comment #1

JohnCope says ...

I share your frustration. This feels very much as though it will never end.

comment #2

D.Z. says ...

Look at the bright side. Hillary's negative reputation managed to cost her a significant landslide. She's just barely coasting at this point. And if Obama can win over so many people who'd normally vote for Hillary, imagine what he can accomplish against McCain.

comment #3

christian says ...

Hillary beating Obama by 10 points even with all the negatives doesn't mean her campaign is imploding.

comment #4

CharlieDontSurf says ...

Hillary has been staying in to accomplish one of two outcomes

1. HRC is able to convince the supers to choose her over Obama despite him having the lead...she does this by attacking him and severely blooding him and she hopes he has a major scandal/disaster.

2. She does the above but doesn't get the nomination but she does damage the Obama campaign enough that he loses to McCain in Nov. she then is the nominee in 2012 and she can claim that she was right and the party went wrong by abandoning her and Bill.

#2 is the likely outcome.

comment #5

JohnCope says ...

Yeah, Charlie, that's exactly how I see it too.

comment #6

Cinéphile says ...

I looked forward to coming to this site tonight, because I wanted to read Jeff's reaction to the results of the Pennsylvania primary. I've read his obsessive Obama rants for months, but tonight I decided to make my first post.

How are Hillary supporters sexist and racist? Obama backers could easily be accused of being sexist and racist. An estimated 92% of black Pennsylvania voters supported Obama on Tuesday. Using Jeff's logic in a fair way, those black voters would have to be classified as racist and sexist.

Maybe Jeff feels guilty that if he doesn't vote for the black candidate, then that would make him a racist. It doesn't matter that Obama is not qualified. He's black, so that automatically makes him better than any white contender, especially a woman. Everyone knows that sexism against women is okay, but racism can't be tolerated. Grow up.

As for Jeff's claims of female Hillary supporters being sexist...well, that's just silly. It's also extremely misogynistic. Jeff obviously hates women. He repeatedly questions their intelligence for daring to vote for another woman. That doesn't make sense.

The reason why Obama lost the Pennsylvania primary is because he's out of touch with average Americans. Obama attracts young college students with little life experience, as well as "intellectual" latte sippers.

Obama lost because he would be unelectable in a general election. He's also not as smart as Hillary. He knows that she's sharper in debates, and that's why he runs away from them.

Why can't sexist, Hollywood men, who are out of touch with the "will of the people", understand that Obama is not right for America? It has nothing to do with him being black or male. He just doesn't have what it takes to be president. Get over it and devote more time to writing about films.

comment #7

D.Z. says ...

christian: She was set to win by 70% of the vote only a month ago. The only thing Hillary's succeeded in doing is dragging the contest out, and netting Obama more delegates.

Charlie: Obama won't lose against McCain, because McCain can't "relate" to blue-collar workers like Hillary. And if Hillary tries again in 2012, she'll probably be in the same position as Edwards was this year.

comment #8

raven says ...

I lived in Upstate NY for twenty years and know how few jobs there are due to the build up of Fort Drum. Hilary Clinton has been unable to make things better for the lower and middle class people in her own state. How is she ever going to be able to improve our Countries economy? She has taken states that already have higher income people and don't want the "change" that Obama intends to bring to the table. It would be nice to have all of this come to an end...otherwise Hilary Clinton is going to continue to hurt the Democratic party more with her negative remarks and total dishonesty.

comment #9

D.Z. says ...

I hate when people bring up the "reverse racism" card.

Cinephile: "An estimated 92% of black Pennsylvania voters supported Obama on Tuesday. Using Jeff's logic in a fair way, those black voters would have to be classified as racist and sexist."

Um, no, because they would normally vote for Hillary, if Obama wasn't competing.

"Maybe Jeff feels guilty that if he doesn't vote for the black candidate, then that would make him a racist."

Or maybe he feels voting for Hillary would discriminate against candidates without family connections.

"It doesn't matter that Obama is not qualified. He's black, so that automatically makes him better than any white contender, especially a woman."

I'm not sure why being Harvard-educated makes him unqualified. Aren't you the one with the double standard?

"Everyone knows that sexism against women is okay, but racism can't be tolerated. "

No, we just tolerate making fun of women who like to lie and manipulate people.

"He repeatedly questions their intelligence for daring to vote for another woman."

Voting for another woman who'd stay with her cheating husband to win an election *is* kind of questionable...

"The reason why Obama lost the Pennsylvania primary is because he's out of touch with average Americans. Obama attracts young college students with little life experience, as well as "intellectual" latte sippers."

