Korean Job Discussion Forums

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

Yeah, I read it. I also lived it at the time. It's about entertainment, in the same way Rush is about entertainment. Hunter and Ann are pretty much mirror images of each other. Entertaining in their way, but not something to be taken seriously.

I had a higher regard for your views about politics until you posted about HST. Groucho Marx and Jon Stewart also are entertaining. My estimate of your judgement plummeted after I read your HST quote. I'm sure you will stay up nights fretting over the loss of my respect. Confused

Czarjorge · Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 8:53 am Post subject:

Whoa. WHOA! So you're dismissing the role of the fool in reference to politically commentary? Would you equally dismiss Mark Twain? He was the John Stewart of his time. I think you're just defending a mistep for the sake of being right here, Ya-ta.

stillnotking · Joined: 18 Dec 2007 Location: Oregon, USA

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

I started subscribing to Rolling Stone in about 1970/71 which is where Thompson was publishing a lot in those days. I thought it was ironic that he used the word 'loathing' in a book title. That was how I felt about his writing. I always thought it was a sad day for American journalism when HST learned to type--in fact, I think he was just a typist, not a writer.

In those days, music and politics went together. (There was a reason Neil Young said music can't change the world the other day--at one time, a lot of us believed it could.) So I read every lousy word of Thompson's that Wenner saw fit to publish...and hated every minute of it. I never once found him funny or insightful.

I stand by my judgement that HST = Ann Coulter. One is just as loathesome as the other.

cbclark4 · Joined: 20 Aug 2006 Location: Masan

mithridates · Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 7:00 pm Post subject:

Latest poll puts Clinton at 50 and Obama at 48 in Texas.

Milwaukiedave · Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Location: Goseong

Ohio is getting relatively close as well. I think Obama has a better shot at Texas.

bucheon bum · Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Kuros · Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

I disagree that it's because the Democrats are tired or that they 'want what the Republicans' have. I think the electability factor was decided when Obama #1) showed that enough white Southern males would vote for him that he could carry southern states and #2) Teddy and the Kennedy clan endorsed him, showing that party heavy-weights accepted him as a serious contender. In my opinion, a third factor is not what Clinton has done wrong but with what Obama represents.

Hater Depot · Joined: 29 Mar 2005

This is really beyond parody. How many states is she going to say just don't count?

Milwaukiedave · Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Location: Goseong

Milwaukiedave · Joined: 02 Oct 2004 Location: Goseong

Sen. Christopher Dodd to endorse Obama

By ANDREW MIGA
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut plans to endorse former presidential rival Barack Obama.

Dodd will endorse his colleague, a senator from Illinois, in Cleveland on Tuesday, according to a Democratic official close to Dodd who requested anonymity because no formal announcement had been made.

Dodd's support, coupled with his liberal credentials, could provide a boost for Obama as major contests near in big states such as Ohio and Texas on March 4. Obama has won some key Democratic endorsements in recent weeks, including Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy, a close friend of Dodd.

Obama and rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton had been vying for Dodd's support since he exited the presidential race after a poor showing in the Iowa caucus last month. Dodd, who won his Senate seat in 1980 and chaired the Democratic National Committee from 1995-1996, has long-standing ties to the Clintons.

Dodd is a "superdelegate," one of nearly 800 Democratic officeholders and party officials who automatically attend the national convention and can vote for whomever they choose. They have become an important force in the close race between Clinton and Obama, and both candidates are lobbying hard for their support.

During the campaign, Dodd cast himself as an experienced leader who unites people. He stressed his long Senate career, foreign policy experience and work on education and children's issues. But his long-shot candidacy, overshadowed by the huge campaign accounts and star power of Clinton and Obama, never caught fire.

Still, Dodd's popularity with liberal voters could benefit Obama on both domestic and foreign policy issues.

Dodd voted in 2002 to authorize military intervention in Iraq, but has become an outspoken critic of the war and now calls his vote a mistake. He has said he would oppose an escalation of U.S. forces in Iraq and has said Congress should consider withholding funding for such a troop increase.

Dodd also could help Obama with Hispanic voters. A fluent Spanish speaker, Dodd served in the Peace Corps in a rural village in Dominican Republic from 1966-68 and has had a strong interest in Latin American affairs throughout his career.

Since his election to the House in 1974, Dodd has forged strong ties with labor unions, tried impose fiscal accountability on corporations and championed family and children's issues. He chairs the powerful Senate Banking Committee.

Dodd was the chief Senate sponsor of the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act, which allows workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for the birth or adoption of a child, or to tend to a personal or family illness.

I have to wonder if Biden will endorse Obama as well.

Kuros · Joined: 27 Apr 2004

OH for Clinton. Looks like a double-digit victory for her there.