This entire post could've been done just with links to the MSNBC rumor machine. But I'm kind of choked up after last night's bittersweet news - think of all the great times that now we'll never have. Plus, focusing exclusively on one source would underplay the breadth and depth of these people's pathetic melodramatics:

1. Denial - This was probably the most surreal stage, with Obama campaign eventually elevating unblinking denial into a campaign smear. The Atlantic ran an article entitled "the Eagleton Scenario" and the NYT published an op-ed gently and kingly suggesting that Palin "should withdraw" to avoid humiliation. InTrade shares on Palin being replaced spiked to almost 15. When that didn't work, the left seamlessly transitioned to a different wishful denial.

  I'm still not voting for McCain or Obama (I don't like either) but the behavior of Democrats thus far towards Palin has been so disgusting that I don't think they realize how much they alienate people.

I was reading a debate on global warming today and the smugness and arrogance of the human-produced global warming crowd always seems to try to try to bolster their argument by trying to make believing in global warming to be akin to believing in evolution. To which I responded: Kurt, there’s a lot more evidence supporting evolution than human produced global warming. Global warming “theory” essentially argues that CO2 is a green house gas and it has been going u...

I wrote this last year: https://forums.joeuser.com/?FoRumID=3&AID=144168 "What if the earth starts cooling" Since 1998, the temperature has been pretty flat. This year, it's looking like it's going to take a dip (and it may be that 2007 was a bit down as well) even as CO2 rates increase. So... All those smug global warming zealots...do you think any of them will apologize for being so obnoxious with their half-baked theory? I am not arguing that there isn't global warming...

Since no one will stand up for greedy evil capitalists these days, I'll take a stab at it.

I highly recommend David Sirota's Hostile Takeover -- just not for the reasons Mr.Sirota would probably prefer.  First, it's considered a "must read" by Al Gore. Secondly, it gives clear insight into how some American liberals view economics and the world in general.  To which I say, good for them. I love an open dialog with people of all political values. Mine are all over the place. Mr. Sirota's book outlines a number of problems with our society and prescribes specific solutions ...

I'm going to go into this more when I have more time. It saddens me a bit that people let their ideologies determine their realities to such a large degree. If we had a doctor writing articles about tips for better health, I would take those articles pretty seriously. At the risk of being an "arrogant prick" I think that having someone who started with nothing who is now "rich" providing observations on behaviors and about how the world actually works as opposed to how people wish it wor...

In 2004, Stardock released The Political Machine. In it, players picked a candidate and ran for President of the United States. Players could compete against either human controlled opponents over a LAN or via the Internet or against computer opponents controlled by Stardock's notorious computer AI. For 2008, Stardock has gone back and re-envisioned how the game should would.  Using an all-new 3D engine, players can now design their own opponents (bobble-heads) and compete not just i...

Obama: I am for the things that are good and against the things that are bad. Hilary Clinton: Hahaahahahahahaahahahahahahaha!!!!! Hahahahaha! Hahahaha! Fred Thompson: I'm not your bro and I am going to taze you. Guilani: There are few problems that can't be solved with more killing. Huckabee: Vote for me or you're going to go to hell. McCain: Don't point out my massive flaws or I'll accuse you of playing dirty politics. Romney: I am for this unless you're against it in which ca...

Walter Williams has a great column demonstrating some of the myths regarding greed, need, and money. http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2008/01/02/greed,_need_and_money

Great Britain. The United States. Canada. Italy. Belgium. These are nation states. And their future is unclear.  Nation states have historically provided 2 key benefits: The ability to pool resources for a common defense and a single market. Globalization and the slow pacification of the modern states of the world are taking away much of that benefit. For example, what exactly does Texas get out of being a state in the United States? What about British Columbia in Canada? W...

Since political debates on this site are so common and debate over the budget is very common, here's a handy link to detailed information on the 2007 Federal Budget: http://www.answers.com/topic/united-states-federal-budget-2007   Highlights:   Below is federal spending and federal tax receipts by year:  

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b/002-0593763-7135257?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=The+Politically+INcorrect+Guide+to There's some interesting books coming out of this series in which the authors defend some of the minority views on different issues. The problem I'm having with the series is that even on issues I agree with, some of their arguments are really weak or (in my opinion) deceptive. Thus, I lose faith in the parts that I'm not as familiar with. For ...

The problem with our governmental tax system in the United States is that it has slowly been morphed into a coercive charity organization. Below is a chart of the 2007 federal budget courtesy of the CBO:   If you look closely, "health" and "income security" (not to be confused with social security) now make up 25% of our budget and grow year after year. Those programs are essentially government charity programs in which we take from one person to give to another. ...