Oh, I'm sorry we can't all be hard-working enough to complain on message boards like you.

"Obama lost because he would be unelectable in a general election."

And yet he's still got more delegates than her.

"He's also not as smart as Hillary."

Yes, Hillary was a real genius to vote for this war.

"He knows that she's sharper in debates, and that's why he runs away from them."

He's been at every debate as her.

"Why can't sexist, Hollywood men, who are out of touch with the "will of the people","

Of course, the "people" like Hillary less each time she opens her mouth..

"understand that Obama is not right for America? It has nothing to do with him being black or male."

Yes, he's too intellectual, and that's dangerous.

comment #10

Mark G. says ...

I just went through the primary results,
if the Democrats were using winner-takes-all contests like the Republicans, Hillary would be at 1,560 delegates (and that's not even counting Florida & Michigan) and Barack would be at 1,257 delegates.
I'm just saying since the general election is a winner-takes-all-contest...
Personally I'm okay with both candidates...

comment #11

Josh Massey says ...

All this hoopla just to see who's going to lose in November...

comment #12

scooterzz says ...

i fear massey is right....this is so wrong/sad....

comment #13

Mr. Muckle says ...

The general election is NOT really a winner takes all contest, or Al Gore would be president now. He won the popular vote convincingly but state by state tabulates differently because of the electoral college (not to mention Bush cheating re: Florida). There's no point saying things like, "If the system was different, a different person would win," as the Clintonites now shamelessly maintain. The candidates campaign according to the system. If it was different, they would campaign differently and there's no guarantee Hillary the LOSER would win.

Hillary has become so incredibly obnoxious, I (like many others have said) cannot stand to listen to her anymore, although really I never could. I don't think that's in the least gender-biased. It's a matter of actually listening and applying your critical intelligence. Everyone should try it. She spouts nothing but self-serving political moron-speech. It means absolutely nothing. I don't know from what well of dark dumbness this kind of speech comes from, but Bill practices it, Bush does it, and so many of them do nothing else.

Obama is the only humanly comprehensible politician I've heard in a very long time. Don't underestimate the qualifications it takes to talk to people like adults, especially when they don't necessarily want to drink the water.

Besides that, Hill has one of those triangular idiot smiles like all the characters in South Park when they're expressing some kind of demented, over the top anticipation of great pleasure. May it forever be denied to her.

comment #14

EDouglas says ...

Everyone gives Hilary shit about going negative against Obama, because it might hurt his chances against McCain if he becomes the Democratic delegate.. but yeah, what about all the "Journalists" and political pundits who've been slamming Hilary left, right and center? (and no, that's not what she said )... I think McCain is going to have the easiest time winning the Presidency of any Republican in the last two decades and that's saying something, maybe because after wasting so much time and money, neither Hilary nor Obama will have any resources left to wage a solid campaign against McCain.

I'm just going to assume McCain is already President and ignore the rest of the posts here about Hilary vs. Obama.

comment #15

EDouglas says ...

Everyone gives Hilary shit about going negative against Obama, because it might hurt his chances against McCain if he becomes the Democratic delegate.. but yeah, what about all the "Journalists" and political pundits who've been slamming Hilary left, right and center? (and no, that's not what she said )... I think McCain is going to have the easiest time winning the Presidency of any Republican in the last two decades and that's saying something, maybe because after wasting so much time and money, neither Hilary nor Obama will have any resources left to wage a solid campaign against McCain.

I'm just going to assume McCain is already President and ignore the rest of the posts here about Hilary vs. Obama.

(Also, Obama supporters are proving themselves to be ingracious winners and sore losers all across the board)

comment #16

MAGGA says ...

Obama has been less than impressive lately. It's great to be above bickering in politics, but sometimes you have to point out the absurdity of certain people making allegations (Hillary sang McCain's praises a month or so ago and is now "outraged" that Obama does the same thing, Bill saying that Obama played the race-card on him yet being "outraged" at a journalist for "spinning" what he said only hours later). I don't know how it relates to Americans, but I know a LOT of women in my neck of the woods who were supportive of getting a woman the most powerful job in the world (hell, I myself loved her before the primaries started) but her comments about wiping Iran off the map seems to have turned every single one of them off, as it is far worse than anything Bush has ever suggested doing. Also, she was "shocked" by Obama considering the bombing of parts of Pakistan, which the current administration recently did, producing actual results. Apart from her health program, which is far superior to Obama's, she seems to be running as a republican't. I think all anti-Amricans are rubbing there hands together while laughing like movie bad-guys right now, as the country is regrettably heading for complete disaster, either under Clinton or McCain (apart from his insane policies, there is a reason why people retire from work at the age of 65 in most other jobs).

comment #17

The Hoyk says ...

with apologies to Ben Folds...

