TRIVIA.....Will history be repeated ? ?

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Barry, if I didn't feel this way, I would be pretty frightened.

We've just seen what happens when a born-again moronic idiologue becomes President. Everything he has touched has turned to ****.

Can you even imagine the damage that Palin would do if President McCain kicked?

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

Hey just so people know,I'll be showing this thread to my offspring so try and keep it clean. I dont want poor USG Hurricane to feel bad about his name

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Paul- I'm not going too far in this thread.

David- see, that's the problem. Obama will run circles around McCain, and likewise Biden will cream what's-her-name. But the public doesn't like that...they don't want a snooty intellectual running the country, they want a guy who is good for a beer and a hot dog, not too brainy, just the cranky guy next door.

[Archive]

Posted By: jdrum

I'm enjoying this.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

That's funny, I'm not.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Yes, Barry, Obama surely ran circles around McCain at Saddleback. The circles were so impressive that he turned down the opportunity to have 10 Town Hall meetings with McCain. He countered with zero. Perhaps he was concerned they couldn't fit a faux Greek temple inside?

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Barry, I pretty much agree with you.

But the last two elections were incredibly close, and the country is in the worst shape it's been in since the Depression.

Surely a few of the beer swillers have learned something.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Let's see how it all unfolds. It's kind of like a pennant race- one guy is ahead, then he goes into a slump and the other one passes him by. We'll have to wait.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

David, just promise me that when McCain wins you won't move to France -- you've got some incredible memorabilia that I want to see in person someday and I'm not packing up for a trip to Paris to see it.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

I don't speak French, Jeff. (And after a few visits there, I'm not crazy about les frogs.)

And, too, I certainly don't want to give up baseball.

Can you make it to Toronto?

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

I posted a set of current facts that are amazingly coincidental to 108 years ago when Teddy Roosevelt was selected for the
Republican VP slot......just to point out how history does repeats itself.

And, look what has come out of the "woodwork"......an uninformed, raving super-liberal "loony". Get off my thread you "JERK".
The rest of us would like to have a reasonable discussion.

We live in a country that basically consists of 33% Liberals....33% Independents....33% Conservatives....AND, 1% "useful idiots".

And, most of us (regardless of our politics) have become sick and tired of these "useful idiots"....these past 28 years.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Your thread?

What a clown.

Stick to t206s, Ted. They're the only thing you seem to understand.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Hey Ted, that isn't fair. You know how threads digress, and there was certainly a political undertone to your first post.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Hey JERK......

I understand a lot of things....and, one of them is that you are an "uninformed, useful idiot" that hates the American culture.

You better start making plans for moving to a foreign country when this Presidential election is over with.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Is it just me, or is it still 1968 in some places in Pennsylvania?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

I SIMPLY posted a set of coincidental facts.....very innocently stated.....there was no implied "undertones" to them.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I know Ted, but if someone disagrees with your politics you can't just curse him out. You know, dissent is allowed. And it doesn't make you a bad American to do so.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Facts?

"I am a reformer"

"I encourage the efficient use of natural resources."

Again, stick to the old cardboard. There (and there alone) your opinion is respected.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ol' Prof

Does anybody still care, or have I missed a post or two? Grant's middle name wasn't either Simpson or "S." He was born Hiram Ulysses Grant.

"Ulysses," or, as a good Republican, "Useless."

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

David,

All due respect...You do realize that it is people like you(or who say things like you do) that actually hurt the Dems chances of winning national elections...though I'm guessing you don't.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Say things like what?

What exactly have I said that you consider to be "over the top"?

[Archive]

Posted By: jdrum

I respect your opinion whether I agree with or not. Isn't it great that we don't all think alike.

edit: And I don't speak in tongues.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

As I said, we live in a "1/3rd Nation" (ideologically speaking).

It's always been like this dating back to the American Revolution. When only 1/3rd of the population supported George Washington.
One-third favored the British rule....and, 1/3rd did not give a crap.

America is great not only because of its ethnic diversity, but because most of us get along really great, despite our ideological differ-
ences.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

I never said they were "over the top", nor are they un-American. Hell, I'd like to buy you a beer(or ten) just to hear you go off. What they are is a bit naive, and more than a little condescending.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

To paraphrase Bela Lugosi (or at least some of his dialogue),

Condescending, perhaps. Naive, perhaps not.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim

Is this a trivia thread or a debate about the left versus the right?

