television audience, Jenna and Barbara Bush tried out their comedy routine. Flash reviews were not good.
They followed that man who looks like an action figure, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and started off gamely enough:
"We love Arnold," said Jenna, her twin beaming at her side. "Isn't he awesome? Thanks to him, if one of us ever decides to marry a Democrat, nobody can complain. Except maybe our grandmother, Barbara." The crowd laughed indulgently.
But Jenna went on: "Gammie, we love you dearly, but you're just not very hip. She thinks 'Sex and the City' is something married people do, but never talk about." There was an uncomfortable tittering in the room. The twins, with their trendy clothes and edgy lines and award-show delivery, seemed to be taking GOP moderation way too far.
The president and first lady are somewhat hipper than their grandmother, Jenna said. "They do know the difference between mono and Bono," a line that fell flat. "When we tell them we're going to see OutKast, they know it's a band and not a bunch of misfits."
"We spent the last four years trying to stay out of the spotlight," said Jenna, who is clearly the one most able to be flip in front of the masses. "Sometimes we did a little better than others. We kept trying to explain to Dad that when we are young and irresponsible . . . well, we're young and irresponsible."
Their appearance, said CNN political commentator Jeff Greenfield, "was frankly, the one disappointing moment in the evening." He predicted that "whoever wrote that material will be walking the coast" in Alaska.
Their routine came in an introduction for their father, who in turn introduced their mother, who gave a serious speech in support of the president's reelection. And the announcement of the twins' appearance on the podium earlier yesterday was a surprise. Both women graduated from college earlier this summer, Jenna from the University of Texas and Barbara from Yale. Their college days were marked by a flurry of tabloid appearances -- brushes with underage drinking, tales of ditching their Secret Service agents and late nights closing down hot dance clubs.
Their emergence as campaigners began with a glossy photo spread showcasing them in ball gowns in Vogue magazine, and they have made tentative forays onto the stump, with mixed results. Jenna stuck her tongue out at photographers during a trip, and her mother later said she had been working with her daughter on her impulse control issues.
But this week, they have emerged as somewhat rambunctious surrogates for their father, who seems to have called all hands on deck for a closely contested election. And Barbara and Jenna on Tuesday night confronted head-on the comparisons with the older Vanessa and Alexandra Kerry, who have been stumping hard for their father, Democratic Sen. John Kerry, meeting voters and talking up the issues. At the Democratic convention in July, Alexandra told a story about how her father had fished out their pet hamster when it fell into the river. Barbara said last night, "We had a hamster, too. Let's just say ours didn't make it."
After the sisters had indulged in several minutes of questionably appropriate pop culture references, Barbara closed by moving to safer ground.
She said she and her sister had learned from her parents "what matters in life. About unconditional love. About focus and discipline. They taught us the importance of a good sense of humor. Of being open-minded and treating everyone with respect. And, we learned the true value of honesty and integrity."
That brought relieved applause, and when the large video screens in Madison Square Garden showed their father at a ball game, where he was campaigning in Pennsylvania, the once young and irresponsible commander-in-chief told his daughters, "You make me so very proud."
Way to go girls! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Roughneck on Sept 1, 2004 16:15:12 GMT -5
And then Laura had her usual plastic mask on. How the hell is she beating Teresa in the polls?
|
|
|
Post by Mr._Shooter on Sept 1, 2004 19:19:04 GMT -5
And then Laura had her usual plastic mask on. How the hell is she beating Teresa in the polls? Roughneck, I agree that Laura was as phony as a cardboard pony...per usual. That being said, the reason she's beating Teresa in the polls is because Teresa rubs many people the wrong way (anyway, that's what I'm hearing from people I talk to). Call her honest. Call her refreshing. But Teresa's blunt honesty and often unchecked emotion does not play well with middle Americans. Thus the poll numbers. "Plastic" sells because, like it or not, most Americans don't expect the wifes of candidates to jump ugly with reporters, or shoot from the hip. Middle America may be free, but it certainly isn't free-wheeling.