In this time of introspection

On the eve of my dejection

I said to my reflection

GOD PLEASE SPARE ME THIS ELECTION!

comment #18

Rich S. says ...

Face it, kids. Hill ain't goin' anywhere. After the loss of Iowa and a few other early primaries, the Clintons had to regroup from the "coronation strategy." Instead they decided to take the long haul strategy all the way to the convention. And that's the way it's going to end up. Getting frustrated and upset between now and then is pointless.

comment #19

Mgmax says ...

"(a) gender loyalty among the less-well-off, somewhat less-educated women who can't let go of the momentousness of a woman making a super-serious run for the presidency, and (b) primal tribal resistance among the working grunts"

But what are the reasons why those people would turn to Obama? Change and style? They're understandably nervous about change because they fear losing what they have, and as for style, they're not exactly reading Details. Hillary IS the model of a modern retail politician for them, bringing the bounty of the great father in Washington to the tribes, maternal face on paternalistic policies. Obama has yet to ask these people for their votes in a way that resonates with them; he's just expected them to be hip to the groove, and they're not won by that kind of appeal.

Gore-Obama. It's the only hope.

comment #20

Mr. Buckles says ...

EVERYONE, STOP YOUR WHINING!

Hillary deserves to stick it out whether you like it or not (I go with O by the way). She has one enough big battleground states to earn the respect to be here.

If she stays negative, then there is something wrong with her. There is truth to the notion that all the punches take a pyschic toll. I think she realizes this and has inflicted the damage she needed to and now needs to turn course (but she does tend to surprise).

If the democratic party can't beat McCain, then they don't deserve it. The fact is, that brand really hasn't meant much for years now. It doesn't stand up for anything and takes its cues from which way the wind blows. Hell, it's only McCain who has the guts to say we should cut the defense budget which all told amounts to something close to $1 trillion dollars.

Let's also acknowledge that Obama seems to get punched with meaningless issues often that people use for false cover, an excuse, not to vote for him. When was the last time you heard someone decry him over a substantive policy position? Let's just acknowledge this.

Overall though, the party has to stop whining and toughen the hell up.

comment #21

Movie Watcher says ...

How long is it going to take for Obama to accept the VP slot? May? June? He can't deliver the knockout blow, so he should be VP, then run for prez. I guess Fox/Limbaugh/Hannity, and the other assorted clowns, are having a good morning. Especially McCain.

comment #22

MattyCurtis says ...

This political "commentary" makes Daily Kos look like C-Span. Embarrassingly bad stuff, and evidence that one can be on the right side of an argument and still be toxic. In this case Jeff's frustration is emanating some very noxious fumes.

comment #23

Indeed says ...

I would like to suggest that Obama lost last night because more people realize that he would be a terrible president. This is coming from someone young with a college degree who wears high thread count shirts.

I also think Hillary and McCain would be horrendous as well.

comment #24

SaveFarris says ...

I would suggest the reason noone hits Obama on policy is that Obama doesn't really have any policy positions, other than using his flux capaciter to go back to 2002 and vote against the war.

Everything else, from health care to education to guns, is a mishmash of "I'll bring people together" with no actual policy proposals. Which is smart, because he knows that once you take a stand on an issue, you can no longer be all things to all people.

comment #25

SaveFarris says ...

Oops, forgot Obama's one other guarateed policy proposal: tax the bejesus out of "rich" people.

comment #26

EDouglas says ...

"tax the bejesus out of "rich" people."

If he adds... "and gives it to the poor people", I'm fullly behind him and his merry band of cabinet members.

comment #27

Mgmax says ...

"If he adds... "and gives it to the poor people", I'm fullly behind him and his merry band of cabinet members."

Because confiscatory tax rates worked so well for Britain in the 70s?

Michael Caine said "the British film industry is alive and well and living in Los Angeles." Care to guess why?

comment #28

Rob says ...

Obama has plenty of policy proposals. He just lacks the experience to know if he can rationally count on being able to implement them, which is why his promises always ring so hollow.

comment #29

Mgmax says ...

"there is a reason why people retire from work at the age of 65 in most other jobs"

So Hillary should agree to serve only one term, then?

comment #30

Chicago48 says ...

