[kj] ot- palin dead

[Change]

Wslking again in the same direction

--- On Wed, 8/10/08, Karen Weil <karen.weil at sddt.com> wrote:


> From: Karen Weil <karen.weil at sddt.com>

> Subject: Re: [kj] ot- palin vote

> To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)" <gathering at misera.net>

> Date: Wednesday, 8 October, 2008, 11:46 PM

> That it does, Exorcist! 

> Hope you get the ticket situation resolved. But don't

> say "bailout." (hardy-har!)

> 

> Until the magic day of Thursday ...

> 

> k.w.

>   ----- Original Message ----- 

>   From: The Exorcist 

>   To: A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!) 

>   Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 2:56 PM

>   Subject: Re: [kj] ot- palin vote

> 

> 

>   Yup busy as hell and don't need another Palin thread

> hijack!

>   And though we disagree with each other it's great

> that we (gatherers with dissent point of views)

>   don't feel the need to stomp each other out!

> Individuality rocks!

> 

>   Free Speech, Free Choice, Free Will all opinions welcome!

> 

>   Have a G'day and will catch you folks in a day or 2.

> 

>   Cheers!

>   Yos

> 

> 

>   At 03:49 PM 10/8/2008, Karen Weil wrote:

> 

>     Well, we could go on about this all day -- but

> we're both busy! 

>     But there's no way in hell a Clinton/Obama ticket

> would win, period. 

>     I just fundamentally disagree with you over the media.

> (Please witness Tom Brokaw's demeanor yesterday.)

>     You are right about Kinky Friedman, though! ; )

>      

>     Rock on, dude.

>      

>     kw..

> 

>       ----- Original Message ----- 

> 

>       From: The Exorcist 

> 

>       To: A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!) 

> 

>       Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 12:45 PM

> 

>       Subject: Re: [kj] ot- palin vote

> 

> 

>       Heya Karen,

> 

> 

>       If you notice, I never brought up McCain or Palin

> here or promoted/endorsed any nominee.

> 

>       I never mentioned Obama till the whole mega Palin

> thread from a few weeks back.

> 

>       (Which a gatherer asked that we drop as it was

> overwhelming the list and I so obliged.)

> 

> 

>       I have my issues with all 4 candidates. I voted for

> none of them in the primaries.

> 

>       Is the Palin the best candidate? No. Is Obama the

> best candidate? No. Did Obama

> 

>       pick the best VP candidate which would have made this

> election a thorough trouncing?

> 

>       Once again. No. (Hillary & Obama? Don't even

> bother campaigning! Sit back and win.)

> 

> 

>       Politics. As Kinky Friedman said.

> 

> 

>       "But all these guys want to do is look good, and

> that is the nature of politics: 

> 

>       poly, meaning more than one, and ticks, meaning

> blood-sucking parasites. 

> 

>       That's what they've all become after

> they've been around a while, so I just say never reelect

> anybody."

> 

> 

> 

>       The media? It's only the republicans and right

> wingers that discussed it. Why is "ties" in

> quotes?

> 

>       But see, you're talking about Sean Hannity, who

> is only listened to and watched by the base.

> 

>       How long ago has he mentioned Obama's ties? Many

> months ago. The only reason this got any

> 

>       traction in NYT etc... whatsoever is because Palin

> mentioned it on the stump. 

> 

>       If it were not mentioned by her, the news sources

> would continue to never mention it.

> 

> 

>       Having one network out of the dozens that are out

> there investigate Obama is something I'd call Kid

> Gloves.

> 

> 

> 

>       Everyone has skeletons and let them all be brought

> out. I have no issues with that.

> 

>       There is one word that I love dearly.

> "Transparency" :)

> 

> 

>       Still Rockin' (or at least trying)!

> 

>       Yos

> 

> 

>       Have a wonderful day Karen!

> 

> 

> 

>       At 01:25 PM 10/8/2008, Karen Weil wrote:

> 

>         Hi, Exorcist. 

> 

>         Look, no offense, really: But what do you think

> McCain's campaign is -- pure substance?

> 

>         Do you really, really, really think McCain

> "chose" Palin because she was truly the "best

> candidate"? 

> 

>         You're a sharp guy, for sure, but you know

> better than that.

> 

>         (Look, we all know Biden was a convenient pick for

> Obama, as well -- but at least he makes sense.)

> 

>         This sounds harsh, but I have to agree with Alex:

> She's shit. 

> 

>         And, in case you missed it, Sean Hannity had a

> blistering expose"on Obama's "ties" with

> William Ayers. Don't think the media hasn't been

> having a field day with that. 

> 

>         With all due respect, I have to disagree with you

> that Obama has gotten the kid-gloves treatment here. He

> hasn't -- nor should he. Neither should McCain. 