|
|
Roland
Full Member
Robert Johnson King of the Delta Blues
Posts: 235
|
Post by Roland on Sept 2, 2004 14:37:08 GMT -5
I just finished cruising the boards and there's some mighty scary shi-t going around! What the hell is the media reporting in the rest of the country? What I've seen these people claiming is going on here ain't even what's remotely going on here! Mucho truth in your words. They don't get it. This isn't "the face of the Democratic party" or partisanship at all. What's going on here is the face of DEMOCRACY! Why does that scare the hell out of them? LS it's good to hear you weren't hauled away in cuffs! ;D I've been wondering myself what's going on there too because I've seen so many conflicting stories. What really is going on there?
|
|
Roland
Full Member
Robert Johnson King of the Delta Blues
Posts: 235
|
Post by Roland on Sept 2, 2004 16:04:22 GMT -5
Roughneck, I agree that Laura was as phony as a cardboard pony...per usual. That being said, the reason she's beating Teresa in the polls is because Teresa rubs many people the wrong way (anyway, that's what I'm hearing from people I talk to). Call her honest. Call her refreshing. But Teresa's blunt honesty and often unchecked emotion does not play well with middle Americans. Thus the poll numbers. "Plastic" sells because, like it or not, most Americans don't expect the wifes of candidates to jump ugly with reporters, or shoot from the hip. Middle America may be free, but it certainly isn't free-wheeling. Mr. Shooter, I can't agree with you on all points because it's not explaining how Hillary was able to shatter that point of view with her hands on approach and despite all the Clinton-bashing, has consistently wound up on top of the most admired women lists for years. That includes the years when our current first lady didn't make the list at all. It seems to me that the current first lady's popularity is a sudden phenomenon and at that, one that smells manufactured to me. My wife, both of our mothers and many women I've spoken to that are of my age and younger, cannot stand Laura Bush. They say that her image has set everything that women have been able to achieve thus far, back a few decades, especially in comparison with what Hillary accomplished and brought to the job. I, myself, see Laura Bush as a throwback to women closer to those of my grandmother's generation who were primarily homemakers that raised the children and were subservient and dependent on their husbands.
|
|
snizz
Full Member
I'm sure I'd be more upset if I weren't quite so heavily sedated
Posts: 322
|
Post by snizz on Sept 6, 2004 1:54:52 GMT -5
I've been wondering myself what's going on there too because I've seen so many conflicting stories. What really is going on there? Right now? The happy horsesh-t's finally over and it looks to me like everybody's off recuperating and enjoying the holiday weekend. Except those down south doing battle with hurricanes. In short order Roland, besides the GOP making jackasses out of themselves the NYPD's method of making arrests was a farce. From what I've seen and heard, about half of them don't count because operation orange net netted as many innocent passersby that weren't involved in any protests and were just going about their daily business as it did protesters. Most were held in a holding pen on the pier long past the 24 hours they were supposed to be, so a federal judge ordered over 500 of them to be released by 5 pm Thursday. They weren't so the judge held the city in contempt and fined them $1000 for each person not released. Of the people who did take part in protests, most of the reasons they were arrested for were unbelievable. I don't know when someone standing with an unrolled banner became an act of disturbing the peace. But then we never know what to expect with Bloomberg. Last year people were being ticketed and fined for such criminal activities as sitting on milk crates during their breaks and pregnant women for sitting down to rest on a stairway. It's a good bet there'll be more than a few lawsuits. All told there was only one assault on a police officer and the story's not clear on that one yet. It could be that one may have happened without the convention and protests being here. Outside of that there was no violence. It was a telling experience though. With all the talk of ironclad security and a President who keeps spouting off about how he's made the world and this country safer, there were enough security breaches where protesters were able to get into the Garden. And someone managed at some point to climb to the top of the Brooklyn Bridge and stole the really big flag that hung from it. Nobody knows when it happened or who did it and they only realized it after someone noticed it was gone! Proof positive that fortress like security isn't going to stop people who are determined to get through. And did anyone else realize the irony that while Bush was giving his speech on fighting the war on terrorism and Iraq, another act was taking place? And it wasn't perpetrated by Saddam or Iraq, but by the people who weren't mentioned once during their whole convention. al-Quada.