I'm an obama supporter because he's fresh and can bring new ideas (and color) to the White house....but let's face it....the White House is reserved for White Irish males. Period. End of statement.
There's no way a man of color (hispanic, Asian, Black) is going to occupy the white house. And white people generally vote against their own interests because of the fear of the unknown. McCain is "known" and comfortable, he will continue Bush's policies and white people are comfortable with that.
As for Hillary, the country doesn't want to admit it, but they are weary of the Clintons. They are everywhere. They won't go away. And with Bill behind her -- should she win the House, which I doubt -- we will have another 4 years of Clintons.

America just won't try something new -- like go 4 years without a war with a foreign country. That's foreign to us and it will continue until some country blows us to smithereens.

comment #31

Chicago48 says ...

"Movie Watcher says ...
How long is it going to take for Obama to accept the VP slot? May? June?"

He won't accept the VP slot...if he loses he's running for Governor of Illinois. That's what the Ill. Dem party wanted, thinking he wouldn't get this far....

comment #32

corey3rd says ...

I get to suffer under a 2 week ad blitz of three a.m. phone calls. And enough with the Superdelegates. Guess all voting men aren't equal in America anymore, eh Comrades.

comment #33

K. Bowen says ...

Have any of the Obamaheads bothered to notice that he just isn't that good of a candidate? The reason Clinton is sticking around is that her opponent sticks his foot in his mouth about once a week.

comment #34

Mgmax says ...

"if he loses he's running for Governor of Illinois."

Great, so we Illinoisians can have a repeat of this primary, the black guy against the woman (Lisa Madigan?)

comment #35

Redmond says ...

Wow, what's with all the doom and gloom?
Obama knew he was going to lose Pennsylvania. Why is everyone so surprised? Last night was awesome for him. Hillary went into to PA with a 20%+ lead. The final numbers have her winning by a 9.37% margin. Last night was a victory for Obama. I'm a huge supporter of the guy and him losing in PA was going to happen. We just have to sit and let Hillary rant and rave that she did it, when really she didn't do that well. PA was hers for the taking and she blew it. Math is against her and the primaries in Indiana and North Carolina will be the nail in the coffin.

So for those of you saying people realized Obama is a terrible candidate: C'mon, get real. She played the rurals and, to Obama's credit, she still didn't crush him.

Buck up, sports!

comment #36

Rob says ...

Hillary didn't "go into PA with a 20-point lead." One poll in Jan. suggested her lead might be that high. Other polls throughout the months had her leading by 9-12 or so, which is more or less where she landed.

This is all part of the same bullshit media narrative that claimed her nomination was "all but inevitable" a year and a half ago, when she was coasting on name recognition and the race hadn't really started yet.

The reality is that she was never a frontrunner. Even a line of dialogue in a first-season episode of 30 Rock was predicting an Obama/McCain match up.

comment #37

D.Z. says ...

Edouglas: "I think McCain is going to have the easiest time winning the Presidency of any Republican in the last two decades and that's saying something, maybe because after wasting so much time and money, neither Hilary nor Obama will have any resources left to wage a solid campaign against McCain."

Hillary and Barack have more campaign money than John; and McCain doesn't know a damn thing about the economy, to boot.

MAGGA: "Apart from her health program, which is far superior to Obama's,"

Yes, nothing like government forcing you to pay for your own health care.

Mgmax: Gore can't win a thing, and he knows it.

"Because confiscatory tax rates worked so well for Britain in the 70s?"

It shows in their longer life-spans...

"Michael Caine said "the British film industry is alive and well and living in Los Angeles." Care to guess why?"

Because it's easier to get broadcast deals for Canada, since that's usually where we shoot nowadays?

Movie Watcher: His knockout blow is his delegate count.

Indeed: I take it you're one of those non-voting voters?

Chicago: I feel for you, but he's gotten this far, and it's not over yet.

Bowen: Yeah, he needs to bring up sniper fire.

comment #38

Indeed says ...

D.Z: No, I always vote, however Im open-minded enough to realize that there arent only two parties to choose from.

And yes, I know that me suggesting such a thing will result in the standard "throw your vote away" comment, but thats exactly the type of attitude that ensures we keep receiving nothing but horrible candidates.

comment #39

dangovich says ...

The White House is reserved for White Irish males. Period. End of statement.

Uh, what? The vast majority of presidents have been WASPs. JFK was the only fully Irish-American president.

comment #40

thorsen1nk says ...

