Browse By

Unity08 Fibber of the Day: Martin J. Longo of Marlborough

Congratulations, Unity08! You are already bringing Americans into politics, helping them, er… fraudulently claim authorship of letters to the editor that they didn’t really write at all. Oh, dear, that’s not so good, is it?

Yes, with its request that “that you write, type, or cut/paste the following letter to the editor of your local newspaper,” Unity08 has convinced Martin J. Longo to submit the following letter to the Framingham, Massachusetts MetroWest Daily News with the false claim that he is the author of it:

America will be in trouble if it doesn’t act quickly on the crucial issues before us – the economy, education, energy dependence, the environment, health care, immigration, terrorism, and more.

I am a member of a movement called Unity08 that will bring our politics back to common ground and elect leadership to the White House that will actually lead.

Politics as we know it – politics as usual – is over. Unity08 will provide access to information, discussion, and decision-making tools that will change politics forever. And just in time. Eight of every 10 Americans think Washington is so polarized that it is paralyzed. The 2008 election is a moment of truth.

Unity08’s new approach will: 1) Enable Americans to rank our most crucial issues. 2) Force the candidates to address those crucial issues. 3) In June, empower all Americans to choose a bipartisan ticket in a secure vote online. 4) In November, elect the Unity08 Ticket to our nation’s highest office.

Unity08 combines our oldest values and our newest technology to reactivate the American community. And then, America can be a proud country again, worthy of inspiring both our children and the world.

As a member of Unity08, I invite you to learn more about our movement at ( Please feel free to direct any questions to me or


Congratulations, Martin! Every single word of that letter of “yours” was actually written by a hack in Unity08’s corporate P.R. division! Not a single, solitary word was written by you. Oh, I take that back. You wrote “Martin J. Longo.” The name is yours. Or was. Now your name belongs to Unity08. The rest is written by a Unity08 operative, and now you’re a Unity08 sheep, branded and everything.

Yes, the Sheep of the Day award goes to you, Martin J. Longo! Keep it up, and you’ll get exactly the government you deserve. Let out a big “Baaaaaaa” for us. Baaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

26 thoughts on “Unity08 Fibber of the Day: Martin J. Longo of Marlborough”

  1. Zerwick says:

    Actually, it looks like he re-structured. He turned the enumerated points of Unity08’s approach into a single paragraph, rather than spacing them all out. Or was this stylistic choice the work of the MetroWest Daily News? We may never know for sure…

    That sheep is BOOKIN’, by the way…

  2. Joseph says:

    So Jim,
    As I asked in response to an earlier post, and you ignored by resorting to “well, they are evil…so lets just point out how they are evil instead of answering the question”

    What do you propose people do? Even if Unity08’s run by horrible people, how do you expect progressive goals to be accomplished? Electing Clinton? Or would you prefer Romney? After all, it’s not like either of them are so detached from the American people and so tied up in an elitist power structure that they are going to sell out as soon as they enter the White House….no way.

    So yeah, what do you propose people do? I see Unity08 as a chance to try SOMETHING to fix the problem and actually get a good candidate in the White House. What do you think is going to fix it? Who exactly do you want to win the election? Because bashing something new, that should work regardless of the motiviations of its leaders, doesn’t seem like it’s going to fix the problems in our government. And just to emphasize: *it should work regardless of the motivations of its leaders*.

    So, to sum up, so there’s no confusion as to what exactly I dont understand:

    1. What do you think people should *do* (not “not do”) to get a progressive candidate elected to the White House?
    2. Who would such a candidate be?
    3. If such candidate does not get the Democratic (or republican…ha ha) nomination, why would you not want people to vote online to have them placed on the ballot by Unity08?

  3. Zerwick says:

    I’m sure Jim will have his own response to Joseph (I’ll give you your name without the quotations, just for sake of cordiality) but I just wanted to make the following observation:

    It seems like the argument you’ve restated above is sort of confusing the issue. You emphasize: *it should work regardless of the motivations of its leaders*, and claim that people like Jim are hurting themselves by closing off this new avenue of democracy. But that’s almost like saying you should give your credit card information to any company who offers you a free gift in return. The company wants your information for unethical purposes, but using your rationale the relationship could still be manipulated for your own personal benefit. What you may not realize is that anytime you enter into such a transaction with ANY organization you are explicitly validating that organization and everything it stands for.

    I’ve been on the fence about Unity08, and I like Jim’s posts because they play devil’s advocate to the idealism in my mind. And I’m not necessarily comparing Unity08 to an online sweepstakes company — although the social configuration Joseph asserts is similar. But just as everyone has the right to give or withhold their personal info from anyone they choose, we all, too, have the right to participate or withdraw from the democratic process (any of them!). In the last election I didn’t vote at all because I was frustrated, and felt like the frustration was clouding my ability to view the election properly. I cannot take part in a national election if I disagree with the operative principles of that nation; NOT voting is a subtle (but explicit) form of protest, as I believe Kundera illustrated. And so, say what you will but those who feel that Unity08 is flawed shouldn’t simply ignore the flaws and try to use that system for their own gain. That makes them no better than the flaws they perceive in the system itself.

  4. Jim says:

    Gee, “Joseph,” if people don’t like Democrats, or Republicans, the only alternative is Unity08? No. There are other third parties out there. Some of them aren’t run by corporate PR executives who do the exact opposite of what they say.

    Plugging up the bungholes of every American with sealing wax would also be “a chance to try SOMETHING to fix the problem.” But that doesn’t make it a good idea, does it?

    I think people should do whatever the hell they want. I also think people should be informed. And that’s why I write about Unity08.

    Zerwick, I like what you wrote.

  5. Ralph says:

    Plugging up the bungholes of all Americans with sealing wax?

    Well, I guess we’ve got to do SOMETHING!

    How dare I be unpatriotic in our hour of need, just because it’s a stupid idea?

    As Dan Rather said in 2001, tell me what to do and where to sign up, and I’m there!

    Invading Iraq was SOMETHING to do, wasn’t it?


  6. Anonymous says:

    I suspect “Joseph” sees Unity08 less “as a chance to try SOMETHING to fix the problem” than as a vehicle to rake in a piece of the pie–the millions of dollars candidates spend on PR firms every election.

    I’ve got a better idea–if you’re willing to try anything, send your money to ME.

    Zerwick, let me point out it is the Republican Party that is helped by a low voter turnout. If you did not vote in the last election, you helped elect Bush.

    I have never stopped to think of how I might use not voting as a kind of “subtle explicit protest”. I consider it my duty as a citizen to educate myself on the issues to the best of my ability and vote.

  7. Joseph says:

    Zerwick makes some excellent points about Unity08 and my argument. I guess you’re right, people shouldn’t support something that they think is intrinsically flawed, as a general principle. The problem I see though, is that just by being American citizens and paying taxes, we are supporting our elected officials. They aren’t harmed by Americans not voting, or not caring, or being frustrated. They can just keep on running the country into the ground and our election system won’t do anything to fix it, and the fact that people are fed up just reinforces it.

    I do figure that in the end, attacking Unity08 will end up closing off another avenue of democracy, so that in the next election millions of people will be frustrated with their choices and simply not vote. The worst that can happen if every single person in America signs up for Unity08 and votes for a candidate to be on the ballot is that then there are 3 (serious) candidates on the ballot and then people vote for the one they like the best out of three instead of two.

    I also agree with Jim in that “just doing something” isn’t necessarily the best, and that there may be other 3rd parties that are better choices. The problem is, which one? Unity08 may have lobbyist/coporate money, but maybe that’s the only way that a third party can ever break into the electoral system is with some money. Which other third party has a snowball’s chance in hell of getting a Presidential candidate elected? I just want to hear something positive, that actually implies that there’s a real, concrete chance of fixing our government. I agree that it’s selling out and sad and on some level wrong to use a tool that you don’t agree with (such as Unity08 being run by illegitimate interests), and that there are other options, but it doesn’t seem like doing what we’ve been doing is going to fix anything, and it doesn’t seem like the other 3rd parties have a shot. So it seems to me (and I know there are probably other options that would be great to discuss that you may have, I can personally just think of these three that seem to be realistic for most americans) that there are the following options:

    1. Do what’s already been done, hope it works this time and politicians fix themselves.
    2. Support a third party that doesn’t have the organizational structure or money to even be a footnote in the election; throw away time, efforts, and votes, as has also been done before.
    3. Support a third party that resembles a lot of what’s wrong with the current system, but a party that has the money and structure to possibly puy good third party candidate on the ballot. Hope that trying something different may work, even though it seems as bad as the old system.

    It’s sad that so many people don’t vote or don’t become educated enough to vote. It’s also sad that less than 30% of our population will decide our next President. I’m not planning on giving Unity08 money, but if they get a tool to allow me to get a third option on the ballot that might actually not be a slave to the same interests as the Dems and Reps, i’ll give it a shot to vote for em with Unity08 and then in the General election. I definitely side with option #3 above, if only because it’s more likely to fix the system than the other two options….

  8. Ralph says:

    Doesn’t seem like the other alternative parties have a shot?

    And Unity 08 does?

    With no candidate, no policy positions, and so many organizational problems this late in the game?

    Be serious.

  9. J. Clifford says:

    Since when does free speech about a political organization close off avenues of democracy, Joseph?

    What kind of cockamamie concept of democracy do you have that you think that it takes place only if nobody ever criticizes anybody or anything?

  10. Joseph says:

    Look, if Jim’s right and they are loaded in money and a PR machine, then yes, they have a shot. If Unity08’s right and Americans are sick of the way politics is and like the idea of voting online, then yes they have a shot. Perot had a shot, and all he needed was money. Good money would say Bloomberg, if he dropped a few million, would have a shot. The other parties do not have a shot. They are seen as simply “spoilers” for any election. As for “late in the game” it’s OVER A YEAR UNTIL THE ELECTION and they aren’t running a candidate until next summer sometime.

    As for closing off avenues of democracy, I’m not saying the speech itself closes off the avenues, but that discouraging others from participating in any possible way of exercising their ability to vote to determine candidates and choices for the upcoming election is closing off avenues of democracy (i.e. Unity08, since (if it works) it gives people the option of both voting in their party’s primary and in a primary where you arent stuck choosing between a Dem/Rep).

    Sure, if Unity08 doesn’t work and falls apart, then the point is moot. But assuming it actually happens, telling people NOT to vote is telling them not to participate in part of our democracy.

  11. Anonymous says:

    I keep hearing all this U08 rhetoric about the government being “broken” spouted without question. I think someone needs to question it.

    What’s with all this nebulous “fed up” “running the country into the ground” “frustrated with their choices” “fix the system” stuff? It sounds like the PR tripe Unity08 sticks all over its front page. But what is supposed to be broke? Why are people supposed to be frustrated? None of this is ever spelled out, but people seem to be willing to repeat these U08 lines without even thinking.

    This sounds a lot like the film Network where one guy with media access was able to get everyone in America to yell “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore,” then throw their televisions out the window. So why be mad as hell or frustrated or whatever Unity08 is telling people they’re supposed to be? What, specifically is the original problem that everyone thinks U08 is going to solve?

    The only problem U08 seems to have identified is the influence of lobbyists. But when in human history have the wealthy not had a disproportionate influence on policy? The antidote for that, of course, is sunlight. Transparency. The major political parties have to disclose the sources of their funds. But Unity 08 has dragged its feet, because they have very clever lawyers who can bypass the laws by keeping the courts tied up with lawsuits that let them hide the sources of their money.

    I happen to think the country is just fine, the system is just fine, the constitution is just fine, the voters will keep tweaking the system, and the worm will slowly turn.

    If someone is unhappy, let them get a teddy bear.

  12. J. Clifford says:

    But see, “Joseph”, that IS saying that free speech discourages democracy. You’re saying that criticism of political organizations discourages people from participating in those organizations.

    What you’re NOT saying (big unspoken premise) is that it’s VALID criticism of politicial organizations that discourages people from participating in those organizations. Invalid criticism discourages people only if they’re unintelligent and don’t take the work to inform themselves of relevant information. Amongst intelligent, dedicated citizens, invalid criticism energizes support.

    So, is Unity08 trying to appeal to people who can’t tell the difference?

    We are NOT telling people not to vote. We are providing people with information that will lead an intelligent citizen not to participate in Unity08. BIG difference, “Joseph”. Unity08 is not the USA. Unity08 is a corporation. It is not our civic duty to support Unity08 without question.

  13. Joseph says:

    In my mind, the problem Unity08 is trying to fix is this one, expressed by Zerwick:

    “In the last election I didn’t vote at all because I was frustrated, and felt like the frustration was clouding my ability to view the election properly. I cannot take part in a national election if I disagree with the operative principles of that nation; NOT voting is a subtle (but explicit) form of protest, as I believe Kundera illustrated. ”

    To be kind to context, he continues and states that he thinks that flaws with Unity08 should be discussed, and expressed, and people shouldn’t use Unity08 if they have problems with it. But his statement of frustration is exactly what I feel about politics. To be specific, it’s not only the influence of money that makes me mad, but the fact that we’re going to have two bad choices for President come February, each of which was chosen by less than 20% of United States citizens.

    Obviously, i’m not saying that FREE SPEECH discourages democracy. I’m saying that CRITICISM of POLITICAL AVENUES closes off THOSE AVENUES of DEMOCRACY. “Free Speech” is not the same as “Criticism”. Additionally, think about all of the people who choose not to vote in US elections. Why would you not vote, when you’re educated from a young age that it’s how you exercise democracy? Popular theory is that they don’t think their vote will change anything. Why do people not think their vote will change anything? Because they’ve heard plenty of criticism (valid or invalud) of the system that leads them to believe that no matter WHO they vote for, the new politician is just as bad as the old. The solution to this is NOT to stop criticizing people or organizations, but the solution is to have a vision of how to actually fix this issue and give people a way to run the country.

