<donning asbestos suit, just in case>

You may have noticed that the campaigns of President Bush and Sen. John F.
Kerry have negotiated 32 pages of nit-picking rules for the presidential
debates that begin tomorrow. For example, the candidates are not allowed to use
note cards, and TV cameras cannot show "reaction" shots of the candidates.

As silly as these rules are, the rival campaigns also turned down some other
proposed debate guidelines during fierce behind-the-scenes negotiations. Here
is a partial list of the candidates' demands that were rejected by the other
side.

Bush proposals rejected by Kerry:

1. First choice for moderator: Rush Limbaugh. Alternate: Justice Antonin
Scalia.

2. The taller candidate must crouch continuously.

3. No questions about anything prior to 1975.

4. The third debate will take place on the deck of an aircraft carrier. Each
candidate is responsible for his own transportation to and from the event.

5. For national security reasons, the candidates are prohibited from uttering
any of the following words or phrases: Osama bin Laden, Iraq, deficits and
voting rights.

6. Three debates, three topics: Foreign policy, domestic policy, and the
sanctity of marriage.

7. A debate shall be interrupted if the President is summoned to a secure phone
to (a) declare war on countries that begin with vowels, or (b) congratulate
Ichiro Suzuki for breaking Major League Baseball's record for most hits in a
season.

8. The moderator shall address the Republican candidate as "Mr. Freedom
Fighter" and the Democrat as "Monsieur Flip-Flopper."

9. The studio audience will limit its reaction to warm applause after the
closing statements and spontaneous outbursts of "four more years!"

10. No Heinz ketchup in the Green Room.

Kerry proposals rejected by Bush:

1. First choice for moderator: Michael Moore. Alternate: Dan Rather.

2. Extra points for nuance.

3. In the event of a tie, the debate shall be settled by a jump ball.

4. The moderator shall address the Republican candidate as "You there" and the
Democrat as "Handsome."

5. The Democratic candidate's podium shall be adorned on the front with a
tasteful cluster of three Purple Hearts.

6. The equal-time rule notwithstanding, because the Democrat is a sitting
senator, he may declare a filibuster at any time.

7. A lazy Susan shall be placed on stage within reach of the Democratic
candidate for easy access to his various answers on Iraq.

8. The Democrat's podium will be equipped with x-ray technology to display
shrapnel in leg.

9. Consolation prize for the loser is a team of polo ponies.

10. No questions about anything after 1975.

Well, I smiled at it...
Vaney
to email, simplify...

"...details delight me, ramifications enchant me, distance no object..."
Lord Peter Wimsey

> <donning asbestos suit, just in case>

I'm sorry, Ms. Vane, but we can't flame you for that. Too even handed. --
and yet it's hard to post something in this group without *somebody* smokin'
you. <grin>

>> <donning asbestos suit, just in case>
>
>I'm sorry, Ms. Vane, but we can't flame you for that. Too even handed. --
>and yet it's hard to post something in this group without *somebody* smokin'
>you. <grin>
>
>

I once posted a (to me) *awfully* funny, vaguely Republican humor-piece on
another newsgroup - and *it* was a rebuttal to a nasty similar thing that was
pro-Dem - and man oh man did I get slammed. I mean hammered right down. Those
Dems just have no sense of humor

Oh well. Can't wait till this election is over, too much sensory overload!

All best,
Vaney
to email, simplify...

"...details delight me, ramifications enchant me, distance no object..."
Lord Peter Wimsey

-- and yet, Vaney me darlin', I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU, so I
have to defend the right to be obnoxious for all of the sides. <L>
All the best,
Daniel

Even *me*, the Reluctant Conservative?? <grin>

Vane
to email, simplify...

"...details delight me, ramifications enchant me, distance no object..."
Lord Peter Wimsey

"Vaney" <vanegirl@aol.complicated> wrote in message
news:20040930151510.23043.00001425@mb-m12.aol.com...
> Even *me*, the Reluctant Conservative?? <grin>

My dear Harriet,
The conservatives need the most help of all. It's more difficult to
protect people from themselves. <L> Truthfully, it depends on what one
means by "conservative." There is all the difference in the world between
tory conservative and Mussolini conservative.
All good things,
Daniel

"Dan McGown" <dmcgown@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:FpudnWJv5r2GQsHcRVn-pQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Vaney" <vanegirl@aol.complicated> wrote in message
> news:20040930151510.23043.00001425@mb-m12.aol.com...
>> Even *me*, the Reluctant Conservative?? <grin>
>
> My dear Harriet,
> The conservatives need the most help of all. It's more difficult to
> protect people from themselves. <L> Truthfully, it depends on what one
> means by "conservative." There is all the difference in the world between
> tory conservative and Mussolini conservative.
> All good things,
> Daniel

Dear Dan. I learn something new here most every day, usually not from what
is posted, but by double-checking what is posted. According to this bio of
Mussolini at http://gi.grolier.com/wwii/wwii_mussolini.html :

"... Like his father, Benito became a fervent socialist. ..."

And, to oversimplify just a little, isn't it the liberals who want a
government so big and humane that it can 'protect people from themselves',
while with conservatives it's 'every man for himself', believing this will
result in Adam Smith's Invisible Hand maximizing market efficiency?

-Fred

"> Dear Dan. I learn something new here most every day, usually not from
what
> is posted, but by double-checking what is posted. According to this bio
> of Mussolini at http://gi.grolier.com/wwii/wwii_mussolini.html :
>
> "... Like his father, Benito became a fervent socialist. ..."


Oh, sure, and calling the German version "National Socialist" makes
Hitler a liberal? At any rate, the point that I was making was not whether
Mussolini was a conservative, but rather that the label "conservative" has
been applied to everything from tories to fascists and that the label
conservative conveys no information whatever to me. I need to know what a
person actually believes and not what label is put on him or her.
For instance, in no modern usage of the word is W a conservative. His
policies are anti-states-rights, pro-large-deficit and pro-big government
and yet people who call themselves conservatives support him.
The label has no meaning anymore so I have to look at the policies
themselves.
Dan

As an example of what I mean, check out this page about the Canadian
"Progressive Tory Conservative Party"



http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Pro...anada#Ideology



This group has managed to contain factions that were liberal in their social
policy, but conservative in their economic policy ("Red Tories"),
conservative in both social and economic policy ("Blue Tories"), and were
conservative in both social and economic policy ("Neoconservatives.")



Whatever in the world does "conservative" even mean when applied with such
abandon?

Should have been:

This group has managed to contain factions that were liberal in their social
policy, but conservative in their economic policy ("Red Tories"),
conservative in both social and economic policy ("Blue Tories"), and social
conservatism and economic liberalism. ("Neoconservatives.")