MM writes
Quote:Of course, now I will never have an excuse to forget our anniversary
Quite true. I had the good sense to push for Valentine's Day as our wedding day for that very reason.
Test time. Hubby and I have been studying this cartoon this morning and have concluded we're not bright enough to understand it or else we missed something in the news recently.
So....would anybody care to do the honors of interpretation here?
Its the campaign button. He just wants to wear it for one more day.
mysteryman wrote:Thank you all.
We hadnt planned to get married till Aug 9, but we just decided yesterday to go ahead and do it now.
Of course, now I will never have an excuse to forget our anniversary.
And Stacy's birthday is on July 6.
Here is a pic of Stacy and I, taken at the FD several weeks ago.
http://www.wmvfr.com/gallery/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=9664
Congratulations MM! Your Stacy looks like fun -- I see a glint of humor there.
mysteryman wrote:Thank you all.
We hadnt planned to get married till Aug 9, but we just decided yesterday to go ahead and do it now.
Of course, now I will never have an excuse to forget our anniversary.
And Stacy's birthday is on July 6.
Here is a pic of Stacy and I, taken at the FD several weeks ago.
http://www.wmvfr.com/gallery/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=9664
She looks like a nice woman! You be good, now!
mysteryman wrote:teenyboone wrote:cicerone imposter wrote:From Fox's link (seems her whole thesis is wrong):
The trajectory of the coverage, however, began to turn against Obama, and did so well before questions surfaced about his pastor Jeremiah Wright. Shortly after Clinton criticized the media for being soft on Obama during a debate, the narrative about him began to turn more skeptical?-and indeed became more negative than the coverage of Clinton herself. What's more, an additional analysis of more general campaign topics suggests the Obama narrative became even more negative later in March, April and May.
On the Republican side, John McCain, the candidate who quickly clinched his party's nomination, has had a harder time controlling his message in the press. Fully 57% of the narratives studied about him were critical in nature, though a look back through 2007 reveals the storyline about the Republican nominee has steadily improved with time.
I agree 100%! Happy Fourth, everyone!
I have to agree with teeny on this one, much as it might shock some of you.
Happy fourth everyone.
BTW, Stacy and I got married today.
Congrats, wow! She's beautiful, and I wish you every possible happiness (other then maybe political happiness, eh heh)!
Cycloptichorn
FreeDuck wrote:Its the campaign button. He just wants to wear it for one more day.
No, I think I figured it out. I don't think he wants to give it up.
(Or maybe that's what you meant.)
Congratulations, MM!
May you two enjoy many happy years together.
Congratulations and much happiness, mysteryman and Stacy!
How would Jesse Helms treated the candidacy of Obama if he were alive?
From 1995:
News: The senator from North Carolina is racist, divisive, pro-government (when it favors the wealthy), and anti-democratic. So why did American voters swing towards Helms and the extreme right last November?
By Eric Bates
May/June 1995 Issue
Jesse Helms sits at the head of the curved rostrum, a faint smile on his lips, listening attentively to testimony about the beleaguered Mexican economy. It is his second hearing as chair of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and he has been a model of procedure and decorum. He has kept his remarks brief, demurred to the newest members, doled out equal time to Democrats and Republicans, and treated Clinton administration officials with courtesy and perhaps even a touch of deference.
Dr. Sidney Weintraub of the Center for Strategic and International Studies has just finished testifying in support of an administration plan to provide Mexico with $40 billion in loan guarantees. Helms, who opposes the aid package, leans forward to question Weintraub.
"Would you feel differently," he asks, "if you were informed that the president of Mexico has declared in a press conference yesterday and again this morning that he will accept no conditions on this loan?"
The packed hearing room grows still. Helms is renowned for maintaining his own network of sources in Latin America, and for dropping bombshells in committee hearings.
Weintraub is guarded. "No conditions of any kind?"
Helms nods. "Yes, sir."
"If he would accept no conditions," Weintraub concedes, "then I would not support the loan."
Helms looks satisfied. "Well, I think that is important." Then he adds, almost as an aside, "I am not saying he has."
The room explodes in laughter.
"Now wait a minute," Helms says. "The report last night was flat-out, and I have been trying to trace it, and I am told the Associated Press moved it and then pulled it back. I'm not sure about that. I have only a report from the British Broadcasting Corporation, which has various statements made by President Zedillo, and we are attempting to ascertain what the facts are." Something sinister is going on south of the border, Helms seems to suggest, and he is going to get to the bottom of it.
Moments later, his aides give reporters the BBC story, which quotes Zedillo as saying he will accept no loan conditions that will "undermine Mexican sovereignty." It is the kind of thing a politician says to allay nationalist fears--not, as Helms implied, an outright refusal to negotiate repayment terms.
It is a classic Helms maneuver. The Mexican loan package is complex, but the senator has sidetracked the entire debate by turning a nonfact into a central issue. "No conditions" becomes a refrain throughout the hearing, creating a false impression of Mexican deadbeats trying to get something for nothing from American taxpayers. Weintraub spends the rest of the morning on the defensive, refuting something that no one had any reason to believe was true in the first place.
