As much as Chertoff's "gut" comment has amused us, there is this awful thought lurking at the back of my mind, what if he knows something? What if, the neocons are cooking up something to make the American people rally behind Bush again. Food for thought.

Got any idea how many votes Nixon lost just because of bad makeup at a televised Debate?

For a news caster to blow this non story up to such proportions they would have to pretend to know absolutely nothing about the effect of lighting on complexions.
Hair is hair, unless its sticking out in all directions or plastered with pomade it isn't that big off a factor, skin tones are a big factor in appearance on screen.
Makeup Artists get high dollar, and it is as much consulting as it is craftsmanship.

PS to last post
"Although people might think that makeup is reserved for people "who just want to look better" on TV or in film, in actual fact, makeup may be required to just retain a subject's normal appearance.

This is because the television and film processes to some degree can introduce (or make obvious) undesirable attributes to skin tones and features.
http://www.cybercollege.com/makeup.htm
"

Yowsa - blog back on top of the main page.  ?? is next and previous page gone too?  We can only hope.

Todd - great!!!! It's exactly how I feel.

A little bit of humor:

John F.Kennedy, when speaking of Richard Nixon:

"Mr. Nixon in the last seven days has called me an economic ignoramus, a Pied Piper, and all the rest. I've just confined myself to calling him a
Republican, but he says that is getting low."

off point:

Well hell. I am so embarassed.

Some of you may remember our discussing primary voting several weeks ago and California people were explaining the "open primary" approach.

Several of us Texans were wishing that we had that and were laughing about confusing the little blue haired ladies who man the polls.

I just now found out that Texas DOES have open primaries!! Has had them for years!!!

However, trying to find out when and where and how to vote took me almost an hour on the phone today.

The end result is that I will be working with the blue haired ladies at the polls.

I am SO embarassed. Steve in South Texas - do you remember these conversations?

Anyway - the question now is how best do I use that primary vote? During the General elections if by some miracle Ron Paul is the R nominee, he will have my vote. Otherwise, any D will have it. (I'm hoping it isn't Clinton but will vote for her rather than any other R than Paul.)

So - how do I vote in the primaries?

We could just skip the whole pretty boy, expensive beautification thing and vote for Bill Richardson.  If he spent $400 on that haircut, he got seriously screwed!

Sue from West Allis - Got ya! Keep the list going.  Rick Noreiga '08!!!!

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California

Pam
     W/O all the critcism and bashing conducted (by both of us) I do have a question for U. Imagine a middle east w/o US Millitary forces. Lets say a petition was sent and a bill was passed to dis- continue CENTCOM. What is you (honest) view of the middle east, and it's affect on the world in say the next 3-5 years.

K. Collins USN (Sent Monday, July 16, 2007 6:15 PM)

Kevin,

As promised, here is an honest reply to the question you posed above.  However, it is a very open-ended question, as there are too many unknowns. In addition, whether you agree or not, George W. Bush has done so much damage  to both our global credibility and morality, it’s very difficult to look to 3-5 years.  Also, with the horror he has created in Iraq, your question is also nearly impossible to answer.  It took me a while and I had to really think it through. There are so many unforeseen factors that is really isn’t a “fair” question; however, I did try my best to answer you honestly anyway. It was a challenge, and the real challenge was George W. Bush.


If the U.S. were to close its CENTCOM operations in the Middle East, it would likely increase its troop presence in Central Asia and East Africa.  In addition, the U.S. would undoubtedly accelerate its development of bases in Eastern Europe, in countries such as Rumania, Bulgaria, etc.

The vacuum created by our military departure from the Middle East would inevitably lead to some countries in the Middle East beefing up their own military arsenals.  Countries such as the U.S., Russia, China, France Great Britain and Germany would probably increase the sale of weaponry to many of the Middle Eastern countries, depending upon the political alliances that exist.  

The U.S. would act diplomatically to isolate what the U.S. regards as potential threats to our national interests as well as those of our allies.  Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Al Queda would be the primary targets.  The U.S. would also try to limit China and Russia from gaining further influence in the  Middle East.  

The U.S. would probably try to strengthen its relationship with France and would work to have NATO prepared to counter any military aggression from the above-mentioned targets.  Similarly, the U.S. would probably increase its reliance on the U.N. as a way of mitigating the negative affects from the closure of CENTCOM.

The relationship between the U.S. and Israel would be probably become even stronger, with additional grants of greater military assistance to the primary U.S. ally in the area.  Additional countries that the U.S. would focus on, with respect to military aid, would probably include Egypt, Jordan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Bahrain, Turkmenistan Tajikistan and Kazakhstan.  

