bmags

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 06:33 PM) http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...n-pulls-ah.html lol what a dumb quote.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 06:17 PM) Well, this part I don't really have a problem with, I really don't know if I want the press questioning people about that family beyond a certain level unless there's something really wierd in there (I'd tolerate, for example, questions about the Alaska independence party and her husband's participation in it). Well, I disagree, when McCain aides were giving varying answers about when he was told about this, and then you have an interview with him, you ask. It has nothing to do with her. It had to do with the questioning over how much time McCain took before handing over the potential #2 position of the most powerful country in the world to her.

Better said on TPM: Well, now I've read them. And it's pretty clear this farce is going to be close to unwatchable. Set aside that this comes just on the heels of McCain campaign manager Rick Davis saying Palin would not sit for any interviews "until the point in time when she'll be treated with respect and deference." The tell comes high up in the AP story by David Bauder. The second graf reads ... Palin will sit down for multiple interviews with Gibson in Alaska over two days, most likely Thursday and Friday, said McCain adviser Mark Salter. Political interviews are never done like this. Because it makes the questioning entirely at the discretion of the person being interviewed and their handlers. The interviewer has to be on their best behavior, at least until the last of the 'multiple interviews' because otherwise the subsequent sittings just won't happen. For a political journalist to agree to such terms amounts to a form of self-gelding. The only interviews that are done this way are lifestyle and celebrity interviews. And it's pretty clear that that is what this will be. ------------------- And there was more, about how Gibson got the interview because he did not question McCain about Palin's family. He thought it was innappropriate. Well, that's all in the framing Charlie boy, because the important part about those questions was everyone wanting to know IF HE KNEW about them when vetting, when and why. So he's going to do a kid gloves interview with Sarah Palin. WE ARE TRULY THANKFUL GIBSON! THIS WILL DEFINITELY MAKE US MORE INFORMED VOTERS!!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 05:48 PM) Actually, she's finally going to sit down for an interview this week. With ABC's Charlie Gibson...the Flag Pin debate moderator. the stipulations in that interview are embarrassing.

KEEP. THE. MEDIA. AWAY. FROM. HER. they are sooooo MEAN

QUOTE (Texsox @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 04:03 PM) If we can't win one in Minny, we probably have no right winning the division. I do think 1-2 in Minny isn't so terrible a statement, and 2-1 shouts we won it. I'd rather not "back into a division title, but hey, anyway is ultimately fine. This weekend was solid. Adding to a lead while we're playing a divisional winner and they are playing a out of it loser, is pretty damn sweet. I mostly agree with this, except that I'm fine backing into a divisional winner.

QUOTE (ChiSox35 @ Sep 8, 2008 -> 06:35 AM) Yeah but Anaheim isn't exactly playing with urgency. I recall hearing that they've been awful as of late. The thing that kills me watching the replay right now is we were up 2-0 into the 6th. Hold on just a little bit longer and you're 3.5 up on the Twins going into a tough set with Toronto. not playing with urgency is a poor trait going into the playoffs.

I love blowouts, but our blow out wasn't even that fun. It was just way too easy. 42-0 half time. Chase patton and Gabbert got some good PT. Gabbert looked alright but reaffirmed that nothing can happen to Chase this year.

making him look like a coward, huh. Because during a hugely important election season, he totally should be putting off seeing actual voters to go a conservative talk show that few would vote for him anyways.

SO proud of my White Sox right now!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...0,7855333.story

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Sep 6, 2008 -> 01:38 AM) Ill take your word for it. Being an Obama fanboy you know all about people that can only speak well when they have a prepared speech in front of them. Yeah! Great Point!!!

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 10:38 PM) The democratic party has a LOT more african-american voters because they've somehow convinced a lot of voters from that group that even despite how the republican party was started in the first place, the GOP hates black people. Besides african-americans, both parties have a pretty equal amount of diversity, it's just that one group that the democrats have put into a trance to almost exclusively vote for them. I mean there are certainly african-americans that vote for the democrats due to the issue, but I think some just do it because "everybody else does". That's just the view of the white guy though. Well, the dems were the ones that were the main pushers for civil rights legislation: truman, kennedy, especially LBJ. Then you had Nixon specifically back some pro-segregationist policies to attract the dixiecrats over to being republicans. The dems are the ones mostly behind affirmative action policies and eliminating prejudice in housing and other purchases. THey didn't convince the black population that the GOP hates them, they are just in more populated areas where people are also more democrat in mindset.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 10:35 PM) The "we were elected to change Washington and we let Washington change us" line blew me away. For somebody to admit that at all about his own party was just refreshing to see in my opinion. Even if it's obvious to us, nobody ever admits something like that. "And what are we going to do about it? Promote the exact same policies!" CHEERS!!!! APPLAUSE!!!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 08:42 PM) Supposedly he has cancelled everything through the general election. Yeah that's what I read too. I'd be happy if I was U of I

btw, I just read that Edwards canceled his U of I speech. I think that was posted in here?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 08:21 PM) McCain is up by 37.5% in Wyoming polls, I agree with what you're saying but thats a bad example. You're correct, I meant to say Montana.

Just out of curiosity...with the amount of Congress and senate races that the RNC is possibly losing this election, do you think they are gonna put all their eggs in McCain victory so they can negate whatever losses they endure, thinking that after 4 years it would likely even back out?

This team can do two things: 1. Deflate, press too much and fall into the abyss 2. Use this as a rallying cry and crush these freaking teams. I just don't see us deflating. Let's fight this, White Sox.

just the worst news. I wish you the best CQ

QUOTE (mreye @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 07:39 PM) You're swatting at flies, ATH. Wow. I'm surprised to learn she actually put it on Ebay. I thought she was kidding. Come on guys look at what AHB wrote after that.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 07:11 PM) US magazine may not be MSM, but they are suffering just the same it seems. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26549704/ It has been coming to my house for years, despite my protest. I just get so sick seeing all the fake celebs on the cover (Heidi Montag, anyone?) and have been trying to convince Mrs. Alpha Dog to cancel it for years. but since she got some deal for like $10 a year, she hasn't wanted to. She saw a story on the cover page, and now I get to stop that crap from coming into my house! Yah! It really is a rag. lucky man. I prefer people, if I had the choice.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 06:08 PM) Worth noting his tag line wasn't on either of those articles...but yeah, a guy who almost went to work for the McCain campaign happens to be their head guy in Washington right now...and conveniently, that's how the AP responded to each speech. I believe he is their editor.

One interesting thing to note, is that Obama has resources in all 50 states. What this means to me is that even in states he loses, he will probably be closer than Kerry was in 04. What I'm getting at, is if Obama loses, I'm thinking it's likely that he still wins popular. And that would really be bad.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 5, 2008 -> 06:05 PM) A week ago, the AP ran this article within 26 minutes of the end of Senator Obama's speech. Last night's AP article on McCain's speech was this one: (Came out a little over 1 hour after his speech) It seemed to be not until this mornign that the AP put out a negative sounding article on McCain's speech, and they left that to the "AP television writer" to do it. The AP is sort of the standard wire service for so many newspapers...basically, the earlier they put stuff out the more papers pick it up. So probably hundreds of newspapers carried each of those first articles, one bashing Obama's speech and one praising McCain's speech. The AP under Ron Fornier