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

TR ran as a "Bull Moose" and Palin can field dress one. Coincidence? I think not.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

And TR lost as a "Bull Moose," to the Democrat Woodrow Wilson.

A coincidence?

I hope not.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Kasel

I'm gonna say you're all wrong and say the correct answer is Spiro Agnew.

No matter how you vote it speaks volumes that you have the following candidates to choose from:

1. an african america raised by a single mother
2. a man who lost EVERYTHING before he even started his first term in the Senate (my opinon of everything would be my kid(s) and wife)
3. a man who spent five tortuous years as a POW
4. a woman who came from nowhere to become a mayor, then governor and now potential VP.

God Bless America!

BTW, I spent Thursday night not watching the drivel that is political debating and name calling but watching 102 Minutes on the History Channel to remember exactly what happened seven years ago and that we should never forget. If anyone gets the chance to read the book 102 Minutes That Changed America I highly suggest it. NEVER FORGET.

Bill Kasel

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

Yes, he did lose. If you add up the votes for Taft and TR they outnumber Wilson's however. That kind of party split probably wouldn't happen in today's world. I like TR's platform in 1912..."To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day." Some things never change I guess...

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

I have to correct your 2nd sentence here......
"If you add up the votes for Taft and TR they outnumber Wilson's however. That kind of party split probably wouldn't
happen in today's world."

Woodrow Wilson (Democrat) became President with only 42.5 % of the vote.

History was repeated in 1992 when Clinton (Democrat) became President with only 43 % of the vote.

Bush had 38 %

Perot had 19 %

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony S.

I'm starting to get the sense that the answer isn't Admiral Stockdale.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

"Obama is mediocre?

Is the current editor of the Harvard Law Review mediocre, too?

Whatsa matter? Does the idea of some actual intelligence making it to the Oval Office scare you?"


This would be funny if it were not so sad. I think most American are afraid of intelligence making it to the oval office. Instead of considering policies and qualifications, they vote for the person that is most like them (i.e. the one they can sit and have a beer with). Smart people are "elitists". It is an idiotic way to choose a president, but it is what we do. That's how we got Dubya. The other major factor is who is better looking. Obama wins this one, but Palin may do wonders. Female sex appeal is an untested wildcard in American politics. Americans want a handsome president, but do they want a hot one?
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

Ted Z,

Yes, you are correct in that instance. My reference was to the Republican party "splitting" in 1912 however. If everyone had gotten behind TR instead of some supporting Taft, the election might have had different results. Might being the key word, it's not conclusive. Politicians don't seem to like to have their relationships with corporate interests severed for some reason.

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

Admiral Stockdale...man I forgot about that guy, though it's a pretty easy thing to do.

Jim B.,

I think it has to do more with how the "elitist" delivers his/her message, not all "smart people" are smart quite frankly. I think most Americans would prefer an intelligent POTUS for sure, but they don't want to be talked down to...if you know what I mean.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

My understanding of the 1912 electtion is that there was a huge rift between Teddy Roosevelt and Taft (R)....that Teddy
decided to run against Taft. Therefore, throwing the election to Wilson, who won by only 42.5% (the lowest margin ever).

In 1992, this scenario was repeated by Perot's dislike for George Bush (Sr.), which then threw the election to Clinton.

Political analysts have determined that 2/3rds of the 19% that voted for Perot, would have voted for Bush. Therefore, Bush
would have beat Clinton in a very close race....51% to 49%


TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

PERHAPS....an informed, and more intelligent American electorate recalls that our so-called "more intelligent" 20th Century Presidents
have been LOUSY leaders, for example........


Woodrow Wilson.....Princeton, U. of Virginia Law School, doctorate at Johns Hopkins University


Herbert Hoover......Stanford University graduate with a Mining Engineer degree


Jimmy Carter.........attended several Colleges, graduated from the US Naval Academy (studied nuclear physics)



WHEREAS....history has shown that the so-called "less intelligent" Presidents have been GREAT leaders, for example........


