Slave? Anyone?
 

Being a total chick about my clothing, I know exactly what that "bump" is... A well tailored suit (Bush buys Oxxford) hugs the shoulders snugly. When you lean over, the fabric in exactly the area where the "bump" is located will become taut and form that "bump". The light on Bush from above creates a shadow below the tightened fabric, thus creating the appearance of a bulge.

I'm not at all surprised the sort of consipracy theorists who post this stuff would be unfamiliar with how a suit drapes.

God, did I just write that?

There was a debate????
 

Does sending out tens of millions of e-mails prior to the debates asking everyone to write letters after, and giving the specific points to be made in those letters, count?

Lies Lies and more Lies
 

He was heavily involved in several children's shelters and other programs, and so there were a number of pics circulating of him holding hands with some boys.

No, he wasn't.

There was a debate????
 

I know that there are lefties doing that, but I wasn't aware that the DNC had anything to do with it. I thought other people had moved to fill the gap left by McAuliffe's crack organization, which was clearly focused on other things. Apparently they can't get yard signs distributed this year, either.

What do I know? I'm not getting that kind of spam.

Slave? Anyone?
 

You'all outed Not Me while I was gone?

Damn. This one I wouldn't have guessed.

Slave? Anyone?
 

No wonder you are so angry all the time. You're "talents" are not truly appreciated in backward ass PA.

There was a debate????
 

I got several myself. They came directly from McA. It was the righty story of the debate night.

There was a debate????
 

The idea that the campaigns are distributing talking points is not a story.* Nothing wrong with that. The idea that putatively independent journalists are regurgitating them is a story. The people who repeated the RNC's talking points are hacks. I would be curious to hear who repeated the DNC's stuff.

* Except to the extent that it suggests that McAuliffe hired someone with a pulse.

The argument for a big win
 

The quote was: 'The Right will scream "voter fraud" everytime a Hispanic person votes, and the Left will be screaming about voter intimidation and voting machines.'

How does the governments focus on electoral groups for homeland security issues have anything to do with a suggestion that the Right will later scream something everytime a Hispanic person votes. Sorry, but that is just a shrill and absolutely repulsive charge to level without support. Either people should explain what they are talking about (even you haven't explained what he might be talking about to the point that I or anyone would understand it), or they should keep these comments to themselves. Its no wonder someone in Texas would get a pit in their stomach reading it.

That said, what homeland security efforts are you talking about? What are they doing?

There was a debate????
 

Sorry. I was only responding to your query re: did we do that?

Seems I saw all of those points, in nearly the same language, in most of the big-city papers the next day or two.

There was a debate????
 

I am. But it's generally telling me to write to my newspaper and participate in on-line polls. It's not telling me specifically what to say. I should have cut and pasted the one from after the VP debate.

Here's the letter from McAuliffe sent earlier today:

Since we're talking about domestic issues ....
 

Please, please, PLEASE someone raise this in tonight's debate.

WaPo

Holy shit. Bush is contemplating cutting Homeland Security, veterans affairs and education??

Read the rest of the article, too. It's pretty damning stuff as a recounting of how GWB set his fiscal policy, and how we'll be royally fucked if foreigners decide to stop lending us money.

Enjoy the debate, all.

The argument for a big win
 

I honestly don't know exactly what Atrios is talking about, and since he's far to my left I'm not sure I'd be able to explain it to the likes of the Right.

What I did a poor job of describing is that I have read a few articles that homeland security types are hassling voter registration in Hispanic neighborhoods and outside of naturalization ceremonies for new Hispanic citizens. In other words, not cracking down on Hispanics in general (this is not a profiling issue) but rather voter registration. Here's an article from the WaPo, although it is not the one that i read at the time.

Those protesting asked the good question of why would voter registration be a target for homeland security law enforcement activities. Some (including Atrios, I would suppose) think it's setting the stage for such a voter fraud charge, as in "the huge number of illegals we found by staking out the voter registration table indicate that there was more widespread fraud."

I agree the charge is shrill, and even based on the above is probably excessive. I was just observing that it wasn't necessarily the gratuitous "Bush is a Nazi"-type insult you see on the lefty blogosphere, and probably had a place in a blog post predicting a protracted partisan fight after the election.

.... Meanwhile, the books burn.
 

Lyyne Cheney orders destruction of Dept. of Education booklets. Nice.

Rumour has it that the books were "destroyed" on the front lawn of the Naval Observatory in DC, with kerosene and a match. The Vice President was also reported to be in attendance, although the shadows cast by the flickering light of the bonfire, and the obscuring of his features by the tall upward collar of his black robe, caused reports on the sighting to differ.

Seriously, I wonder what the reaction would be if something like this were to have occurred at any time during the Clinton Administration.

Since we're talking about domestic issues ....
 

I'd like to see the actual numbers since - as you are well aware - "cut spending" has become shorthand for "reduce increases in spending"