Anonymous wrote:How can you say this is not a real issue? This misogynistic mindset can only affect decisions on judges, laws on abortion, significant healthcare reimbursement covering women's health issues, policies on equal pay for women, ... do you not have a mother, sisters, daughters, cousins that this can affect?

"Mindset" is a good word for this discussion: I can imagine my mindset if my wife teased me about my disappearing hair in front of people -- anywhere from humor to embarrassment to annoyance. But probably not rage. And how we feel about specific words depends greatly on our background -- an African American of McCain's age might not think twice about being called colored, while a twenty or thirty year-old would probably be quite taken aback. I think it quite possible that it was a relatively innocent jibe between McCain & wife. In any case, I don't think it reasonable to judge a man's mindset on the basis of your reaction to one word.

On the other hand, I am willing to judge his mindset on the basis of his recent attack ads with all their lies and distortions, and the insinuations implied by juxtaposing him with Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, linking him to their slutty reputations and treating us to the juxtaposition of a black man with young blond women. To me, this looks like the McSame old Bush-Rove tactics. You can see the ad here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/30/mccain-ad-links-paris-hil_n_115841.html

The McCain campaign refers to Obama as The One. After ther recent attack ads that accuse Obama of causing the high gas prices and of not caring about our troops, I dub McCain The Negative One.

Anonymous wrote:Why is it when a Republican does it then it is a big deal and makes the news, but when a Dem. does something it is considered a private matter?

As Jeff noted, it's not totally clear that your assumption is true -- it appears to be a natural human tendency to see the press as biased against our own views. But if there is truth to it, it might be because of the hypocrisy involved when the "family values" bunch devalue their own families. That might also explain why super-prosecutor Spitzer was hit so hard.

A quick Google got me this quote: "Recent statistics suggest that 40% of women (and that number is increasing) and 60% of men at one point indulge in extramarital affairs". Although it is widely thought that Edwards would not necessarily carry NC, if he could swing a significant percentage of the infidelity vote, he might be the best choice for VP. His supposed mistress, Rielle Hunter, used to be Jay McInerney's girlfriend (then called Lisa Druck); perhaps the literary crowd would also be attracted. GQ (giggling quietly)

That subject line is the ID of someone who wrote a comment on Politico.com. I just tossed it on here because I think it's funny. Has Joe Biden used it yet?

Anonymous wrote:That's March of this year. I don't understand how to turn off the emoticons.

That's a major problem, especially for politicians -- think of Muskie's tears or Dean's scream!

Being an Obama supporter, I am surely not an unbiased observer of the MaCain campaign. So I would be curious to know whether an undecided voter or a McCain supporter would feel that McCain's response to a question about his charge that Obama would rather lose a war to win a campaign really came anywhere near answering the question of whether he was impugning Obama's patriotism. It seemed to me he was doing his best to leave that impression without having the guts to come out and say it. The interview tape is here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25838127#25838127

Note: I readily admit that Obama also "answers" questions by saying what he wants to say rather than giving a direct answer. But I don't think he has done anything comparable to accusing someone of putting his election over the interests of the country.

Anonymous wrote:Bet your bottom dollar the Iraqi prime minister doesn't want us gone in 16 months. He's just saying that because there's an election coming up and it's the politically expedient thing to say.

You may be right, but the unavoidable implication of your statement is that the people of Iraq want us out. And, since we have set up a democracy there, whether we like it or not, the people will decide.

I think there is a tendency to get tied up in details, trying to counter this or that specific argument. I hope I won't sound preachy, but I'd like to give my general view of things.

By way of disclosure, as I have said in some earlier postings, I'm definitely on the liberal side, although I try not to be doctrinaire or knee-jerk (maybe just a plain old jerk now and then). I plan to vote for Obama because I agree with his general political philosophy, am impressed by his intelligence and communication skills, and, perhaps most important, do not want to see another Supreme Court Justice with the Scalia/Thomas/Roberts/Alito slant.

However, I have no difficulty seeing why someone would support McCain. His wartime experience and the fact that he did not get his son out of Iraq service impress me, as does his long-time willingness to ignore the Republican party line and to work with Democrats like Feingold and Kennedy. His pro-life record is strong and would certainly be a plus if I happened to be on that side of the issue. I'm not that much younger than him, so I appreciate his years of experience, although I think he's nuts to want the job at this time in his life (but I think one has to be nuts to want it at any time).

So what it comes down to is that it's a crapshoot in any case (who'd have thought a successful governor of Texas could be such a disaster as president?), but these are two guys who look to me as though they might actually be successful, and are almost sure to be an improvement over the present occupant. I'll go with Obama because of where I stand on the issues he may have to deal with, but I'm glad that, if we end up with a Republican, it will be McCain.

Rich

Hey Jeff, I don't mean people have to be quite as informative as you, or even as my rather limited revelation. I'd be happy with something like 'anon1' or 'X', just to distinguish which responses come from the same person. I have had at least one experience of confusion on this.

I would like to suggest that people on this list register at the home page http://www.dcurbanmom.com/ and then sign in when you come to this forum so we won't continue being confused by the number of people named 'anonymous'. Alternatively, put some kind of signature on your postings.

Rich

The Post may be of questionable objectivity on the election, although I bet McCain supporters think it favors Obama, just as Obama supporters think the opposite (maybe they just go for fluff on both sides). However their sister publication, in my opinion, did us a great service in printing Fareed Zakaria's article How Obama Sees the World: http://www.newsweek.com/id/147763

Rich

Anonymous wrote:Would you suggest I treat Krauthammer with kid gloves because he is in a wheel chair? I think Krauthammer might object to that.

As for feeding into the "elitist" argument of the Republicans. It's not my fault that Republicans tend to elect these shit-kickers who have no intellectual curiousity, and then call those who value it "elitist". I don't think we have to pretend that Obama's accomplishments are less than they are so that more people will want to have a beer with him. Or whatever.

The Catch-22: Talk about Obama's tremendous accomplishments, and you're feeding into the elitist thing. Don't talk about them, and then be silent and endure a litany of people saying, "If he weren't black, he'd be nothing!!"

Kid gloves? No way! In addition to patronizing, I'd add that he's pompous.

And I don't mean to argue that you should accept the anti-intellectual outlook of much of the body politic. My point is simply that winning debating points is not the goal, it's winning votes. And the last thing that's likely to win votes is for us to bash each other on process when we probably agree on the issues, so I'll shut up for now.

Rich

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. "Joe Lieberman" liberal is the best way to describe the Post -- which means NOT VERY!

I dub them Lieberlibs. On the opposite side, there are Hagelcons.