> 

>         (And if you don't think McCain doesn't have

> his own share of skeletons in the closet, you're kidding

> yourself. That doesn't mean McCain is terrible, mind

> you, but it's just the truth.)

> 

>         As a much-revered president once said about

> politics: "If you can't stand the heat ..."

> 

>         Please have a good day. 

> 

> 

> 

>         Keep on rocking,

> 

> 

> 

>         k.w.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>         ----- Original Message ----- 

>           From: The Exorcist 

>           To: A list about all things Killing Joke (the

> band!) 

>           Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:10 AM 

>           Subject: Re: [kj] ot- palin vote

> 

>           I always said people's record is fair game.

> Have you looked up Obama's record? 

>           Have you seen any of the big papers or bloggers

> go after his record? 

> 

>           Nope...

> 

>           I've yet to hear one thing that he has

> accomplished.

> 

>           His entire campaign is based on pure rhetoric.

> Though I am glad that you've come around to 

>           agreeing about going after ones record and not

> their race/gender and just constant ad hominem attacks.

> 

>           At 07:12 AM 10/8/2008, Alexander Smith wrote:

>             "She's been the most vilified and

> attacked person in ages."

> 

>             Hardly. If anything, she hasn't been

> attacked ENOUGH. Not about her gender or her character, but

> ABOUT HER RECORD.

> 

>             She's shit.

> 

>             Alex in NYC

> 

> 

>             On Oct 8, 2008, at 3:18 AM, The Exorcist wrote:

> 

> 

>               Soft on her? She's been the most vilified

> and attacked person in ages.

> 

>               The Bush Doctrine? What about Joe Biden's

> massive screwup interpreting the constitution? (Wait a

> second! for someone who 

>               has been in the field for 35 years... screws

> up so bad... Yet no one says a word? AMAZING! This is the

> friggin CONSTITUTION! 

>               But I've heard nary a peep.) 

> 

>               As I've pointed out before, the

> interviewer (Mr. Gibson) himself did not know the Bush

> doctrine and 

>               was immediately smacked down by the

> individual who coined the phrase (Charles Krauthammer). 

>               I've linked to it in my previous emails

> when we had the whole Palin thing going on. 

>              

> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html

> 

> 

>               You may disagree all you want Brendan but you

> are dead wrong on this. 

>               Not to mention that even if you were correct,

> not knowing the constitution (after being in the service for

> 35 years) 

>               or not knowing the bush doctrine - you tell

> me which is more pathetic.

> 

>               (And I still stand by my opinion that Obama

> is a talentless hack who never accomplished anything and was

> hand-held 

>               his entire career. Go and read up on how he

> achieved every job title he ever had.)

> 

>               Judge not lest ye be judged. :)

> 

>               Cheers, 

>               Yos

> 

> 

>               At 12:07 AM 10/8/2008, Brendan wrote:

>                 "Given enough time she'd be just

> as good with talking points and gotcha's 

>                 as he is."

> 

>                 That's an assumption I disagree

> with...unlike some others who have gone 

>                 soft on her, I think stuff like not knowing

> what the Bush Doctrine is is 

>                 absolutely pathetic, and provides more

> evidence that she's in there for 

>                 reasons of personality / looks / gender /

> demographic as opposed to talent 

>                 (gasp!).

> 

>                 > Every poll is rigged... Look at the

> Daily Kos; they list every poll 

>                 > out there and tell everyone to go and

> vote to change the numbers. 

>                 > They do this for Obama, Palin, Mccain

> and every other friggin person out 

>                 > there. 

>                 > 

>                 > Look up freep and words similar to

> that. 

>                 > 

>                 > You ppl. really need to stop getting

> so fussy. :) 

>                 > 

>                 > When the Obama sent out the mass

> mailer to all their supporters to 

>                 > shut down the radio show 

>                 > that hosted some of his detractors I

> don't recall you worrying much 

>                 > about bias. :) 

>                 > 

>                 > BTW, IMHO, her qualifications are just

> as good as Obama (which means 

>                 > ZERO or close to it). He just has his 

>                 > talking points down better after

> campaigning for so long. Given 

>                 > enough time she'd be just as good

> with talking 

>                 > points and gotcha's as he is. 

>                 > 

>                 > Obama is currently in the lead and may

> very well win the election. 

>                 > Life goes on and you prepare for the

> next one. 

>                 > 

>                 > BTW.... The same thing that those

> nasty "republicans" are doing... is 

>                 > the same thing you are doing now. 