"2. She does the above but doesn't get the nomination but she does damage the Obama campaign enough that he loses to McCain in Nov. she then is the nominee in 2012 and she can claim that she was right and the party went wrong by abandoning her and Bill."

Yep. You're a wise man, Charlie. (Sighs, reaches into desk drawer for flask.)

comment #41

christian says ...

They're all politicians, they all suck, they all lie, and few can do anything of what they claim when they get into power.

Once the Dems stop fighting each other, there's a better chance for them to gang up on the GOP/McCain and win this thing. It's already the Dems to lose. George Bush is the most unpopular president in the history of the Gallup polls, and McCain should be tainted also. The GOP policies have been implemented. We see they don't work (except for those who have made bank like Cheney) and they represent disaster for this nation and world.

To quote Klatuu, "Your choice is simple."

comment #42

bb says ...

The other day friend explained to me why he is voting Obama. Because he believes a black president would make the rest of the world like us again. That's not voting, that's throwing a hail mary pass.

This looks to go to the convention. The convention, if this remains undecided, is going to be a fiasco with actual riots in the streets as the various wingnuts make their demands with whatever version of molotov cocktails they manage to toss around.

McCain wins by default because regular folks decide they don't want a batshit crazy party running the country.

McCain, the renegade who was admired for standing up the Bush on so many issues will be vilified as a doddering old dunce completely out of touch with the world, in other words, just a variation of how each Republican President is described by the media, stupid.

The adults in the Democratic party will regroup, squeeze out the nutters that brought on this debacle and try to shift the party back to the rational center.

And on and on and on.

comment #43

christian says ...

"The adults in the Democratic party will regroup, squeeze out the nutters that brought on this debacle and try to shift the party back to the rational center."

What a fantasy you have! The "adults" are the the ones in this so called "rational center." The Carvilles and Penns and Clintons etc.

McCain is out of touch. But as he represents the stolid capitalists in the media and corporate landscape, he will get a gilded ride. As did Bush until "Hey, wha' happened?"

comment #44

Movie Watcher says ...

Chicago48, I agree that if Obama turns down the vp slot, I could see him running for governor.
DZ, I don't vote. Even if I lived in Pennsylvania I still wouldn't vote.
All the talk shows on cable are starting to give me a headache. 6 more months of the constant, non-stop, bullshit on tv. I will be watching less tv this spring/summer, just to clear my head and read a few books, take a walk, anything, than watching the same people say the same things.

comment #45

christian says ...

And watching the Obama folk spin this as a "crushing defeat" for Clinton is the height of What The Fuck? Look at the outraged groupies on HuffPo, again claiming, "No, really, now it's all over for Clinton. She won PA by only 10 percent. It should have been 20. A clear victory for Obama."

Those people give proof to the claim of Obama's lightweight strength. Because they have to keep convincing themself that a Win is a Loss. Surreal.

comment #46

Dave Polands Gut says ...

Oh man. there are going to be some fireworks this summer when the super delegates leave Obama and all the blacks, the elitists and the far left leave the Party.

It'll be 1968 all over again.

comment #47

Krazy Eyes says ...

"Oh man. there are going to be some fireworks this summer when the super delegates leave Obama and all the blacks, the elitists and the far left leave the Party."

Which is exactly why this will never happen. The superdelegates are going to get behind whomever has the popular vote going into the convention and barring a miracle for Clinton that person is going to be Obama.

comment #48

Mgmax says ...

"The White House is reserved for White Irish males. Period. End of statement."

Nonsense. The important message of this election is that anyone can be president, no matter whether they attended Harvard OR Yale. In fact, you no longer need to have been in Skull and Bones to run!

The Naval Academy, however, is beyond the pale.

comment #49

Rob says ...

As much as they're whining now, the blacks, elitists and far left will swallow their pride and vote for Clinton in November if need be.

The real problem is that base of Clinton support that finds Obama too untested and too far-left and will happily be swayed toward McCain if Obama gets the nod.

comment #50

bb says ...

"Which is exactly why this will never happen. The superdelegates are going to get behind whomever has the popular vote going into the convention and barring a miracle for Clinton that person is going to be Obama."

