Comments Posted By Rick Moran
Displaying 41 To 50 Of 1317 Comments
THE TOP TEN POLITICAL SPEECHES OF ALL TIME
Jim:
Thanks for the kudos. I probably should have posted it during the week so that it got a little more exposure.
But in the end, it's what I call a throwaway post - extremely easy to research and write. I already had 8 of the speeches before I started to research the speeches.
Jim Lion:
You are right about it being extremely important. The only problem is that Washington never gave it as a speech. It was published in every newspaper in the country. Since this was about oratory and the spoken word, I didn't include it.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 19.01.2008 @ 21:43
TELL US WHAT YOU REALLY THINK, MATT
Brad,my love:
I think I specifically targeted the "Stalinist mongrels" found at Sadly No and other cesspools on the internet.
Perhaps when you achieve a reading level above that of a second grader, you will notice things like that.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 17.01.2008 @ 22:43
FRED ON THE MOVE IN SC: IS IT ENOUGH?
Not much. But perhaps just enough to give Fred a litle boost.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 17.01.2008 @ 14:33
Fred went into South Carolina with a $1 million war chest. That's three times what McCain has to spend and twice what Huckabee has.
A strong second in SC probably won't help fundraising much but he will probably have enough to hit the panhandle with a lot of ads. That's where most of his support is and it might be enough to get him into second again - perhaps even better if Huckabee drops out after SC.
It is a very, very long shot. But McCain has no money going into Super Tuesday either and he's ahead in a lot of those polls. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 17.01.2008 @ 14:14
Sorry but most of you are wrong.
GOP voters are not "deciding" which candidate is best. They are, by every poll out there, disgusted with their choices and can't make up their minds which candidate they hate the least.
If you think that bodes well for November, you are going to be rudely surprised.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 16.01.2008 @ 11:50
I think I made it pretty clear that it was the MSM who had crowned McCain "Mr. inevitable."
As for McCain, he has tremendous support among vets of which South Carolina has the most in the nation. I agree though about the base. He only got 25% of the Republican vote in Michigan - pitiful.
Huckabee has self destructed with his stupid remark about amending the constitution based on "God's principles." Those votes go to Fred who fights it out with McCain and Romney for 1st.
Don't count Rudy out in Florida.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 16.01.2008 @ 09:38
McCAIN NOW CROWNED "MR. INEVITABLE"
Heh. Thanks for the correction.
Actually, I am running. I'm the candidate of the "Leave me the hell Alone" party.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 15.01.2008 @ 13:14
Yeah but none of them guys could hold a candle to bugs when it came to intellectualizin'. Dat bunny was da bomb.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 14.01.2008 @ 06:29
Bugs Bunny stole from a variety of sources including Casablanca, The Treasure of Seirra Madre, African Queen, as well as popular culture icons of the 40's and 50's.
I don't give a crap where it originated. Bugs Bunny said it in several cartoons hence, for the purposes of this post, it will be attributed to him.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 13.01.2008 @ 23:21
SOROS AND THE LANCET ELECTION HIT PIECE (UPDATE WITH A COMMENT FROM JOHN TIRMAN)
John’s clarification is definitive.
John's "clarification" is anything but definitive and as I point out, raises a helluva lot of questions about this man's integrity.
Read that Journal article for some absolutely devastating discoveries about how this study was carried out. How anyone can conclude that this was anything except scientific fakery in pursuit of a political goal is beyond me.
I am not going to take the time to discuss this - as I say in the article the numbers are painful enough without having to resort to the kind of chicanery Roberts et al did. But you are correct in making the distinction between the NEJM and Lancet studies as far as what the material covered. I never should have included the NEJM study as a comparative to the Lancet study.
Having said that, the one thing that stands out in Lancet that is debunked by the NEJM is the number of violent deaths. Lancet 1 placed the blame on "mostly US air strikes" as a cause of violent death. The pitifully small number of combat sorties (as pointed out by numerous milbloggers at the time) as well as the limited use of helicopters would seem to put the lie to that statistic.
No matter. Read the Journal article and come back and tell me how confident you are in the Lancet 2 findings.
Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 13.01.2008 @ 13:28