|
|
|
Post by Mr._Shooter on Sept 7, 2004 9:28:31 GMT -5
Mr. Shooter, I can't agree with you on all points because it's not explaining how Hillary was able to shatter that point of view with her hands on approach and despite all the Clinton-bashing, has consistently wound up on top of the most admired women lists for years. That includes the years when our current first lady didn't make the list at all. It seems to me that the current first lady's popularity is a sudden phenomenon and at that, one that smells manufactured to me. My wife, both of our mothers and many women I've spoken to that are of my age and younger, cannot stand Laura Bush. They say that her image has set everything that women have been able to achieve thus far, back a few decades, especially in comparison with what Hillary accomplished and brought to the job. I, myself, see Laura Bush as a throwback to women closer to those of my grandmother's generation who were primarily homemakers that raised the children and were subservient and dependent on their husbands. Roland, you made the case for why Hillary is more admirable than Laura, and I agree with you wholeheartedly. But how does that help John Kerry? Simply put, Teresa's no Hillary. And for some people, this might prove determinative on election day.
|
|
|
Post by LS on Sept 7, 2004 17:13:13 GMT -5
Roland, you made the case for why Hillary is more admirable than Laura, and I agree with you wholeheartedly. But how does that help John Kerry? Simply put, Teresa's no Hillary. And for some people, this might prove determinative on election day. Nuh-uh Shooter...the way I'm seein' it is Roland made a case refuting your statement saying that outspoken, 'shoot from the hip' wives of politicans don't play well in middle America...he offered up Hil as an example of... it ain't so ...so the way I see it- the ball's still in your court on that point.
|
|
|
Post by Mr._Shooter on Sept 7, 2004 18:11:00 GMT -5
Nuh-uh Shooter...the way I'm seein' it is Roland made a case refuting your statement saying that outspoken, 'shoot from the hip' wives of politicans don't play well in middle America...he offered up Hil as an example of... it ain't so ...so the way I see it- the ball's still in your court on that point. I'm sticking by my earlier statement, LS. People I talk to, even some who are voting for Kerry, aren't enamored of Teresa. This, coupled with Roughneck's point about Laura doing better in the polls, would seem to indicate that there's something about Teresa that's turning people off. Given that the only publicity Teresa has received of late stemmed from her run-in with the conservative reporter (i.e., negative publicity, whether deserved or not), and inasmuch as public opinion generally ebbs and flows with the most recent news cycle, I think it's not a stretch to conclude that that something must be Teresa's take-no-prisoners approach. Personally, I couldn't care less. I've already made up my mind (Teresa could haul off and smack a reporter, I'd still vote for her husband). But if you and Roland think that, in light of Hillary Clinton's wide popularity, Teresa's similar yet less polished style hasn't negatively impacted her husband's campaign, then I challenge you to name another reason why Laura's doing better in the polls.
|
|
|
Post by LS on Sept 8, 2004 0:27:53 GMT -5
It was a telling experience though. With all the talk of ironclad security and a President who keeps spouting off about how he's made the world and this country safer, there were enough security breaches where protesters were able to get into the Garden. And someone managed at some point to climb to the top of the Brooklyn Bridge and stole the really big flag that hung from it. Nobody knows when it happened or who did it and they only realized it after someone noticed it was gone! Proof positive that fortress like security isn't going to stop people who are determined to get through. Yep snizzster...you hit on pretty much all the 'highlights' But even more telling...if we're all so much safer thanks to the Bushies- then why the need for the police state and 12,000 armed cops and military personnel?? Would seem to me- that right there proves in reality- we're less safe. Yeah I noticed that...and my heart goes out to those people. I loved Putin's response when it was suggested by certain Western countries that he should sit down and talk with these terrorists!! He asked when 'we' were planning on sitting down and talking with Osama. I also noticed a few other things that got 'lost' in the news...The weekend before the GOP convention it was announced that an arrest was imminent in the CIA outing case- and that it was someone in Feith's dept. So what happened?? And what about the intel leaks to Israel on Iran...also from Feith's dept.??