Republicans are fighting a tough battle on immigration. Their get tough policy is irking some employers, and their raids are hurting their business. Where does McCain stand on immigration; a current hot topic.
By JULIA PRESTON
Published: July 6, 2008
Under pressure from the toughest crackdown on illegal immigration in two decades, employers across the country are fighting back in state legislatures, the federal courts and city halls.
Mike Gilsdorf hired 40 immigrants through the federal guest worker program to do seasonal work at his Colorado nursery.
Business groups have resisted measures that would revoke the licenses of employers of illegal immigrants. They are proposing alternatives that would revise federal rules for verifying the identity documents of new hires and would expand programs to bring legal immigrant laborers.
Though the pushback is coming from both Democrats and Republicans, in many places it is reopening the rift over immigration that troubled the Republican Party last year. Businesses, generally Republican stalwarts, are standing up to others within the party who accuse them of undercutting border enforcement and jeopardizing American jobs by hiring illegal immigrants as cheap labor.
Employers in Arizona were stung by a law passed last year by the Republican-controlled Legislature that revokes the licenses of businesses caught twice with illegal immigrants. They won approval in this year's session of a narrowing of that law making clear that it did not apply to workers hired before this year.
Last week, an Arizona employers' group submitted more than 284,000 signatures ?- far more than needed ?- for a November ballot initiative that would make the 2007 law even friendlier to employers.
Also in recent months, immigration bills were defeated in Indiana and Kentucky ?- states where control of the legislatures is split between Democrats and Republicans ?- due in part to warnings from business groups that the measures could hurt the economy.
mysteryman wrote:Thank you all.
We hadnt planned to get married till Aug 9, but we just decided yesterday to go ahead and do it now.
Of course, now I will never have an excuse to forget our anniversary.
And Stacy's birthday is on July 6.
Here is a pic of Stacy and I, taken at the FD several weeks ago.
http://www.wmvfr.com/gallery/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=9664
Very nice picture! Congrats! Now what are you doing spending time here???
engineer wrote:mysteryman wrote:Thank you all.
We hadnt planned to get married till Aug 9, but we just decided yesterday to go ahead and do it now.
Of course, now I will never have an excuse to forget our anniversary.
And Stacy's birthday is on July 6.
Here is a pic of Stacy and I, taken at the FD several weeks ago.
http://www.wmvfr.com/gallery/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=9664
Very nice picture! Congrats! Now what are you doing spending time here???
I was thinking the same thing...
I am not sure, cyclops. I read your kos article, which provided little information to debunk the claim, and of course we know that Dailoy KOS is unbiased don't we? How come he apparently paid no points or fees? I have just gone through this process, my credit is as high as it can be, and I wasn't told the same thing about a loan, fact is the up front fees seem to be standard procedure if you get a home loan, not a line of credit loan. But I am a nobody out here, but we know that Obama is a prominent Chicago politician, but we all know that has no impact on such loans in Chicago, don't we?
http://patriotroom.com/?p=493
And how about Chris Dodd getting special treatment, but apparently nobody cares?
By the way, congratulations to MM, and I wish you happiness until death do you part.
okie wrote:
I am not sure, cyclops. I read your kos article, which provided little information to debunk the claim, and of course we know that Dailoy KOS is unbiased don't we? How come he apparently paid no points or fees? I have just gone through this process, my credit is as high as it can be, and I wasn't told the same thing about a loan, fact is the up front fees seem to be standard procedure if you get a home loan, not a line of credit loan. But I am a nobody out here, but we know that Obama is a prominent Chicago politician, but we all know that has no impact on such loans in Chicago, don't we?
http://patriotroom.com/?p=493
And how about Chris Dodd getting special treatment, but apparently nobody cares?
By the way, congratulations to MM, and I wish you happiness until death do you part.
Yeah Okie... I'm sure the rest of your application was, and negotiation skills are, nearly identical to Obama's and/or Dodd's.
okie wrote:
I am not sure, cyclops. I read your kos article, which provided little information to debunk the claim, and of course we know that Dailoy KOS is unbiased don't we? How come he apparently paid no points or fees? I have just gone through this process, my credit is as high as it can be, and I wasn't told the same thing about a loan, fact is the up front fees seem to be standard procedure if you get a home loan, not a line of credit loan. But I am a nobody out here, but we know that Obama is a prominent Chicago politician, but we all know that has no impact on such loans in Chicago, don't we?
http://patriotroom.com/?p=493
And how about Chris Dodd getting special treatment, but apparently nobody cares?
By the way, congratulations to MM, and I wish you happiness until death do you part.
I prefer Occom Bill's response but what's the big deal? What McSame didn't get a BIG deal when he MARRIED all that money? Is THAT what she wanted? A BEER-drinkin', DRUNKEN SAILOR? No disrespect to all of the OTHER men who sail, my HUSBAND being ONE of them! :wink:
