Thursday Open Thread

“In the theater the audience wants to be surprised–but by things that they expect.”

–Tristan Bernard

72 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DavidThi808 says:

    Just a friendly reminder, the choice for President is between Barack Obama & John McCain. And Republicans want to take the conversation elsewhere because on Obama vs McCain – Obama wins.

    • Ray Springfield says:

      They lose Palin v. Biden badly.

      She and her husband belonged to a party that wants out of the USA. That’s not patriotism. That’s treason. Ask Abraham Lincoln.

    • Libertad says:

      What points do you think he’ll stress besides country 1st?

      Do you think he’ll adopt Obama’s pledge to make nice?

      Do you think he’ll feed the base with direct appeals to his GOP mates or pepper this speech with ‘my fellow americans’?

      • DavidThi808 says:

        Last night was red meat for the base night. And even in that mode, there was very little discussion of lower taxes and none of abortion, etc. They’ve got at least one eye on the middle.

        And the Palin speech went over well, so he won’t see a need to try and shore up that decision. So I think it will be very similiar to Sarah Palin’s speech – it went over well and it’s the same people writing both speeches.

        • Ray Springfield says:

          The question becomes how long the media will choose to ignore her participation in the Alaska secessionist party.

          Biden won’t ignore it in a debate. The media is fickle, or perhaps just biased . Rev. Wright receives front page news because a Black man criticizes the USA.

          A White woman’s affiliation with a secessionist party gets a pass?

          It doesn’t pass the smell test.  

          • Barron X says:


            I almost expect you to work this angle on every thread,

            just like Libertad and whatever it is that she (he ?) posts everywhere.  

            Either you persuade a lot of folks, or you antagonize them.

            But Work it, Ray.


            • Ray Springfield says:

              The question becomes why isn’t NBC,CBS,ABC, FOX , The Wall St Journal, and CNN working it.

              McCain is elderly and has had cancer.

              Someone that does not believe in the United States of America remaining united has no business being commander in chief. There is no need to ask her views on anything else. She doesn’t believe in the USA.

              I think that you believe in the USA.  

      • … the phrase is ‘my friends’.

        I’m guessing his backgrounder will be heavily laced with his service to country.  I’m guessing he won’t be heaping much praise on Obama, though I’d be surprised if there was nothing good said about his opponent.

        He’ll hit the tax issue, and the oil issue, and he’ll spend considerable time on his “strong” international posturing.  But more than anything, since he’s speaking “to the country” tonight, he’ll hit on his supposed maverickness.

  2. The AP has come out with a bit of a fact-check vs. the Republican convention speeches…

    Here are the findings.  (Sorry to all you righties; the copy I found is from RawStory, but it’s just a reprint of an AP wire story…)

    Summary: while the AP headline uses the phrase “stretching the truth”, their examples indicate “ignoring the truth” would have been more accurate.

  3. dwyer says:

    I think Palin walks the walk and talks the talk on this issue.

    For women, her personal choices will reverberate.  You can’t look at the sleeping infant and say he was better off not here.

    However, even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe, the issue returns to the states and each state can battle it out.  I don’t think that is going to happen..I think that the Court, with a McCain majority, will piece meal, reduce the right, but not eliminate it.

    The issue puts Obama at a distinct disadvantage. Not only is he profoundly pro-choice, but as a student of Constitutional Law, he understands the implication of overturning or severely limiting Roe.

    I also think this woman is done with family. She left this family when she ran for governor.  I think the family knows it, perhaps the multitude of babies was an attempt to bring her back.  I think men will recognize the look. Women will envy her decision to act on it.


    • DavidThi808 says:

      And you can talk the mechanics of how the states would still keep it legal – and that doesn’t matter. The possibility that Roe might be overturned drives a lot of votes – on both sides.

    • Barron X says:


      I also think this woman is done with family. She left this family when she ran for governor.  I think the family knows it, perhaps the multitude of babies was an attempt to bring her back.  I think men will recognize the look. Women will envy her decision to act on it.

      Reading that, my stomach turned with revulsion.  

      It’s mean; it’s ugly; it’s desperate.

      At first, I was angry that you had written that.

      But I can see how it may succeed.  

      Karl Rove leveraged bigotry and fear into electoral success;

      this takes it to the next level.  