Whether a U.S. closure of CENTCOM would have a beneficial effect on the Middle East is debatable, depending upon one's point of view.  One could argue that our huge military presence in the area is a significant factor in creating the increasingly large  number of terrorists in these Middle Eastern countries, who regard our presence as a defacto type of neo-colonialism and imperialism.  It could be argued that a reduced military presence by the U.S. might reduce this phenomen, although proponents of the U.S. presence would argue that are departure would only empower our stated enemies in the Middle East.  

The continued U.S. occupation of a Middle Eastern, Arabic country will probably increase the perception in the Middle East and around the world that the U.S. has more than strictly political motives at heart.  The oil reserves in the Middle East are of major importance to the U.S.  

If the U.S. closed CENTCOM operations in the Middle East, there would be a jockeying for power and influence in this area amongst the major powers in the world, as well as the regional powers of the Middle East.  How it would play out is not certain.  New political alliances might be formed.  The U.S. would still be heavily involved in the area, both diplomatically and politically.

Furthermore, the U.S. would continue its military spending build up to enhance
our "rapid response capabilities", in the event that events occurred in the
Middle East that might be construed as justifying U.S. military intervention.

The U.S. would make a huge diplomatic push to gain as many allies as possible in
the Middle East, and world-wide, a strategy that hasn't been a major priority of
the Administration of George W. Bush.  

Conclusion;  the drawbacks to our occupation of a Middle Eastern country
out-weigh the benefits of our military presence in that country.  Our presence
fuels hatred toward the U.S. and smacks of neo-colonialism and imperialism.

PEACE!!  

Jon edwards is my dream client. A hairdresser could only wish more people would spend more money on haircuts.

When Johnny Edwards drops out of the race will he sign a contract with Breck Hair care products? When the voters give Hill the boot will she be the new Jenny Craig poster girl? Will Dennis Koospinich take Cris Benoit's place at the WWE? Will Barhack Inane Osama buy a farm and grow watermelons? Will Joe "iman-a-ho" Biden return to his moonbattery recycling job? Can Cris "Maudd" Dodd expand the sales of his infamous "waitress" sandwiches? These questions and more must be axed and answered in the near future by the faux fawning masses of the lefty leapin leaners legions of lemmings.

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 5:22 PM)

Damn girl - you're on a roll today, aren't you.

Although I disagree with you on some of the particulars, I agree with your conclusion.

Well done.

Indie - you decide on your open primary vote before the election.  Depends on who's still in it when you vote.  Last presidential primary, Dean dropped out right before the Wisconsin primary (he was my choice up til then), so I needed to figure out who was next best.  Since the Pugs were only running BushCo, I ended up voting for Edwards.

If there's a clear winner for the Dems, it makes sense to cross over and vote in the other primary.  But again, you need to see who's still in the running.

It will be more clear as primary election day comes closer and we're still many months away from even the first primary.

Fortuna - I hope there is a serious contender for Cornyn's seat.  There's more than enough Senate Bush butt-kissing sound bites from him to make millions of ads against him.  I want him GONE.  Along with Norm Coleman, who has serious opposition in Al Franken.

Too bad your other shill Senator can't be up for re-election, too.

I'm making my List of Senators who Need to be Gone just as I did in 06.  Rick "fetus in a jar for the kids to play with" Santorum, George "macaca" Allen, Mike "corruption" DeWine, Jim "no talent" Talent, and Conrad Burns - bye bye.  The only survivor was Joe LIEberman, because, of course, he LIED.

I saw Susan Collins whining on CNN earlier today about how unfair it is that the Democrats are filibustering.  Where was her whine when her Pug buddies did the same thing?   She's up for re-election too (and her pal Joe LIEberman just held a nice fundraiser for her) and she just doesn't want to change her spots just yet.

Oh yeah, I forgot:  what the Dems do - bad;  what the Pugs do - just peachy, righteous, blessed by God, fair and balanced.  

Bobbie Sox Wanten Mo.

I am confused.  Faux means fake -- how can one be fake and fawning?

If you hadn't indicated that you were from Missouri, I would have sworn that you were from Brooklyn, where questions are 'axed'.  The rest of us use 'asked'.  

Were you, perchance, channeling Lewis Carroll?  Next time try "lefty leaning legions of leaping lemmings". As an insult, it makes more sense, what you wrote makes you look ignorant.  

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 5:47 PM)

LOL!! I disagreed with MYSELF on some of "the particulars"; however, I tried my best to take "myself" out of the writing to some degree to really analyze his question.

