once again the jokes write themselves...

[godsshoeshine]

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
  from an ny times editorial:
 
 THE presidential campaign has taken a detour into a dispute over the constitutional status of the vice presidency. It all started when Sarah Palin asserted in her debate with Joe Biden that the vice president should play an important role in the legislative branch.
 
 Ms. Palin has been roundly mocked for her claim. But she was probably right.
 
 Article I of the Constitution, which describes the authority of the legislative branch, says that �??the vice president of the United States shall be president of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided.�?� Aside from the job of replacing a president who dies or is unable to serve, the only vice presidential duties that are spelled out in the Constitution are legislative in character.
 
 so, would you rather have someone who declares they don't know something and wants to learn or someone who claims to know something, but is astoundingly wrong?  seems to me that, in keeping with the character of people on this board, they'd rather have the person who admits they don't know and wants to learn.  i'm willing to stipulate the efficacy of a particular person's actual desire to want to learn.

isnt that the same instapundit author you linked a few weeks back?

[sweetcell]

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
 let's just say that while palin amusingly wonders what's the role of the vp, biden confidently declares that he knows what the role of the vp is and that it's part of the executive branch, except that it's not.

i'd rather have someone who has a valid but disputable interpretation, vs. someone who has no fucking clue at all.  complete   and her bit about using the office of VP to do good things for alaska further shows that she isn't ready for the national stage.  personally, i don't find that amusing.
 
 i thought the repubs were dead-set against learning on the job... oh, wait, that only applies to the other side.

[manimtired]

sweetcell can you even vote?

[walkonby]

<img src="http://dailyabuse.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/111304_vote_or_die.jpg" alt=" - " />

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by manimtired:
  sweetcell can you even vote?

i obviously cant answer for him, but since you asked that....i am wondering if i can...i didnt think i could but now i am unsure.

[manimtired]

you cant. dont try.

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by manimtired:
  you cant. dont try.

you know, i thought about trying just to see if i could or to see if they really just let anyone vote.
 
  my situation is confusing, i have had 2 GC's and am married to a citizen.  I was told by some that i had to wait 3 years after being married but now i am believing i could have applied sooner since i was already here before i got married.
 
  Either way, its not like i could get naturalized by next week anyway.  1 less Obama vote you have to worry about manimtired.  I live in Maryland anyway so not like it really matters.

[walkonby]

ooh, maryland . . . the new northern virginia.

[sweetcell]

nope, not currently eligible to vote.  yes, eligible to have an opinion.  
 
 your point?  lemme guess, you're going to dismiss me because i can't vote (invariably with a most thoughtful argument along the lines of "STFU").  sorry buddy, i'll be spouting off as much as the next guy.  this board - and the right to an opinion - isn't limited to eligible voters.  my hope is to influence those who can.  been living here 10 years, elections affect me.  
 
 if i was pro-mccain, 100% guaranteed you wouldn't be making an issue of this.  how about choosing a real issue and discussing that?  LOL.
 
 sonick: what's a "GC"? (i'm unfamiliar with that abbreviation, in this context).

[manimtired]

LOL. u mad?

[manimtired]

GC - grand children.  hes rhetts age..

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by sweetcell:
 
 sonick: what's a "GC"? (i'm unfamiliar with that abbreviation, in this context).

green card.

[Sage 703]

The Endorsement from Hell
 
 John McCain isn�??t boasting about a new endorsement, one of the very, very few he has received from overseas. It came a few days ago:
 
 �??Al Qaeda will have to support McCain in the coming election,�?� read a commentary on a password-protected Islamist Web site that is closely linked to Al Qaeda and often disseminates the group�??s propaganda.
 
 The endorsement left the McCain campaign sputtering, and noting helplessly that Hamas appears to prefer Barack Obama. Al Qaeda�??s apparent enthusiasm for Mr. McCain is manifestly not reciprocated.
 
 ***
 
 Later, from the same article:
 
 Yet the endorsement of Mr. McCain by a Qaeda-affiliated Web site isn�??t a surprise to security specialists. Richard Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism director, and Joseph Nye, the former chairman of the National Intelligence Council, have both suggested that Al Qaeda prefers Mr. McCain and might even try to use terror attacks in the coming days to tip the election to him.
 
 �??From their perspective, a continuation of Bush policies is best for recruiting,�?� said Professor Nye, adding that Mr. McCain is far more likely to continue those policies.

[manimtired]

no reverse psychology being used by those clever terrorists...nope, none at all.

[manimtired]

http://augustafreepress.com/2008/09/22/webcast-richard-clarke-stumps-for-obama/
 
 http://ndnblog.org/node/2445