|
|
|
Post by LS on Sept 8, 2004 0:42:56 GMT -5
I'm sticking by my earlier statement, LS. But if you and Roland think that, in light of Hillary Clinton's wide popularity, Teresa's similar yet less polished style hasn't negatively impacted her husband's campaign, then I challenge you to name another reason why Laura's doing better in the polls. Hil is widely admired?? Could've fooled me by the way she's publically bashed to the high heavens...Which is the point. All we keep hearing is poor Hil being bash-bash-bashed by the neocon talking heads and their 'Clinton-itis' is then repeated by their faithful following and spread across the country down into the ranks. She even gets bashed here in NY where- despite the all that conservative bashing- she demolished her competitor for the Senate (by getting nearly 60% of the vote)...and please- don't use the 'NY is notoriously Democratic' excuse - because outside of the City proper- LI & upstate are solidly 'Republican' strongholds- yet Lazio didn't win a single district in the entire state. (The state- as well as NYC itself- has been Republican controlled for years- and the state went to Reagan and Nixon). So who overwhelmingly voted for her?? Obviously it would seem the same people who curse her under their breaths pulled the lever voting her into office. During Bill's first campaign Hil was widely disliked- especially among the female 'stay-at-home/soccer-mom' crowd (who are more apt to vote than single career women) for her infamous comment on not being the 'stand by your man little woman who stays home baking cookies.' So then...what happened and how does she wind up on the 'most admired' lists?? Does she play in middle America or not?? Laura-bot's numbers come in above the DuHbya's- so that's not saying much to begin with. But as far as Teresa- my experience has been that single women love her, working/career women (both single and married) love her, men under 40 (single and married) love her...the few people I've run into who don't care for her are males over 40 (strong, independent woman usually intimidate them) and older women who've never worked outside the home. But I'll give it to you straight Shooter- you can sit there with all the polls you like...and believe them if you're fool enough to. Part of my job happens to rely on spotting trends. I look at and have to interpret various 'polls' all the time. The thing about polls is they're not an unbiased source of <ahem> 'information'- someone with an interest to prove initiates them- always. Studies have been done on them and it's been proven on the subject of polls, questionaires, interviews, etc.- first and foremost the answers aren't really honest because the questionees tend to answer questions based on what they think the interviewer wants to hear...a case of trying to please those in 'charge.' Statistics can be (and are routinely) manipulated in every way imaginable. Take the poll on Laura vs. Teresa...who was it conducted by, how many people were polled?? How many men, how many women, what ages, single, married, what income levels, what areas of the country, what party affiliation, registered voter or non-registered, etc.?? Somehow polls always seem to leave out that information...And truthfully- is polling only 1000 people in a country of 280 million with 95 million registered voters really a fair sampling?? I've been voting for about 1/2 my life now- and neither I- or any relatives, friends or aquaintances I have of any age- have ever been polled on political matters. Strange- no?? After 9/11 when DuHbya's approval rating was allegedly over 90%...I- and a lot of other people- had to wonder how that could be- because those I knew and spoke to disapproved 5 to 1. How could a 5 to 1 ratio put us all in that 10% who disapproved?? Or how about the alleged 11% Bush convention bounce...the results of two polls. However subsequent polls show a much smaller bounce- some less than half that 11%. But as I went surfing the newspapers and other news outlets online- how come I saw wildly conflicting results (and those sites had it set up where it logged your IP addy so you could only vote once )?? The 'unscientific' polls on sites like The Daily News (a conservative paper no less), MSNBC, Netscape, CNN, etc. showed Kerry with double digit leads of up to 20% with almost a half million votes cast on many sites...yet on sites like Fox or the Wall Street Journal, etc.- those polls showed DuHbya in the lead- sometimes only slightly... On another board I frequent- somebody put a whole new spin on polls and asked...'do you believe what the polls say (do you feel political polls are a true reflection of the majority)' or 'you don't believe polls (do you feel political polls aren't a true reflection of the majority and are being used as a manipulative tool to discourage and/or sway voters).' Take a wild guess which choice is the overwhelming winner?? My honest observation?? This country is divided into two halves- free thinking independents who refuse to be manipulated and submit to 'thought control' and sheeple- those who'll believe anything, don't bother with trying to sort out fact from fiction and jump on the bandwagon du jour if they perceive it as the 'popular' stance... Just remember that saying Shooter...don't believe everything you see, only half of what you read and nothing you hear.
|
|
Roland
Full Member
Robert Johnson King of the Delta Blues
Posts: 235
|
Post by Roland on Sept 8, 2004 17:11:01 GMT -5
LS, I didn't mean to run out and leave you in the lurch to debate this one alone. The first week of school is always a chaotic nightmare. Mr. Shooter, it is true, I wasn't making a case for why Hillary Clinton is more admirable than Laura Bush. I was disagreeing with your middle America remark. Hillary was greatly disliked during Clinton's first campaign. And if you want to go by polls, today it would appear she is still greatly disliked. So I'll ask the same question LS has. By whom is she disliked? If she's generally disliked by middle America, how does she wind up on the most admired lists? Or is this simply a perception that her vocal conservative detractors have fabricated to make it appear that way, when in fact middle Americans do like and admire her? Most people I've spoken with don't have a problem with Teresa and I consider myself and those around me "middle America." I'm not disputing what you've heard, but that could very well be a regional view. LS provided some interesting food for thought regarding polls. In view of the history of numerous Bush smear tactics, it would not surprise me at all if this poll was of their own making. Consider the fact that no one had a problem with Teresa when she was married to the late Sen. Heinz or before Kerry entered the presidential race, and yes she was very much in the public eye. Consider too that Sen. Heinz was a Republican, as was Teresa. She remained a Republican after marrying Kerry, however she switched parties in protest of the campaign smear tactics used by Republican Saxby Chambliss against Democrat Max Cleland in the 2002 Georgia senatorial election. When questioned about her switch, she made the following statement. "Let me just say having been married to a Republican, wonderful man, who was the old kind of Republican that we used to have once upon a time, the Republicanism of this administration is neither Republican nor conservative. There are good people in both parties. These people are not Republicans." Those same tactics are now being used against her husband, John Kerry. Mr. Shooter, considering that Laura Bush hasn't registered as a blip on the radar screen of public consciousness for the past 4 years, I find her newfound popularity to be something more than coincidental, particularly when added to Teresa's Republican history. Could it be more feasable that it has nothing to do with personality and has more to do with a Republican who defected because of this administration and she's now the wife of their "enemy"?
|
|
|
Post by SweetNadine on Sept 8, 2004 17:21:07 GMT -5
Just wanted to throw in my two cents to this conversation.
I watched the Laura Bush speech. IMHO, she is a bitter woman. She doesn't like the bashing her husband is receiving. Laura Bush wants her children and her husband to be exempted from all the thorns of life. A lot of this bashing could have been avoided had there been some forthright honesty coming from the mansion on the hill.
Teresa Heinz is alright in my opinion. Yep, she took-up for herself with the reporter. I probably would have to had I put up with his bs for the period of time she has put up with his harassment. I think the evening she made "shove it" a worldwide renown cliche, the lady was tired and had had enough of the mental abuse from the guy. We didn't hear much about this man's record in the media though. Just like with the bashing about Heinz. Heinz is a worldwide company and has been for decades. However, you'll never hear about how the owners never laid-off a soul during the Great Depression. The founder and his offspring were operating a worldwide organization long before today's modern communication systems. And I have never read of the unscrupulous behavior from the owners as has been performed from companies such as Ford.
The upright, hypcritical, morality police of the world have tried in vain to downgrade all of the protesters who participated in the protests during the RNC. I don't see it that way. First Amendment rights are guaranteed in the Constitution. However, with some of the things going on nowadays one would think the Constitution went by the wayside in 2000.
|
|