And that is when the fireworks will begin. Whatever side is NOT chosen will feel cheated by the fact that 1,000 individuals (or so) will invalidate their vote and choose the nominee. Whatever happens is going to leave around half alienated and angry. John Dean has a lot of work ahead of him.

comment #51

cobhome says ...

what gets me is how utterly out of it americans are - liberals - conservatives whatever stripes we wear - all americans haven't a clue - while we make dumb ass remarks like "look at what confiscatory tax policies did to the brits" - the standard of living for americans declines - the USA isn't even in the top ten of national measurements of standards of living - it is 15 - declining from 10 in the last five years - life spans are lower than those universal health care euro countries - per cent of kids graduating from High School continues to decline and the US education system is ranked 25 th in the world - the US economically consumes more than it produces - it ain't the 1950's anymore - the europeans and some asian countries have gotten it figured out in a way we haven't - and instead of making outdated comments about the dangers of traxaing the rich - we ought to ask ourselves why we are so far behind - nations with less wealth than us ??????????

comment #52

dangovich says ...

And to add your point, cobhome, yesterday a new study revealed that life expectancy is actually dropping for some groups of Americans.

Thank God we're spending $12 billion a month over in Iraq. We certainly can't use it here.

comment #53

D.Z. says ...

christian: "Obama's lightweight strength."

Yeah, giving into Bush on every awful piece of legislation he's enacted, and then speaking out against it, when it's convenient, really shows strength.

David: "and all the blacks, the elitists and the far left leave the Party."

Why yes, black people really want to support a party which ignored them in New Orleans and Africa. And when Bill O'Reilly claims there are no vets living under bridges, he's clearly more in touch with the average American, and not elitist like those liberals. And after all, welfare is communist, but subsidizing Bear Stearns and
Halliburton is in the spirit of the free market.

comment #54

Mgmax says ...

I love being lectured on how dumb I am by someone who doesn't capitalize, makes really insightful comments like "it ain't the 1950s any more" (no, most things are better and Sputnik isn't threatening us), and ends by falling asleep on the "?" key.

comment #55

cobhome says ...

I love being lectured on how dumb I am by someone who doesn't capitalize, makes really insightful comments like "it ain't the 1950s any more" (no, most things are better and Sputnik isn't threatening us), and ends by falling asleep on the "?"

if you will recal from your vast knowledge of US history - the 1950's was a time when the US actually did have the highest standard of living in the world - hence the remark - but you knew that right?? ????????? As for punctuation - on this site - it seems a waste of energy to bother - it is the internet after all - not a column ofr the NYT

comment #56

cobhome says ...

I love being lectured on how dumb I am by someone who doesn't capitalize, makes really insightful comments like "it ain't the 1950s any more" (no, most things are better and Sputnik isn't threatening us), and ends by falling asleep on the "?"

if you will recal from your vast knowledge of US history - the 1950's was a time when the US actually did have the highest standard of living in the world - hence the remark - but you knew that right?? ????????? And Sputnick - a threat ? It had a decaying orbit - no weapons and was intended to study atmospheric density - compared to what we have sitting in the silos and what NATO has - how does Sputnik represent anything remotely resembling a threat ? U nder what possible scenario are we "safer"ow ?As for punctuation - on this site - it seems a waste of energy to bother - it is the internet after all - not a column of the NYT

comment #57

cobhome says ...

I love being lectured on how dumb I am by someone who doesn't capitalize, makes really insightful comments like "it ain't the 1950s any more" (no, most things are better and Sputnik isn't threatening us), and ends by falling asleep on the "?"

if you will recal from your vast knowledge of US history - the 1950's was a time when the US actually did have the highest standard of living in the world - hence the remark - but you knew that right?? ????????? And Sputnick - a threat ? It had a decaying orbit - no weapons and was intended to study atmospheric density - compared to what we have sitting in the silos and what NATO has - how does Sputnik represent anything remotely resembling a threat ? Under what possible scenario are we "safer" now ?As for punctuation - on this site - it seems a waste of energy to bother - it is the internet after all - not a column of the NYT

comment #58

cobhome says ...

I love being lectured on how dumb I am by someone who doesn't capitalize, makes really insightful comments like "it ain't the 1950s any more" (no, most things are better and Sputnik isn't threatening us), and ends by falling asleep on the "?"

if you will recall from your vast knowledge of US history - the 1950's was a time when the US actually did have the highest standard of living in the world - hence the remark - but you knew that right?? ????????? And Sputnick - a threat ? It had a decaying orbit - no weapons and was intended to study atmospheric density - compared to what we have sitting in the silos and what NATO has - how does Sputnik represent anything remotely resembling a threat ? Under what possible scenario are we "safer" now ?As for punctuation - on this site - it seems a waste of energy to bother - it is the internet after all - not a column of the NYT

comment #59

luvneverends says ...

I saw Kian's profile on millionaire&celeb dating site RichMatchMaking.com last week. I am wondering what kind of relationship he is looking for on that site.