      I pray Obama eschews this vileness, but it just might be his winning ticket.


    • Dabee47 says:

      How dare she not kill her son because he has Down’s Syndrome…  I’m sure that will resonate with voters…

      What a load of crap…that’s the nicest I can put it…

    • Laughing Boy says:

      The “Angry Left”.

      Keep it up.  You’re doing great work for us.

      • dwyer says:

        I have never revealed my position on abortion in this blog. I have consistently discussed the issue in the context of political strategy and legal consequence, specifically to the Constitution of the United States…  A cup of luke warm instant  coffee to anyone who can refute that statement.

        Now, I believe very strongly that kids in this country are getting short shrift…..I believe it is okay to  look at how a party or a candidate treats children.  I have been very critical of the Edwards and their decision last year to keep on campaigning, dragging those children on the campaign trail, even after they knew that Elizabeth Edwards was terminal.  I believed that those children needed and deserved to be first in that family and their needs should have come before any political ambition…

        I believe that if a candidate presents him or herself as a “model” of traditional values, or presents their family life as somehow a testimonial to their character,  it is okay to ask how the campaign will impact the family.  My observation is that Palin is putting the needs of the campaign ahead of the needs of those children..all of them.

        A personal note: My father was career military. I am of an age that my father left the family three times..WWII and Korea….to go to a shooting war.  The last two times, I remember his saying goodbye to my kid sister and I…I remember that that was the worst pain I had ever felt in my young life….perhaps I am simply incapable of being objective when it comes to anything which resembles the voluntary abandoment of children by parents.  Of course, he was ordered and had no choice, of course he was serving his country…blah blah blah… don’t understand adult reasons…they just know a parent is not there…

        So back off and give me a f##k break.

        • redstateblues says:

          I thought she was going to pull through?

          • dwyer says:

            Her own quote was something to the effect that now she knows how she is going to die.   Cancer is god awful, and I would not wish that prognosis on anyone.  But, most likely, her young children are going to lose their mother, and the final months may be rough for everyone.  She is in treatment; but, I believe the survival rate for State IV is far less than five years.

            Initially, she was in remission and her changes were considered good. But, it reoccurred in the bones and she announced that it was State IV.  

  4. DavidThi808 says:

    from the Washington Post

    Only 36 of the 2,380 delegates seated on the convention floor are black, the lowest number since the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies began tracking diversity at political conventions 40 years ago. Each night, the overwhelmingly white audience watches a series of white politicians step to the lectern — a visual reminder that no black Republican has served as a governor, U.S. senator or U.S. House member in the past six years.

    • Whiskey Lima Juliet says:

      According to polls of delegates conducted by The New York Times and CBS News, 93 percent of the Republican delegates are white (compared with 85 percent in 2004 and 89 percent in 2000), while 5 percent are Latino and 2 percent are black. The Democratic delegate pool in Denver, according to the survey, was 65 percent white, 23 percent black and 11 percent Latino, similar to recent years.

      Funny, none of my friends were moved by her – most of us are Indeps.  

  5. Sir Robin says:

    $300,000 get-up at the RNC:

    Have at it….

  6. Dabee47 says:

    While most of you here have been saying the media is just fairly examining Sarah Palin’s record, pretty much everyone else disagrees.

    “Last night’s polling shows that, by a ten-to-one margin, voters believe reporters are trying to hurt Palin’s campaign rather than help.”

    And perhaps attacking…and maybe even mocking…Obama for being a “community organizer” and not having any executive experience wasn’t such a bad idea after all.

    “Perhaps most stunning is that, among unaffiliated voters, just 42% believe Obama has better experience than Palin to be President. Thirty-seven percent (37%) say Palin has the edge on experience. Again, most of the interviews for this survey were completed before Palin’s well-received speech last night.”

    Only a 5 point edge among undecideds when it comes to experience?  Wow.

    Times for us Dems to buckle down and work on winning the election, not making fun of a woman apparently a whole lot of people like…

    • RedGreen says:

      whether it’s ever the job of reporters to “help” a vice presidential candidate’s campaign.

      Sure, the McCain campaign is spinning an effective sympathy narrative for Palin around the undeniable feeding frenzy occasioned by an unknown dropping into the middle of the campaign a few days before her nomination. Ask the same voters why they don’t change the channel or cancel their subscriptions to US Weekly or People. People might not like what they’re hearing, but they sure want to hear it.

