Is anyone really surprised this happened? I can see stunned but can anyone really say they were surprised?

Also can anyone say the US wasn't involved in some way? The fact that Pakistan is just another US-backed dictatorship says more the not. Considering that the Musharraf regime is the third (or 4th) in the region behind Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and Saddam Hussain, the outcome really should surprise no one.

The W administration has turned its back on the old school method of "ousting and exile" and gone with the really old school method of mayhem, dead and war.

Looking at things from a purely pragmatic and US based point of interest -- the US has more to gain by having Musharraf in place then Bhutto.

Yet again, shit happens in a US-backed dictatorship. George W. Bush -- major league asswipe. The neo-cons around him -- little pieces of shit that have clung on. One can only hope karma pays back. And people wonder why the world despises the US.

...that's right. My bro says something like "Max, Vikings Packers" and if the kid farts long, it's the first team. If the kid doesn't fart or farts short, it's the second team. I have no idea of the accuracy but it's way more fun then actually watching the games.

So how about them Cal Bears King? Man they made a lot of old blues (and young ones too) crap their pants this year.

Tigers and animals shouldn't be in zoos. I'm an unusual or big animal rights person -- except to say they should be left alone and treated fairly -- but this is common sense. It's really not a hard concept to gather.

It's also nice to see some animal lovers not blame the dead kid.

If there's any element that's disturbing, it's the animal lovers who blame the dead kid and his buddies. Blaming the dead kid and his buddies is victim blaming -- "hey she deserved getting raped, she flirted with the guy".

I'm not sure if this attitude is a symptom of a sad, sick society, plan ignorance or if some animal lovers just can't relate to people. Whatever the case, it's sub-human, and what many people see as the contradiction of the animal right movement.

...or is it the right wing pundit-mongers manufacturing more horse crap in their hate for all things HRC or wanting a BO match-up (read hidden race card to be played often and heavy)?

I don't know but no one should be shocked HRC won, they should be wondering why it was a close margin.

BTW, if I was a real paranoid right wing nut job I'd be spilling that HRC stole it, along the lines of GWB in 2000...oh wait, they're waiting to use that card when it's time.

The only thing I can say on the positive side is Romney or McCain will be crushed by any Democrat. The jig is up.

P.S. there needs to be a "pundit free zone".

That's really it.

If Clinton's campaign tried to block polling at job sites that have a heavy Latino staff, Obama's campaign is simply returning the volley.

Also, a little insight, casinos are de facto social centers given the growth of LV and the infrastructure. Hell seniors go to casinos to read books in the air conditioning and not gamble. They'll be using the polling, as will workers of all backgrounds.

If nothing else the polling question/debacle here is an indictment of the U.S. voting system...i.e., why does the U.S. still insist on a single Tuesday and not two days over a weekend? It's simply astounding that tradition prevents better democracy.

Ironically, traditionally it has been the GOP who have tried to limit voting times/place access (see Renquist in AZ). This doesn't speak well of the Clinton campaign trying to shut down 9 precincts. In fact it looks like the same sh*t, same color...different party. If that's the case -- expect a return volley.

Rebecca Traister wrote:

"Where do they get these people?" "Who is dumb enough to be undecided this close to an election?" "Do they not read newspapers?"

[...]

"I have no idea who I'm going to vote for."

------

Irony and angst, funny how that works. Well at least RT is human and trying to make an informed choice.

Ultimately however you vote for:

1) who has your best interest in mind

2) who has the country's best interest in mind

3) who thinks the most like you

4) who looks the most like you

The angst comes with these compete against each other, or you can't intellectually or emotionally make choice or distinction between these.

I'm voting for Barack Obama. I knew this once he announced despite unknowns. If he doesn't get the nomination, I have no problem voting for HRC what so ever because #1 and #2 are at stake vis-a-vis a Republican.

If #3 and/or #4 pulls you, go for it. However when November rolls, vote Democrat regardless of who.