Ray, I'm so beyond giving a shit about these guys protesting anything. I want to know who's getting payoffs, how much and who they're getting them from. These people do not represent us.

Jay Severin, a libertarian on a Boston talk station, made a great point today. I only agree with him about 20% of the time but he was right on point today. He had a caller on who said we no longer have taxation with representation. Jay went on about how, unfortunately, because every person in the country is represented, we do. But he also went on about how there has always been a great philosophical argument about what our representatives are supposed to do once elected. On the one hand, are they to represent us completely once they're elected? As in, listen to their constituency and work to achieve what their districts want them to do, even after they gain office?

Or, are they to campaign and let us know their moral beliefs, we vote them in, and after that they completely disregard what their constituency wants them to do and then vote and pass legislation based on their moral and financial beliefs?

Jay put it far more succinctly, but of course our politicians do the latter.

The whole f-ing bunch of them are traitorous neo-robber barons, who if I had my way, would be tarred and feathered the old fashion way. Far better than being lined up and shot.

I think it is our tun around to be a 3rd world nation. I knew we were sunk and the Mexican nation would see prosperity the minute we moved Levi jeans to Mexico.

That would mean an investigation of Cheney and Bush as well, as I see more conflict of interest there than in any ten Congressmen put together.


And football the sport of he-men. Let's sexuailize athletic competions a little more. Else we risk men slaving over a tray of hot snacks while the ladies watch the World Series of Field Hockey.

Getting back to the point under discussion, it isn't true, as I have stated here before, that ALL Americans don't care what the world thinks. This is only the extreme neocon and militarist view, and not the view of the American people in general.

At the moment, the rest of the world has good reason to disapprove of America's actions for the past several years. I believe that will change with an Obama presidency. While we can't worry too much about whether we are liked as a nation or not, the good opinion of others is often helpful, and dismissing their concerns out of hand, i.e. "who gives a shit what the world thinks?" is the kind of dunce bullying arrogance Bush is so capable of exhibiting.

Other nations don't hate America for it's freedoms, but for its activities. From the position of World Leader and best hope for Democracy after WWII, we've become a nation lead by political hacks and scoundrels who put their own best interests and profit before the interests of the American people.

Nah, the US is just taking longer than usual to try all the wrong policies before trying the right ones...the US is poor at pursuing its people's true/real interests.

Get hit in the face or knackers by a cricket ball at 90-100mph, Stone, lose teeth, like in Ice Hockey or Hockey, and you'd know what a pansy sport was!

If you were right, and "the American people in general" were concerned with the world's opinion, then you would have seen a significant bump in the polls from Obama's European Victory Tour. IF you were right, but apparently...


This sounds all warm and fuzzy but I'm just saying, Democrats who make a big deal out of sucking up to the rest of the world end up shooting themselves in the foot at the polls. Naturally, I hope y'all keep firing away.

Sarah Palin explained her "I can see Russia" statement by saying Alaska and Russia are trading partners. Didn't 'the people' find this sense of cooperation with a foreign country cute enough to cause a rise in the polls?

I'm not suggesting that independent voters will be swayed by the fact that he's popular worldwide, although that may be one of the indices, but frankly there are much more important reasons for electing Obama. Obama does lead in many polls, and I guess we won't know until election day. Although then you can suggest that his overseas trips were or were not a factor, depending on what point you wanted to make.



My quote has nothing to do with anyone sucking up to anyone, and I don't think your response to it is adequate.

What you think is adequate, and $1.00 will get you a cup of coffee. (Well, not at Starbucks, but...)

But repetition of inadequate responses is neither reason for one, nor excuse for the other. Please continue with some content.