August 2006 Weddings
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: A question for conservatives
1. Yes they insinuated he's someone to be feared, no they didn't insinuate he's a terrorist.
2. Yes I agree that he's someone worthy of being feared. Obama's politices are scary, as are his connections. You can attempt to deny Ayers all you want but Obama has a history of extreme associations and Ayers is only the latest and greatest of these. Even putting aside the fact that Ayers is a terrorist, he's - today - a radical socialist who thinks education is a vehicle for socialist/communist revolution. That is scary and it at the very least deserves scrutiny.
3. Yes
4. I'm laughing that you think we'd actually care about "traditionally conservatives newspapers" endorsing Obama. When Heritage endorses Obama then you'll have something to talk about. Until then no one on the right gives a sh!t about newspaper endorsements, especially when it's just the editorial department. We spend every election with virtually every newspaper in the country endorsing the liberal. I've read most of the conservative individuals' endorsements and they're as empty as Obama's campaign. One guy says he's voting for him b/c he ran a better campaign. Great! What does that have to do with running the country? Another says Obama is "cool under pressure." Huh? These endorsements have nothing to do with Obama's beliefs or policies. One endorsement actually said he doesn't think Obama will enact the policies he's running on. Why would that kind of endorsement sway anyone?
Really?
I realize that Wiki isn't always the best source, but I think they're doing a pretty good job of tracking endorsements. This year, a number of papers who endorsed Bush in 2004 have endorsed Obama, including Wisconsin State Journal, Chicago Tribune, Salt Lake Tribune, New York Daily News, Austin American-Statesman, and the Houston Chronicle.
According to Editor & Publisher, in 2004 John Kerry got 213 newspaper endorsements and George W. Bush got 205. I'd hardly call that "virtually every newspaper in the country." Care to revise your statement?
The Salt Lake Tribune? Wow that changes everything.
I wonder why Texas newspapers supported Bush? Puzzling!
Kerry got 213 endorsements in 2004; Bush got 205. Do you still stand by your statement that "virtually every newspaper" endorses the liberal?
I don't expect someone who has made up her mind to be swayed by newspaper endorsements. I'm sure that every single newspaper in the country could endorse Obama, and you'd still vote for McCain. But to say that "virtually every newspaper" usually endorses the liberal flies in the face of those peksy little things we call facts. THAT was what I took issue with in your post, and that's why it was the only line I quoted.
(The point of naming those papers was that they are conservative papers supporting Obama. As for papers in Texas supporting Bush, I think you'll find it has less to do with him being from Texas and more to do with them being conservative, hence the Dallas Morning News endorsing McCain this year.)
Virtually every big newspaper endorses a liberal. I really don't give a crap that some Dallas newspaper endorsed McCain. I've never heard of that newspaper until your post. The elite media, the NYT of the country, almost always endorse liberals, so conservatives like me just tune out about this time of the election season.
The Chicago Trib endorsed a dem for the first time in something like 150 years. It's a little laughable to suggest that all papers endorse the liberal every time.
In any case, paper endorsements do matter for some, not all, readers, particularly to those people still deliberating. I will use myself as an example. My paper just endorsed a candidate running mayor in a very divisive and contentious campaign in my town. Since I am completely on the fence as to who to support, I found the endorsement helpful (read: not dispositive) in my decision making process.
Alright then. Please don't ever accuse liberals of being "elitist" after that statement.
You said that "virtually every newspaper" in the country always endorses the liberal. I didn't realize that "virtually every newspaper" excluded papers like the Dallas Morning News, which has a readership of 1.5 million.
Perhaps you should have revised your statement to say that "virtually every major, elite newspaper" always endorses the liberal and then offered up a definition of a "major, elite newspaper." You refer to "the NYT of the country," but there really aren't any papers comparable to the NYT. Washington Post and... and... who? MAYBE L.A. Times, which endorsed Obama in its first presidential endorsement since 1972, and Chicago Tribune, which made its first-ever Democratic endorsement.
Here's a little more evidence for you: newspapers have endorsed Obama 3-to-1 over McCain, but Kerry only got 8 more endorsements than Bush in 2004. Of course, there are still two weeks for other newspapers to endorse, and I wouldn't be surprised if the margin closes some in the coming days.
Again: I'm not trying to say that you should change your vote because newspapers are endorsing Obama, but it's just FACTUALLY WRONG to claim that Obama is getting all these endorsements just because most papers usually endorse the liberal.
Are you really debating me over my characterization of the media? It must be a slow news day if you feel the need to compare endorsement numbers. When I made my statement I was referring to the large newspapers. Excuse me for not being specific. I wrongly assumed most Americans don't give a sh!t who the Sterling Heights Sentries of the country endorse.
Other than the Chicago Tribune none of the endorsements is a surprise. Do you think the LATimes is right wing? How 'bout the Washington Post? They endorsed Gore in 2000. How about other major market non-Texan papers that have an obvious self-interest in getting their governor to the White House. The Detroit Free Press, USA Today, Boston Globe, Minneapolis Star Tribune? How many of those are right wing? Here's a list of the top 50 newspapers in terms of circulation. After all the endorsements are in we can get back to debating how "evenly split" the endorsements are.
http://nyjobsource.com/papers.html
I'm glad you're not telling me to change my vote b/c I would never rely on editorialists to decide my vote for me.