You are viewing the older version of this Weblog. I have left this version available for those of you who do not have Javascript enabled in your web browser.
If you have Javascript enabled and would like to view the lastest version of this Weblog, please go here.
If you have Javascript enabled and would like to view the lastest version of this Weblog, please go here.
November 08, 2006
What is everyone saying this morning?
“Change.”
At least that’s what NPR is reporting. The fact of the matter is, I’m proud of what my state accomplished yesterday. (I had my doubts as I was heading off to bed last night.)
Here’s a run-down of the “key races in Kansas and Missouri” (as brought to you by Kansascity.com and the Associated Press)...
Get a complete overview of the elections here.
Posted at 08:24 am
Trackback:Trackback Link:
Please enable javascript to generate a trackback url
Comments (10):
How can we be proud when the most “Talent’ed” candidate didn’t win? :)
dh () - November 08, 2006 at 10:45 am
One political commentator said the “the Democrats are on probation for the next two years.” I would have to agree with that. If they operate like Howard Dean did in 2004 you could see this as something temporary. On a side note it is interesting how this election was single issue. All of the left ridicules the right for being single issue (why I don’t know I don’t think they are) but in this election it clearly was a single issue election. Seems a double standard to me. IMHO
dh () - November 08, 2006 at 1:14 pm
Hey Tim, I voted Democrat yesterday. Can you believe it? I voted for (D)Mike Sanders for Jackson County Executive. I hope you are proud of my bipartisanship? In fact there was another Democrat that I would have voted for if I lived in his particular district that is Heath Shuler for US House, from North Carolina. No, it isn’t because he was a former NFL Quarterback. :)
DH () - November 08, 2006 at 1:57 pm
dh: would that it were “single issue.” But, while Iraq was clearly the most important thing, GWB’s domestic policy hasn’t been much better than his foreign policy. He and his lap dogs (on both sides of the aisle) have spied on us, run up the debt, done very little with the economy, ignored the environment, and entrenched themselves on the wrong side of the stem-cell debate. On top of that, corruption and nepotism have run amuck and unchecked in his party. People want change, not just in Iraq, but in general.
wheat (URL) - November 08, 2006 at 2:12 pm
Well, all of the analysts said it was a single issue day. On the economy. Actually the economy is doing very well. Unemployment is under 4.5%, Inflation is around 3-3.5% and GDP is growing as well. Wrong side of the stem-cell debate when adult stem cells work just as well and doesn’t kill life which begins at conception like any scientist agrees with? Who are you to say it is the “wrong-side of the issue”? All analysts agree that if there were no War in Iraq Bush would still be in office thus making it a single issue. Okay I will make a deal with you and those who happen to agree with you. Never more say that people who vote opposite than you are “single-issue” and I will do the same. I know I stated it was single issue but only because people claim the other side is single issue. All sides need to stop calling people “single issue”. :)
dh () - November 08, 2006 at 2:44 pm
dh, if you were in my English class, I can see myself writing “cite your sources” over most everything you say. I’m not going to defend myself against “all the analysts” (an over-generalization if I ever did see one) or something that a vague, unsourced group of “people claim.” I’ve never used the term “single-issue” to describe any race (if I have, please point out where), so the bone you have to pick is with someone else. Your claim that adult stem cells work “just as good” as the undifferentiated ones that fertility clinics throw away every day flies in the face of science and, according to this election, the will of the people of Missouri. If you need a primer, the National Institutes of Health has one: http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp
Seriously, you’re so incredibly partisan that you make me not want to ever comment on any of Tim’s posts. Next time, I’ll just email him and avoid having to deal with your tired, right wing talking points. If I ever want to know what you think of something, I can just flip over to Fox news.
Seriously, you’re so incredibly partisan that you make me not want to ever comment on any of Tim’s posts. Next time, I’ll just email him and avoid having to deal with your tired, right wing talking points. If I ever want to know what you think of something, I can just flip over to Fox news.
wheat (URL) - November 08, 2006 at 3:07 pm
Wheat, I’m sorry you feel that way. Many people on both sides of the isle support and reject stem-cell. I don’t see it as “right-wing” as you say. I appreciate that you don’t use the term single-issue. I get labeled that for some reason all of the time. I apologize for appropriating that to you. My original post didn’tseem partisan to me. I know many Democrats who happened to agree with my response that started with “one political commentator…”.