Teddy Roosevelt....Harvard, Columbia Law School (drop out).....one less lawyer for President


Harry Truman........only a High School education


Ronald Reagan.......graduated Eureka College

[Archive]

Posted By: ali_lapoint

what does "would have" mean? if someone was going to vote for someone wouldn't they have voted for them? just because a third option exists doesn't mean you have to vote for them. so to say if someone voted for perot they "would have voted for bush" doesn't make any sense. they could have just voted for bush in the first place. it's just as easy to assume they wouldn't have voted at all.

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

Truman went to law school for a couple of years but did not graduate.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

I want a president with brains...not some guy I'd like to have a beer with. Same goes for my doctor, my accountant, my financial adviser....et cetera. Who wants a president that they can "relate" to? Especially after 7 1/2 years of Dubya.

What cynical times we live in.

[Archive]

Posted By: ali_lapoint

i agree. i can relate to someone who gets excited over a pristine matty but i don't necessarily want them as my president.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rhys

For the first time in 14 I just had a flashback of the Saturday Night live skit with Dana Carvey playing Ross Perot and Phil Hartman playing Admiral Stockdale. I need to find that thing on youtube. Priceless!

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Rhys- remember Perot asks Stockdale to get out of the car, and when he does Perot drives away. Then Stockdale runs at full speed and catches up to the car. Hartman got his loopy character down perfectly.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

That's always the first thing I think about when Ross Perot and Adm. Stockdale are mentioned, but you won't find SNL clips on youtube Rhys. For some reason (probably a perceived loss of dvd sales) SNL doesn't want anyone to see their old skits.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Paul,
You are right. The way they deliver their message is critical. Clinton was extremely smart, but he was able to communicate with everyday folks.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

I usually try to stay out of this type of conversation.

But David:
"Of course, it's totally irrelevant what either Obama's or Palin's "spiritual advisor" believes."

I am trying to understand how Reverend Wright is not relevant if he was part of Obama's campaign.
My thought is that the people who are/were part of a candidate's campaign are kind of relevant.


Sure if he was just a spiritual advisor - it might not matter so much - but a member of the campaign?



I can even get past all of the comments made by Wright.

What is very difficult to get past is.... when it all hit the fan.....
Obama's was asked if he knew that Wright made the comment of "God Damn America" being a better phrase than "God Bless America"
Obama said he didn't know that Wright made those comments, he wasn't at Church when the statements were made.

In 20 years of knowing him... does anyone believe that Obama never heard Wright make statements like this?

cmon!

edit: grammar
edit: last sentence to 'cmon!' in order for a kinder reply.

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

I wouldn't call Admiral Stockdale "loopy". He was badly miscast and clearly uncomfortable as a VP candidate but otherwise he conducted himself w/honor and dignity his entire life. If he was, in fact, loopy, perhaps it was from beating his face against walls and lacerating his own skull so that his North Vietnamese captors could not use him in propaganda films. When he was released after seven years he was in even worse physical condition than john McCain and was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.

Barry, I know you didn't mean anything disrespectful by your comment, I just think it's a shame that Stockdale is chiefly remembered for that brief period of his life.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

Wright was not part of the Obama campaign.

"IMO - Obama is either full of cr@p or he thinks we are all morons, or both"

Why don't you compare that little lie with some of McCain's statements?

How about him saying that "Palin is the best choice of running mate in American history."

Or that he's an agent for change. (Although he will change anything he's previously said or supported in order to garner the support of the Republican faithful.)

Now, who's really treating us like morons.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Joe, have you noticed who The Maverick (TM) has surrounded his campaign staff with? They're all lobbyists...McCain has even named a lobbyist to run his transition team in the unfortunate event that he is elected president. One of McCain's chief campaign strategists is Tucker Eskew, the man behind the push polling in South Carolina in 2000 in which they called people to ask them if they would still vote for McCain if they discovered he had an illegitimate black baby.

If McCain/Palin are elected I sincerely hope McCain's health sustains him for 4 possibly 8 years and that he will dump the Rovian trash he's decided to surround himself with in order to get elected.

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

Wright was a member of Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee and as such was part of the Obama campaign.