It was a most a difficult one considering all the unknowns.  I don't agree with the scenarios, i.e. our closer relationship with Israel; however, I do feel it "could" be a true outcome, as with some others.  I bet we "disagree" on the same ones – LOL!! Don't worry, I know we're still on the same page.

Thanks again!!

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 5:47 PM)

LOL!! I disagreed with MYSELF on some of "the particulars"; however, I tried my best to take "myself" out of the writing to some degree to really analyze his question.

It was a most a difficult one considering all the unknowns.  I don't agree with the scenarios, i.e. our closer relationship with Israel; however, I do feel it "could" be a true outcome, as with some others.  I bet we "disagree" on the same ones – LOL!! Don't worry, I know we're still on the same page.

Thanks again!!

I want to thank Pat in Boston for her information about Mr. Romney in her 11:34 am post. Damn...sounds like he just might be rich enough to buy an election and not have to worry about them pesky donations, making promises he won't keep to get donations, etc. A politician's dream...

Thanks again, Pat!

Carol, oh yes one can fake fawning and it is done best while "simpering" it takes practice. No, no, no, just before you jump....you lean...some lean but never jump....get it?

Impeach Bush and Cheney.

All these politicos having haircuts for hundreds of dollars, when they appear on the debates or elsewhere in front of a camera ; their hair doesn't look that spectacular? Does it? Who else agrees?

P
 Yoa made some good points and you did your homework, but you missed some areas that most internatioanl parties are addressing now, which is why a pull out ould complicate things. although the US Millitay is looked at as agressor in Iraq right now. It's also identified as a peace keeper in the area (these issues don't make headlines)
Past incidences (prior to Al-queda) required a US presence. Without it Isreal would cease to exist and Iran would be to sole Gulf Superpower witheyes focused @ Saudi Arabia. All arab nations hate Isreal, and at one point in time at least one official from each of her neighbors hve pledeged to destroy the country. Without a US and UN presence we would have witnessed another Arab-Isreali war. Conflict between other middle eastern states would also continue. (Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, India....etc) Countries like these and other view the US a millitay deterent in the area. One aircraft carrier in the gulf has more influence in controling violence than a hundred diplomats.

Something to think about

Mitt Romney is clearly a clown. Is this the best the Republicans have to offer?  I honestly think the Republican party is coming to an end, and not a moment too soon.

Keith never mentioned the $400 haircut, or the $1,250 dollar haircut that John Edwards charged, but he absolutely must talk about Mitt Romney.  Speaking of which, the charge of that make-up session was actually $150, but since his team booked for an extra session ahead of time that Mitt did not end up using, he still went ahead and paid the full $300.  I'm also pretty confident that Mitt Romney isn't the only one of the 20 Presidential Candidates who uses make-up.      

Jamie, Elmwood: No, Barack does not fit that category as well. He may have a lower and middle class history but somewhere along the line he lost that connection that keeps one a part of where they came from. He has graduated into the realm of a career politician and how I define a career politican dooms him as far as I am concerned.  

You can put lipstick on a pig but at the end of the day, you still have a pig except now it's a $300.00 pig.

No, Barack does not fit that category as well. He may have a lower and middle class history but somewhere along the line he lost that connection that keeps one a part of where they came from. - C A, Tuscaloosa, Al (Sent Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:31 AM)

C A - I disagree with this.  I sincerely believe both Senator Obama's upbringing and race, having a black father and a white mother, have positively genuinely grounded him.  

In my opinion, I see him as a man who has never left his roots and truly understands that Americans must play a role in the decision-making process in Washington.  I believe he is very down to earth and has not allowed his popularity or success to turn him into an egomaniac, as it HAS Rudy Giuliani. I also believe he is very sincere.

When he speaks, I listen and I also feel he is speaking with me not at me.

PEACE!!

Remember how John Kerry's spray on tan turned orange under the lights?

He should be asked about the secret handshake, also, did anyone notice that he kind of looks like a carved baked potato.

Amazing  really not a word in the MSM about Romney's hypocrisy (not just the hair but a 10 million dollar house in New Hampshire, btw twice the price of Edward's) while John Edwards gets creamed for 400 dollar haircuts and a 5 million dollar house. This reminds me of the "liberal media's" handling of John Kerry in '04. "Senator Kerry is light a wave or a particle?" See he can't make up his mind on that issue. Well Senator which is it wave or particle?  

"Amazing  really not a word in the MSM about Romney's hypocrisy (not just the hair but a 10 million dollar house in New Hampshire, btw twice the price of Edward's) while John Edwards gets creamed for 400 dollar haircuts and a 5 million dollar house. "
Because its not news worthy.
For what its worth my sister met Mrs Edwards in the course of her work years ago and she thinks the world of her.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):