Ted's Daily Thoughts

[kentay]

An open letter to WBC and Ted do ether one of you profess to be a Christian or follow any religious teachings?   kentay

[wbcoleman]

An open letter to WBC and Ted do ether one of you profess to be a Christian or follow any religious teachings?   kentay

kentay, I "profess" to be Jewish, as you ought to know.  Before you start in with your pretentious moralizing, how about responding to some of our questions, OK?

[Ted S]

kentay, I "profess" to be Jewish, as you ought to know.  Before you start in with your pretentious moralizing, how about responding to some of our questions, OK?

I am a Christian, and like Mr. Coleman, I would appreciate your answer to some of our questions.

[Ted S]

Well, it looks like Kentay is in no rush to answer our questions so here's today's thought:

Tim Pawlenty sure blew it.

Romney is getting clobbered over Bain Capital, and offshore investments, and Swiss bank accounts, and all the necessary baggage that comes with financial success.  And I'm afraid that the democrats are going to use this envy based tactic constantly until the election and it will lead to a photo-finish when given the economy Romney should win in a landslide.

Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty shouldn't have dropped out so early.  It's true that he did poorly in the first race of the season but that is because the far right wanted somebody who breathed fire.  They got it in Michele Bachmann.  Luckily Republicans came to their senses as Bachmann and the other candidates self destructed until the only one left was the gazillionaire Romney.

Now for me, the fact that somebody has the smarts to accumulate great wealth is a positive thing but then I'm not a blind leftist or an ignorant centrist or independent.  I'm afraid that Romney's caravan of cash along with his lack of personality is going to turn voters off.

But Tim Pawlenty doesn't have Romney's problems.  Unlike Romney, Pawlenty didn't pass anything like Romneycare in Minnesota.  And Pawlenty is the son of a truck driver and lives in a modest home in Minnesota and doesn't have any Swiss bank accounts.  Pawlenty is also the only governor in the state's history to actually cut the size of government and for this he earned an A rating from the Cato Institute.

The downside for Pawlenty is that he is similar to Romney in the personality area.  Romney is wooden and artificial where Pawlenty simply lacks excitement but the impressive thing about Pawlenty is that he can win in a deep blue state.  Romney has a long history of losing elections and Pawlenty wins elections.

Pawlenty made a fatal mistake by blowing his entire wad in the opening days of the primary.  He should have held back and came in as the Romney alternative.  Had he done that I bet the right would have a really energized base right now and team Obama would be focused on picking drapes for their new presidential library.

[wbcoleman]

Well, it looks like Kentay is in no rush to answer our questions so here's today's thought:

Tim Pawlenty sure blew it.

Romney is getting clobbered over Bain Capital, and offshore investments, and Swiss bank accounts, and all the necessary baggage that comes with financial success.  And I'm afraid that the democrats are going to use this envy based tactic constantly until the election and it will lead to a photo-finish when given the economy Romney should win in a landslide.

Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty shouldn't have dropped out so early.  It's true that he did poorly in the first race of the season but that is because the far right wanted somebody who breathed fire.  They got it in Michele Bachmann.  Luckily Republicans came to their senses as Bachmann and the other candidates self destructed until the only one left was the gazillionaire Romney.

Now for me, the fact that somebody has the smarts to accumulate great wealth is a positive thing but then I'm not a blind leftist or an ignorant centrist or independent.  I'm afraid that Romney's caravan of cash along with his lack of personality is going to turn voters off.

But Tim Pawlenty doesn't have Romney's problems.  Unlike Romney, Pawlenty didn't pass anything like Romneycare in Minnesota.  And Pawlenty is the son of a truck driver and lives in a modest home in Minnesota and doesn't have any Swiss bank accounts.  Pawlenty is also the only governor in the state's history to actually cut the size of government and for this he earned an A rating from the Cato Institute.

The downside for Pawlenty is that he is similar to Romney in the personality area.  Romney is wooden and artificial where Pawlenty simply lacks excitement but the impressive thing about Pawlenty is that he can win in a deep blue state.  Romney has a long history of losing elections and Pawlenty wins elections.

Pawlenty made a fatal mistake by blowing his entire wad in the opening days of the primary.  He should have held back and came in as the Romney alternative.  Had he done that I bet the right would have a really energized base right now and team Obama would be focused on picking drapes for their new presidential library.

I agree with this analysis, except that I believe the election is going to be largely a referendum on O.  As such, the identity of the GOP challenger has less significance, what matters is the skill of the nominee.  On that score, losing one's nerve at the outset isn't a good sign.

[Ted S]

I agree with this analysis, except that I believe the election is going to be largely a referendum on O.  As such, the identity of the GOP challenger has less significance, what matters is the skill of the nominee.  On that score, losing one's nerve at the outset isn't a good sign.

Agreed. However, Obama continues to be a very attractive candidate in superficial ways.  He's black, which gets him 90% of the black vote and he black, which gets him votes from whites who don't want to see the first black president fail.  He's tall, he's lean, he has young kids and an attractive wife, he has the media on his side. He has great vocal tone.  He can speak complete nonsense in such a way that inspires and uplifts those folks who aren't really paying attention.

Elections often end up being beauty contests and I'm afraid that his looks and style can overcome a lot of his substantial negatives.

Or put another way; I don't trust the collective wisdom of the American voters.

[wbcoleman]

I agree with this analysis, except that I believe the election is going to be largely a referendum on O.  As such, the identity of the GOP challenger has less significance, what matters is the skill of the nominee.  On that score, losing one's nerve at the outset isn't a good sign.

Agreed. However, Obama continues to be a very attractive candidate in superficial ways.  He's black, which gets him 90% of the black vote and he black, which gets him votes from whites who don't want to see the first black president fail.  He's tall, he's lean, he has young kids and an attractive wife, he has the media on his side. He has great vocal tone.  He can speak complete nonsense in such a way that inspires and uplifts those folks who aren't really paying attention.

Elections often end up being beauty contests and I'm afraid that his looks and style can overcome a lot of his substantial negatives.

Or put another way; I don't trust the collective wisdom of the American voters.

He certainly is black; however, his oratorical eloquence seems to me to have vanished entirely.

Where I really disagree with you, Ted, is that I DO trust the collective wisdom of American voters.  Definitely.  I found the results of the 2006 and 2008 elections to be totally explicable, the Republicans richly deserved to lose both, and the voters quickly saw through the Obaman bullshit, voting appropriately in 2010.  George Bush, as crappy as he turned out to be, was preferable to both Algore and The Pompous Windbag.  Bush Sr. certainly deserved to be punished for "Read My Lips," and in retrospect Clinton was probably the correct choice for reelection as opposed to Bobdole.  Even Jimmy Carter's election in 1976 was understandable, given the unusual circumstances.

When was the last time you think the voters went radically astray??

[Ted S]

When was the last time you think the voters went radically astray??

In recent years my own home state of Minnesota has elected Jesse Ventura, Michele Bachmann, and Al Franken.  That can't possibly be the result of consistent and clear thinking.

[wbcoleman]

When was the last time you think the voters went radically astray??

In recent years my own home state of Minnesota has elected Jesse Ventura, Michele Bachmann, and Al Franken.  That can't possibly be the result of consistent and clear thinking.

I'm not so sure they actually "elected" Al Franken.

I live in Illinois, and I'll grant you that the political results here on the state and local level are inexplicable.

[Ted S]

Today's thought:

For the most part, this forum (Hypercrites) reminds me of the kind of conversation that many elderly couples have.

The wife says something, the husband isn't listening.  The husband says something back, the wife answers with a criticism that is completely unrelated to the husband's comment.  The back-and-forth goes on-and-on.  Lots of words are spoken, nothing is heard, nothing is understood, there is no clarity, nothing is accomplished.

Yup, that's my thought for this Friday.

[wbcoleman]

Today's thought:

For the most part, this forum (Hypercrites) reminds me of the kind of conversation that many elderly couples have.

The wife says something, the husband isn't listening.  The husband says something back, the wife answers with a criticism that is completely unrelated to the husband's comment.  The back-and-forth goes on-and-on.  Lots of words are spoken, nothing is heard, nothing is understood, there is no clarity, nothing is accomplished.

Yup, that's my thought for this Friday.

Hello, kentay?

[clistensprechen]

Today's thought:

For the most part, this forum (Hypercrites) reminds me of the kind of conversation that many elderly couples have.

The wife says something, the husband isn't listening.  The husband says something back, the wife answers with a criticism that is completely unrelated to the husband's comment.  The back-and-forth goes on-and-on.  Lots of words are spoken, nothing is heard, nothing is understood, there is no clarity, nothing is accomplished.

Yup, that's my thought for this Friday.

Well, when invalid "points" are made, don't be surprised that nobody grants you your point. Just sayin'.

[wbcoleman]

Today's thought:

For the most part, this forum (Hypercrites) reminds me of the kind of conversation that many elderly couples have.

The wife says something, the husband isn't listening.  The husband says something back, the wife answers with a criticism that is completely unrelated to the husband's comment.  The back-and-forth goes on-and-on.  Lots of words are spoken, nothing is heard, nothing is understood, there is no clarity, nothing is accomplished.

Yup, that's my thought for this Friday.

Well, when invalid "points" are made, don't be surprised that nobody grants you your point. Just sayin'.

Although ted can obviously speak for himself, I suspect he may be thinking of participants who post new threads willy-nilly while ignoring points made to them in existing threads.

[Ted S]

Well, when invalid "points" are made, don't be surprised that nobody grants you your point. Just sayin'.

That's make sense Clara, but that's not what's happening.  Here's a typical exchange:

Me: "The weather is really nice today but a bit too windy for me."

Them: "The rich steal the wind from the poor!"

Me: "Wait a minute, exactly how does that happen?"

Them: "The homophobic/racist 1% 'ers steal everything from the 99%"

Me: "How exactly, give me some examples?"

Them: "George W. Bush lied his way into war!"

Me: "We're talking about the wind, not the Iraq war.  How do the wealthy steal the wind?"

Them: "Halliburton and big oil and the Koch brothers are racists!"

Me. "Can we stay on topic?"

Them: "All Republicans are beholden to Grover Norquist!"

Me: "Wind?"

Them: "Al Gore is the real winner and if he had been elected icebergs wouldn't have been stolen by Dick Cheney and Scott Walker."

Me: Sigh

[clistensprechen]

Today's thought:

For the most part, this forum (Hypercrites) reminds me of the kind of conversation that many elderly couples have.

The wife says something, the husband isn't listening.  The husband says something back, the wife answers with a criticism that is completely unrelated to the husband's comment.  The back-and-forth goes on-and-on.  Lots of words are spoken, nothing is heard, nothing is understood, there is no clarity, nothing is accomplished.

Yup, that's my thought for this Friday.

Well, when invalid "points" are made, don't be surprised that nobody grants you your point. Just sayin'.

Although ted can obviously speak for himself, I suspect he may be thinking of participants who post new threads willy-nilly while ignoring points made to them in existing threads.

That made me chuckle since that's basically what you'd been doing at Linc's place. Good ole days.