>                 > 

>                 > Cheers, 

>                 > Me :) 

>                 > 

>                 > 

>                 > At 11:12 AM 10/7/2008, fluw wrote: 

>                 >>Forward-- 

>                 >> 

>                 >>PBS has an online poll posted

> asking if Sarah Palin is 

>                 >>qualified.  Apparently the

> Republicans knew about this in advance 

>                 >>and are flooding the voting with

> YES votes.  I know -- it's only a 

>                 >>poll.  But it will be reported on

> PBS, picked up by mainstream media 

>                 >>and can influence undecided voters

> in swing states. Please do two 

>                 >>things -- takes 20 seconds 

>                 >>1)  Click on link and vote

> yourself.  Here's the link: 

>                 >> 

>                 >><

> http://www.pbs.org/now/polls/poll-435.html >

> http://www.pbs.org/now/polls/poll-435.html 

>                 >>2)  Then send this to every single

> voter you know, irregardless of 

>                 >>party affiliation, and  urge them

> to vote and pass it on. 

>                 >>The last thing we need is PBS

> having to say their viewers think 

>                 >>Sarah Palin is qualified unless we

> ALL vote. 

>                 >>Thanks. 

>                 >> 

>                

> >>_______________________________________________ 

>                 >>Gathering mailing list 

>                 >>Gathering at misera.net 

>                 >>

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering 

>                 > 

>                 > Competition is a barbaric, insensitive

> ritual that reeks of social 

>                 > Darwinism. 

>                 > We cannot allow the fittest to survive

> on our pages. Your loss is someone 

>                 > else's gain, and your gain is

> someone else's loss. Therefore, losers 

>                 > contribute 

>                 > to the society and winners take away

> from it. Being a winner is 

>                 > unethical, while 

>                 > a society of losers is happy and

> striving as a collective. In the 

>                 > spirit of diversity, 

>                 > inclusiveness, and collectivism our

> contests shall have no winners. 

>                 > Everyone is declared a loser, which in

> our book means an ethical team 

>                 > player. 

>                 >

> _______________________________________________ 

>                 > Gathering mailing list 

>                 > Gathering at misera.net 

>                 >

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering 

>                 >

> 

> 

>                

> _______________________________________________ 

>                 Gathering mailing list 

>                 Gathering at misera.net 

>                

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>               Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual

> that reeks of social Darwinism. 

>               We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our

> pages. Your loss is someone 

>               else's gain, and your gain is someone

> else's loss. Therefore, losers contribute 

>               to the society and winners take away from it.

> Being a winner is unethical, while 

>               a society of losers is happy and striving as

> a collective. In the spirit of diversity, 

>               inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests

> shall have no winners. 

>               Everyone is declared a loser, which in our

> book means an ethical team player. 

>              

> _______________________________________________ 

>               Gathering mailing list 

>               Gathering at misera.net 

>              

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>             _______________________________________________

> 

>             Gathering mailing list 

>             Gathering at misera.net 

>            

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>           Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual

> that reeks of social Darwinism. 

>           We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our

> pages. Your loss is someone 

>           else's gain, and your gain is someone

> else's loss. Therefore, losers contribute 

>           to the society and winners take away from it.

> Being a winner is unethical, while 

>           a society of losers is happy and striving as a

> collective. In the spirit of diversity, 

>           inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests

> shall have no winners. 

>           Everyone is declared a loser, which in our book

> means an ethical team player. 

> 

> 

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> 

>           _______________________________________________ 

>           Gathering mailing list 

>           Gathering at misera.net 

>          

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

> 

> 

>         _______________________________________________

> 

>         Gathering mailing list

> 

>         Gathering at misera.net

> 

>         http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

> 

> 

>       Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual that

> reeks of social Darwinism.

> 

>       We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our pages.

> Your loss is someone

> 

>       else's gain, and your gain is someone else's

> loss. Therefore, losers contribute

> 

>       to the society and winners take away from it. Being a

> winner is unethical, while

> 

>       a society of losers is happy and striving as a

> collective. In the spirit of diversity,

> 

>       inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests shall

> have no winners.

> 

>       Everyone is declared a loser, which in our book means

> an ethical team player. 

> 

> 

> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

> 

>       _______________________________________________

> 

>       Gathering mailing list

> 

>       Gathering at misera.net

> 

>       http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

> 

> 

>     _______________________________________________

>     Gathering mailing list

>     Gathering at misera.net

>     http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering 

>   Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual that reeks

> of social Darwinism.

>   We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our pages. Your

> loss is someone

>   else's gain, and your gain is someone else's

> loss. Therefore, losers contribute

>   to the society and winners take away from it. Being a

> winner is unethical, while

>   a society of losers is happy and striving as a

> collective. In the spirit of diversity,

>   inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests shall have

> no winners.

>   Everyone is declared a loser, which in our book means an

> ethical team player. 

> 

> 

> 

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> 

> 

>   _______________________________________________

>   Gathering mailing list

>   Gathering at misera.net

>   http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

> _______________________________________________

> Gathering mailing list

> Gathering at misera.net

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering