For the record, LL, … McCain will be 72 if and when he takes office.

It’s been used Star …. you hadn’t heard?

Well, you sure popped up in a hurry at the mention of the “m” word, tdfm. Truth hurts. I don’t know which is worse, your hate speech or your obtuseness. Why do you waste your time in a site you despise so much?

Sorry Star. Here’s the biggest story to come out so far about her gubernatorial accomplishments — http://www.ickypeople.com/2008/08/palin-brother-in-law-scandal-grows.htm… (in case you haven’t seen it.)

We shouldn’t be tearing Palin apart; we should be tearing McCain apart for selecting her. Here’s the latest result when you google “palin brother-in-law” : http://www.ickypeople.com/2008/08/palin-brother-in-law-scandal-grows.htm…

Frannie, one of Lincoln’s strongest points was his ability as a “talker.” It’s gotten Biden in trouble, but his current attitude about it ensures that even an occasional gaffe can’t be used against him effectively. My feeling is that he’d be great in the town hall format. Perhaps that’s the way the debate with Palin should be handled — possibly that will reduce the chance that he’ll be seen as condescending to her as Bush One did to Ferraro in the more formal debate setting. On the other hand, it could benefit her by reducing the pressure, but I’m expecting she’ll be well rehearsed and is disciplined enough to stick carefully to the talking points in any case.

Carol, Palin’s nomination will live in history in the same sense as George Bush’s nomination of Harriet Myers for U.S. Supreme Court — it’s historically cynical and ill-advised. Had the Obama campaign manipulated the announcement of Biden in the same way McCain did to steal the Democrat’s thunder, the criticism from the right wing media would have been huge. Here’s a list of the McCain talking points on Palin in case you haven’t seen them: http://www.wowowow.com/user/15575

Well said, Joan. You might enjoy the talking points of a new wowowow member who has offered a very comprehensive list of every conceivable Palin talking point on the John McCain Birthday page: http://www.wowowow.com/user/15575 I opined there that these will all be debunked and rebutted in due course, and suggested that this choice is far from an egotistical Hail Mary pass on McCain’s part, but clearly a diabolical Rovian tactic of the worst kind. My assumption is that many who would refuse to vote for Obama based on conscious or subconscious prejudice (racial or otherwise) will happily rationalize voting against their own economic interests by citing the McCain ticket’s historic nature and claiming to be supporters of the rights of women. I refuse to believe a substantial number of Clinton supporters will go for the McCain ticket. I am curious about the background of the PUMAs and Democrats for McCain, etc. — many of them may be the “independents” who were told by Limbaugh to vote for Hillary.

Aloha Aggie - Mahalo for the talking points. They will all be fully debunked and rebutted in due course. Now, for a dose of reality, read a very clear, concise summary of your candidate’s foreign policy agenda. (See link below.) I’m not sure about the Howdy Doody in a knife fight comparison above; I think it would be very unwise for anyone to underestimate the abilities of this phenomenal female Svengali from the North country. Likewise, it’s unwise to view this move by the McCain machine as anything other than the most diabolical of Rovian tactics. No doubt many who will refuse to vote in their own economic interest based on conscious or subconscious prejudice (racial or otherwise) will happily rationalize voting for the McCain ticket because of its historic nature. After all, isn’t that how we got Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court? Here’s the link: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/08/27-9 PS - Aggie - were you one of those Hillary supporters who supported because Limbaugh told you to? Did you contribute? Volunteer?

My insight came from one of the specials that CNN did recently on OBAMA — they did back to back McCain and Obama specials. One of them was called “Obama Revealed” and it was quite good, I thought. I worked in the Hawaii State Legislature for years, and I assume it worked like most others. Unless one is in the good graces of the leadership the bills get introduced but go nowhere (in Obama’s case it was the Senate Majority Leader or Speaker or President or whatever he’s called.) The story is that Barak went to this “kingmaker” as a newly elected Senator and suggested that he could be elected Senator, and the Senate leader was smart enough to recognize the young man’s potential.

Everyone in the free world knows his Maverick ads are b******* — he’s not a Maverick, he’s a “sidekick”. ( I forgot who used that line at the Convention.)

Her best supporting Oscar role in 1971 (“The last Picture Show”) opened my eyes and touched me as few performances on the screen ever have. It may have changed my life.

Here’s a link to one of the funniest (and bluest) celebrity roast cameo appearances I’ve ever seen. I think parts of it were too raunchy even for Comedy Central — on second thought, more likely time limitations caused the edits. Enjoy! http://www.cinematical.com/2008/08/07/cloris-leachman-wants-to-strap-on-…

I don’t get what I’m supposed to do when I get to that Utube webpage Iris. I was hoping it would have a clip of the Bob Saget roast appearance by Cloris.

It’s 10 to 1 so far, Bonnie O — well, you did your part to cheer up John’s day. Bless your heart.