Ginger Gargoyle's Gems

Tanya Rogers (I think that's her name) was doing some analysis of the candidates body language and she was saying that (a)Hillary still believes in the 'vast right-wing conspiracy' based on her eye movements from her recent interview on 'Meet the Press' (episodes available on iTunes in both audio & visual forms)....(b)Mrs Obama--didn't catch her name--is the person running the show because she put her hand on the front of the podium she was speaking at....(c)Huckabee was uncomfortable when challenged by Thompson in the debates--well-DUH! But the one that really pisses me OFF to no end is that she said (d)Thompson doesn't have good enough facial expressions to be president.

What the HELL is going on with the media trying their best to knock him out of the race? He is prebably the candidate who is the closest to the "Reagan" era republican which everyone seems to say they want==yet they are trying to knock him out of the race?

I can't figure out who they want anymore.
They don't like McCain because he is too bipartisan for them...I've heard them called the Oreo-Republican (republican outside, democrat inside). They don't like Guliani because he keeps running just on 9-11...and yes he is a one-note candidate. They don't like Huckabee because he is more democratic than any other candidate-even some of the democrats. They don't like Romney because he is either mormon or because he has flip-flopped on so many issues. They don't like Ron Paul because....well, he just comes off as nuts (sorry to all you supporters out there, but he does). Now they don't like Thompson either because he's got that basset-hound face (I think its kind of cute actually), and he isn't a screamer or attacker...geez, he gets his licks in-he just doesn't seem to do as much muds slinging as the others (oh no, a politician that actually wants to talk the issues--whatever shall they do???)

I probably hear more touting of Edwards as president lately in the press than anyone else. I'm serious! The first 6 months of this crap you hardly ever heard a word about Edwards and now you are hearing him being mentioned left & right.

Okay...So what i would love for any single candidate to say once--just ONCE--is that the whole mortgage fiasco (and they are all talking about it as a Bush policy) was actually a push by politicans to get the working poor into homes....in fact they pushed so hard that they failed to make it clear to these people that they would have to face higher mortgages over time without a ceiling to it.

I have a feeling that a lot of these loans were explained in a rather "iffy" manner such as....okay you pay 1% on the loan for the first 5 yrs and then you will have to pay the current rate...right now its 6%.

Now i can see where some people would see this as saying "when it balloons up you will have to pay 6%" instead of "at the current rate" (which is what 8%? which doesn't seem like a lot but some are set up so they have to pay the deferred interest as well so it can nearly double).

I'm going somewhat a stray here....but basically I want a candidate that will tell the whole TRUTH.

Things like--yes we got the intelligence wrong, they meant to say "Iran" but we head "Iraq"; we know where Osama is but we don't dare go after him because its a "friendly" nation that is harboring him; Bush is a lot smarter than he appears to the public (that would be very shrewd of him); or how the UN was using the Iranian matter as a form of 'blackmail' against the US for the bill they say we owe them.

That's what the people want to hear....but if they hear it, they will lose confidence in the national authority and then we are ripe for the picking.

while we have people who don't believe the government....we have enough people who are willing to go with the crowd and follow the rules that society holds its cohesion....if however you get enough who begin to question the structure which defines what our society is--well ou end up with the late 60's-early 70's...the nation nearly tumbled into anarchy! So what changed our country?

I truly believe it was the Bicentennial. Hey it was a big two year celebration...and it was something people could stand behind no matter their race, religion, gender...because as a whole things got better for everyone...even homosexuals--okay things weren't great, but they were a lot better than they had been.

So who is likely to tell us the truth? hmmmm.
hmmmmm.
hmmmmmm.

The nut-case? well kind of, he gives partial truths.