So Wheat are you saying you are not open minded to other points of view? I think if one is truly Post-Modern they would be open to ALL points of view. Remember I voted bipartisan in this election so to say I’m totally partisan seems rather funny to me. I didn’t mean to make you feel uncomfortable but I think wemust look at ALL sides of an issue rather than reject outright. For me, while you may get that impression, I don’t do that. Wheat, I never meant to irritate you. I don’t think it should nor was I irritated myself. All views should be open and I didn’t think I ridiculed anyone or yourself. I don’t know maybe weare all partisan and this election can help us away from that? At least I’m trying Wheat. Give me a chance. Maybe we can see each others views and modify to some degree however small it may be? That is part of life. Oh well, Wheat. I still respect you and never lost respect for you. :)
So Wheat are you saying you are not open minded to other points of view? I think if one is truly Post-Modern they would be open to ALL points of view. Remember I voted bipartisan in this election so to say I’m totally partisan seems rather funny to me. I didn’t mean to make you feel uncomfortable but I think wemust look at ALL sides of an issue rather than reject outright. For me, while you may get that impression, I don’t do that. Wheat, I never meant to irritate you. I don’t think it should nor was I irritated myself. All views should be open and I didn’t think I ridiculed anyone or yourself. I don’t know maybe weare all partisan and this election can help us away from that? At least I’m trying Wheat. Give me a chance. Maybe we can see each others views and modify to some degree however small it may be? That is part of life. Oh well, Wheat. I still respect you and never lost respect for you. :)
dh () - November 08, 2006 at 3:52 pm
dh: I don’t often agree with you, but you have as much right as anyone else to air your views. I don’t have a problem with existence of views that run contrary to mine. But, like anyone else, I champion the ideas that I think are best (best for me, best for the country, best in general).
I didn’t find your post offensive (you didn’t ridicule me), just frustrating, for a few specific reasons. First was your question “Who are you to say it is the ‘wrong-side of the issue’?” I have as much right as anyone to have an opinion on this issue and to try to articulate why I feel so strongly about it. But here I may have let my emotions get away with me a bit, as I feel very deeply about this issue (self-link: http://wheatdesign.com/view_by_permalink..). So my apologies, as I, too, was picking a bone with someone not in the discussion.
And, finally, it’s very kind of you to offer a soothing word here. My own post was written in frustration. If I have a problem with your assertions or arguments, I’ll do you the favor of either explaining them in detail or holding my tongue and not resort to labeling. So allow me to retract both “right-wing” and “partisan.” Please excuse my lapse in civility.
I didn’t find your post offensive (you didn’t ridicule me), just frustrating, for a few specific reasons. First was your question “Who are you to say it is the ‘wrong-side of the issue’?” I have as much right as anyone to have an opinion on this issue and to try to articulate why I feel so strongly about it. But here I may have let my emotions get away with me a bit, as I feel very deeply about this issue (self-link: http://wheatdesign.com/view_by_permalink..). So my apologies, as I, too, was picking a bone with someone not in the discussion.
And, finally, it’s very kind of you to offer a soothing word here. My own post was written in frustration. If I have a problem with your assertions or arguments, I’ll do you the favor of either explaining them in detail or holding my tongue and not resort to labeling. So allow me to retract both “right-wing” and “partisan.” Please excuse my lapse in civility.
wheat (URL) - November 08, 2006 at 4:37 pm
Wheat, you are way too cool. :) I appreciated you clarifying your original statments from “wrong-side” to “strongly disagree”. My point in stating what I said is to give a different, yet logical, perspective to help people to not “reject outright” just like when I read these posts it helps me to “not reject outright”. We all need balance and need to not be entrenched too much, notice I said too much, in our positions. I accept your apology. At the same time I will work not to irritate you or frustrate you. :)
dh () - November 09, 2006 at 09:01 am
