Just in case you missed it.
I typed in most of the comments from the forum on tuesday night. Here are the links.
http://www.arkcity.net/stories/103008/com_0005.shtml
http://www.arkcity.net/stories/102908/com_0001.shtml
I didn't go to the one yesterday. From what I heard it was much of the same.
Trimmer did get rather defensive about some of the accusations floating his way. Cant blame him, but I guess his opponent is just desperate. Im not sure Trimmer could lose this one if he tried.
There have been a lot of negative mailers going out. Many of them are sent by private organizations that don't have to disclose who is paying for them. Not sure it matters that much, but it does allow for people to be really negative.
Its just dirty politics.
If I was undecided, that dirty politics would affect my vote .... against the one throwing mud.
Posts
32 comments:
he was defensive and not in a good way
we need someone who can communicate well in bad times as well as good , in good times its easy to be graceful , we need that in crunch time , i am not sure Trimmer is the man for that , just MY opinion nothing more
I changed my registration from Republican to Unafilliated last year, and you should see all the crap in my mailbox every day. And the majority of it is from the Democrats slinging mud at Abrams and Kelley. It really is disgusting.
he was defensive and not in a good way
we need someone who can communicate well in bad times as well as good , in good times its easy to be graceful , we need that in crunch time , i am not sure Trimmer is the man for that , just MY opinion nothing more
also , when put in a elected position or any position of authority , you lose the right to lose your cool
also , when put in a elected position or any position of authority , you lose the right to lose your cool
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
-Barack Obama
Can you imagine the uproar from Dems if Bush had tried this?
And what I find really telling is how the mainstream media has all but ignored it.
Anonymous said...
"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
-Barack Obama
Can you imagine the uproar from Dems if Bush had tried this?
And what I find really telling is how the mainstream media has all but ignored it.
Civilian Security Force brings to mind Hitler and his brown shirts. Basically an independent military force that answers only to the man in charge.....
@ 10:27
This statement was made by Obama in explaining his support of National Service. For example students could get a tuition credit for enlisting in the armed services or serving in under-served components of our society(veterans, schools, hospitals). It is broadening the scope for, I serve my country.
Does it make sense to accuse Obama of not upholding the 2nd amendment and then think he will fund a civilian security force? You can't have it both ways.
"Does it make sense to accuse Obama of not upholding the 2nd amendment and then think he will fund a civilian security force? You can't have it both ways."
Well of course he wants his private army to be armed with military weapons... how else can they be expected to collect all our guns?
Obama wants to disarm law abiding Americans, plain and simple. What he doesn't seem to realize is that CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY LAWS!!! Drugs are against the law, but by some miracle, CRIMINALS STILL GET DRUGS!! Guns will be no different, except us law abiding citizens will be defenseless against them.
Byte daily will apologize for anything Obama says or does, no matter what.
Such is the mark of a great sheep.
Just like you will bash Obama for anything....
I just saw video of Obama saying "I will slow our development of future combat systems."
What the hell does that mean, that our military will no longer stay competetive with other countries? Good lord that is scary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCkvvFJtLJE&feature=related
@ 12:15
Do you realize how ridiculous this sounds:
Well of course he wants his private army to be armed with military weapons... how else can they be expected to collect all our guns?
Couldn't you just enlist in his private army and then stage a revolt? Is he going to change the Peace Corp into the Piece Corp?
Will you get a tank if you volunteer to feed the homeless?
That video was lame, Are we disscussing Obama? Because the only thing bad I saw was coming from his pastor NOT him- He's denounced him- Lets move on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZFEwDIVGeA
bytedaily said...
@ 12:15
Do you realize how ridiculous this sounds:
Well of course he wants his private army to be armed with military weapons... how else can they be expected to collect all our guns?
Couldn't you just enlist in his private army and then stage a revolt? Is he going to change the Peace Corp into the Piece Corp?
Will you get a tank if you volunteer to feed the homeless?
Those who do not remember their history are doomed to repeat it.
Hitler took power and began the disarming of German citizens. At the same time Hitler's brown shirts remained armed and began "dealing" with all those who spoke out against Hitler's regime.
Chicago and NY have very strict gun laws yet the police and other government agencys have guns. So it makes perfect sense for a leader(sic) to be against the 2nd admen, yet still have an armed goon squad to enforce his policies.
bytedaily said...
@ 10:27
This statement was made by Obama in explaining his support of National Service. For example students could get a tuition credit for enlisting in the armed services
tuition credit for serving in the armed forces???? Brilliant idea Obama Bin Liden had...
It is called the GI bill and has been around longer than Obama Bin Biden
that was not my post are we starting this childish behavior yet again
traveler editor said...
that was not my post are we starting this childish behavior yet again
October 31, 2008 1:47 PM
That was not my post if you want to participate in the forum you are welcome to
under your real name :(
"Byte daily will apologize for anything Obama says or does, no matter what."
Bytedaily. definition: a small wing of the Democrat party.
It seems we drop to name calling and childish behavior when our arguments are weak and we cannot defend them. I think this is true of the "fliers" arriving in my mail, as well as the posters on this blog.
@ JJ
From the comments, it looks like you've responded to the fake traveler editor but each post has the same profile which doesn't match your normal profile.
Did I miss something?
Exactly who's opinion is that wrote on the editoral page of the Traveler about the candidates? Does that mean the Traveler has one mind combined (with the use of a single brain apparently)??? I don't like being told who to vote for and your endorsement of some of these candidates is very offensive- like that you think you have the intelligence or the right to tell us poor uneducated readers who we should vote for. You are supposed to be the unbiased media that provides equal and fair information, but instead you are nothing more than a sellout. Easily bought and biased and you wonder why people would rather buy a larger paper like the Eagle than this weak piece of trash. Yea- they too publish their opinions- but it says that it is opinion and actually has a name tagged to it not printed cowardly like gospel truth with no name taking credit. You'd be better to work for the Globe or Enquirer with the crap you are manufacturing.
Hey, isn't that why its called an opinion page? Maybe you might check the dictionary o n that one.
@10:35 AM
I think most newspapers do it.
I never cared for the practice myself. Always thought it was kind of using the "bully pulpit".
Oh well, guess we just have to think for ourselves. :-)
Ive been gone all weekend.
on newspaper endorsements.
a lot of papers do it.
at most papers there is an editorial board that makes the decision of who to endorse.
Here it is the owner of the paper that makes endorsements.
its not the opinion of the whole paper.
It would be irresponsible to think endorsements are the opinions of everyone at the newspaper... I swear this town is so backwoods... A LOT of papers endorse candidates. I would like to say that I agreed with every single candidate that the Traveler endorsed.. They nailed it. WTG!
yawn. ;-0
It matters not to me who the paper endorses. Not sure even why the paper feels the need to do this. I would not be moved whether they endorsed my person or not. Oh well. I know who I'm going to vote for.
I prefer to think for myself, thank you. :-)
It matters not to me who the paper endorses. Not sure even why the paper feels the need to do this.
>>>
Part of it is tradition. 100 years ago papers had more influence with people. With the internet and all that, people have so much more access to information, they tend to not look to "authorities" to tell them what to do.
Awhile back we had a roundup of who papers across the nation were endorsing for president.
its very common really.
a helpful tidbit of info. thanks
It must make Seaton feel so important and influential to give his thoughts. Given his record of endorsing the losing candidate, I am surprised the candidates don't ask him to shut it down.
Post a Comment