  7. parsingreality says:

    How many minutes into the speech will those terrible years be brought up and then inferring that makes him a quality presidential candidate.

    And do you think he has trained himself to not do the Bush snork-snork when he laughs at his own jokes?  

    • RedGreen says:

      Actually, it’s more of a dead-eyed, creepy grimace.

      The other question is whether McCain will call what happened to him in Vietnam “torture,” because if he does, that means he believes the current administration has been torturing captives. Bush contorted himself to avoid using the word on Tuesday, as did Fred Thompson. Last night, Huckabee and Giuliani called it what it is, but they’re not in a position to prosecute anyone over it.

    • Dabee47 says:

      But the snorks make him seem folksy…isn’t that what folks in the pan-handle think  😛

      I wouldn’t be surprised if he has a line in his speech similar to the one Arthur Branch…I mean, Fog Horn…I mean Fred Thompson used on Tuesday.  

      “Now, being a POW certainly doesn’t qualify anyone to be President.  But it does reveal character.  This is the kind of character that civilizations from the beginning of history have sought in their leaders.”

      It’s not a bad strategy…and can work against the “noun, verb, POW” criticism.  

      • BlueCat says:

        Obama and Biden are very pointedly not touching that. They preface every criticism with an acknowledgement of McCain’s courage, service and sacrifice, unlike the righties who denegrated a silver star war hero who happened to be the Dem candidate. Very smart AND respectful.

  8. NEWSMAN says:

    Could you please send an e-mail with contact information to:

    They would like to invite you to a candidate forum/debate.  Doug Lamborn has accepted their invitation, and they are in the process of contacting Hal Bidlack’s campaign.



    • DavidThi808 says:

      I knew you couldn’t leave.

      As to Doug Lamborn, will he agree to any debates with a non-partisian moderator, or only from Republicans?

      • RedGreen says:

        the Colorado College debate already. His “people” say he’s working on scheduling debates, but Bidlack’s campaign says they haven’t heard a peep from him, so it’s unclear how he’s scheduling them.

          • NEWSMAN says:

            But why would they when the incumbent congressman has agreed to a candidate forum , with fair rules, and equal treatment.  

            What, you think Lamborn would do anything remotely underhanded in a race he will win 70/30 if he does nothing but his job until election day.  Lamborn has credibility with his base and would never risk that.  

            The RCF has way more to lose than to gain if the debate is anything other than up and up.

            I know the people in charge of this, and it has my seal of approval.  

            What more could you ask? 🙂


      • NEWSMAN says:

        in an event sponsored by the Democratic  Club of Boulder as well.

        If the RCF uses the same rules as their last event, it will be the same written questions asked to all 3 candidates in rotating order. It’s a very fair format and the RCF prides itself on their reputation for fair events.  

        But If I were from the other party, I would do some some checking.  

        There will be no personal attacks allowed between candidates or the audience.  It is as civil a format as one could hope for in my opinion.

        I believe this one is scheduled for Sand Creek High School,(Falcon School District 49) in the eastern part of Colorado Springs, (Powers corridor).  I don’t have the date handy.

    • parsingreality says:

      Also defines the liberal philosophy.  Republican version: Some men dream of a paradise that never was, some ask why not return to it?

      Welcome back.  Where ya been?  

      • NEWSMAN says:

        I have new responsibilities that prevent me from blogging very often.  

        The quote is a paraphrase of a man I admired who was killed when I was 15.

        It’s one of my favorite guys from my High School years, RFK.  

        A truly courageous Attorney General, and a tragic loss.

        The first president I remember was his brother JFK.  A man who if alive today, would by his polices and rhetoric be driven out of the party, and would stand with Joe Lieberman.

        I don’t think the Daily KOS crowd would like this very much.

         Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

        “The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are…. The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.”

        In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility-I welcome it.

        Translation = Bring it on.

        Ask not what your country can do for you-ask what you can do for your country.

        Iraq – anyone

        I hear it said that West Berlin is militarily untenable-and so was Bastogne, and so, in fact, was Stalingrad. Any danger spot is tenable if men-brave men-will make it so.

        He didn’t want to negotiate for Berlin.

        The freedom of the city is not negotiable. We cannot negotiate with those who say, “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is negotiable.”

        Khrushchev reminds me of the tiger hunter who has picked a place on the wall to hang the tiger’s skin long before he has caught the tiger. This tiger has other ideas.

        And Like Bush, he was not impressed with the accuracy of American intelligence services.

        I don’t think the intelligence reports are all that hot. Some days I get more out of the New York Times.

        All Quotes are John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

        Are you sure you missed me?

        Not to worry, I will leave you in peace for a season.

        Be well my friend.


        • ThillyWabbit says:

          JFK would have known the difference between the threat of a nuclear-armed Soviet Union with the largest army in the world and a petty dictator in Iraq whose military had been crushed under the weight of sanctions.

          I agree with everything JFK said in your quotes. And I think Joe Lieberman is a tool of the far right of the evangelical far right that has a religious agenda rather than a strategic agenda when it comes to Israel and middle east policy.

        • parsingreality says:

          You swat some good fast balls and you will take the returns seriously, at least sometimes.

          JFK is a mixed bag, now that we have historical perspective.  Yes, he was tough on security – which is a whole different definition today – and yet he bollixed the Cuban situation in numerous ways.

          But you left off his great quote about what it means to be a liberal!

          JFK was a great motivator. I think we have found Obama to be one, too. We have had great orator presidents like RR and BC and FDR, but to fill the hearts of Americans with excitement for the future is limited to a few.

          • NEWSMAN says:

            …”What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label “Liberal?” If by “Liberal” they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer’s dollar, then … we are not that kind of “Liberal.” But if by a “Liberal” they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a “Liberal,” then I’m proud to say I’m a “Liberal.” JFK [September 14, 1960]

            I see there are those that take exception to my quoting  “Democrats”. My friends, at the time, my parents were life long Democrats, and so was I, if an 8 year old can have a party affiliation.  OK, Jr. Dem then.

            I am not ashamed of the RFK quote that is my current sig-line.  Inspiring quotes are just as inspiring from RFK as they are from RR.  

            But I will be happy to dump the Democrats from my quote rotation. I am thinking of one of these for my new sig-line. Which one should I choose?

            “I guess when you turn out profoundly wrong on a vital national security issue, maybe you shouldn’t pretend that everyone else was wrong, too.” SARAH PALIN

            “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a “community organizer,” except that you have actual responsibilities.” SARAH PALIN

            “We tend to prefer candidates who don’t talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.”

            SARAH PALIN

            “Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America’s energy problems – as if we all didn’t know that already. But the fact that drilling won’t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.” SARAH PALIN

        • dwyer says:

          However, JFK was President of all Americans, and you are welcome to his inspiration.  You are not welcome to distort his meanings or rewrite his history.

          Note:  The Berlin Wall was built in August of 1961 during the first year of a Kennedy administration. JFK went golfing. He denounced the wall, but he did not move militarily.

          And that speech, it inspired Americans to join the peace corps, not the army.

  9. Something Is Brewing says:

    With the race now tied it is highly possible that McCain will be up by double digits by mid-September.

    A truly funny thing happened on the way to the landslide.  Now leading Democrats are  worrying about the effect a big Obama loss will have on down ticket races.

    • bob ewegen says:

      As the story says, other polls still have obama up 8 points.

      Basically, any poll is at best a still photo of a moving target.  Frankly, none of them will mean much until we’re at least a week past the last convention, to let the bounces, counter bounces and what have you sort out.

      My guess is that this puppy will go to the wire. I couldn’t be surprised to see a reverse 2000, with Obama winning the electoral vote while McCain wins Miss Congeniality, also known as the popular vote. Race and the Southern military tradition could combine to give McCain huge majorities in the old South while Obama squeaks by in key states like Ohio.

       National polls almost never account for electoral votes, which is one more reason they don’t mean much. State polls are much better in that regard, but it is still way early.  

    • RedGreen says:

      People are just now beginning to pay attention and polls will be volatile.

      But, SIB, when has anyone other than the Republicans claimed there will be a landslide? No one expects this to be anything but a very, very close election. Both sides should remember, too, the other side constitutes fully half the country, so stop treating them like a radical fringe. After the election, everyone’s going to still have to share the country.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.