    Pointing out the problems with Unity08 is a good thing to do, it improves communication, but it’s not BALANCED. If Unity08 isn’t the solution, what is? No one here states that. If Unity08’s “online voting” is a good idea in theory, but it has flaws that need to be worked out, why not state that? All i’ve seen are posts attacking Unity08, various politicians, viewpoints, anyone who sent a letter helping Unity08, etc. That’s not going to HELP our democracy, it’s going to make some readers think there is NO SOLUTION and then NOT VOTE, which is the exact thing that I would hope we’re trying to prevent.

  14. Iroquois says:

    So that means it IS our civic duty to support the US government without question? And from now on, youse guys are gonna keep your mouths shut? This I gotta see.

  15. Jim says:

    “Free Speech is not the same as Criticism.”

    Interesting idea, Joseph. Go ahead, dive right in to Unity08, you’ll fit right in.

    The solution, by the way, is for people to stop checking their minds at the door, read, think, speak freely (not just free as long as you don’t say upsetting things), listen, and act independently of team and tribe when team and tribe are going the wrong way.

    “Unity” is what you’ll hear cried when someone wants you to put your brain to sleep, and it is a sign that you should wake it up.

  16. Ralph says:

    “‘Free Speech’ is not the same as ‘Criticism.'”


    What kind of free speech do you have without the right to criticize?

    “Pointing out the problems with Unity08 is a good thing to do, it improves communication, but it’s not BALANCED.”

    It’s quite well balanced, actually.

    If anything, it’s overbalanced by the mainstream press puff pieces on Unity 08 that have been floated in the mainstream press.

    Nobody in the mainstream press has bothered to even ask basic critical questions:
    Has Unity 08 kept its own “Clean Money Pledge?”
    Why is Unity 08 suing the FEC?
    What caused the problems with Unity 08’s first online vote, and what is being done to fix it?

    No, the mainstream media have been throwing softball questions and puff pieces at Unity 08 without doing a lick of research or critical questioning.

    Is that “BALANCED,” Joseph?

    Have you complained to any of the major news networks that their almost universally sunny coverage of Unity 08 is not BALANCED?

    Why not?

    Oh yeah, because BALANCED is just another PR term you throw around in a way that is the precise opposite of its meaning. You quite clearly don’t have an interest in promoting BALANCED coverage of Unity 08, or you’d be pressuring CNN to run a piece based on Jim’s critical research to BALANCE the butt-kissing schlock it’s been running up to now.

    But when PR people say “BALANCED,” they don’t really mean BALANCED, they mean FAVORABLE.

    I for one am sick and tired of PR hacks twisting around the meanings of words until they mean the exact opposite of what they originally meant, then saying golly, the poor unwashed masses of America are too dumb to write their own letters, so I guess the only way we can involve them in the political process is by making them sock puppets, plagiarizers and dittoheads!

    Anybody else sick and tired of that?

  17. Joseph says:

    Okay, if everyone would please slow down and think a little before posting, this conversation would be a lot more constructive:

    “Free speech is not the same as criticism” is in reference to comments such as “Since when does free speech about a political organization close off avenues of democracy, Joseph?”

    I *never* argued “We shouldn’t have free speech. Free speech is bad, don’t have free speech in regard to Unity08.” My argument, when boiled down to its “basic level” is that instead of just presenting criticism, you should also be evaluating other aspects of Unity08. Constant criticism results in the same thing as negative ad campaigns in an election: PEOPLE WONT VOTE. They’ll just sit at home and NOT participate. By simply criticizing without offering in-depth analysis of the concept, you’re giving people negative sound-bites which are just as bad as the constant rosy perception that’s espoused in the media. I mean, really, entire blog posts devoted to “Look at this sheep who is doing what Unity08’s e-mail requested”. WTF?!? I’m not against free speech just because i’m critizing the biased nature of what you’re saying.

    The post ASSUMES that Unity08 is illegitimate and the entire premise is evil, just because those valid questions that were listed above haven’t been answered, and therefore supporters should be ridiculed. I hope there is a balanced story in the “popular” media that simply asks the same questions Jim has been asking. Maybe you should actually organize an effort to get a media outlet to ask those questions, instead of simply resorting to the same one-sided tactics that you accuse them of? At least that way you’re advocating a fix to a problem (lack of accurate information about Unity08), instead of just complaining because they haven’t answered your questions.

  18. Jim says:

    “The same one-sided tactics that you accuse them of?”

    Excuse me, Joseph?

    Am I engineering a campaign of plagiarist letter fraud?
    Am I a registered corporation?
    Do I take multi-hundred-thousand-dollar-loans while crying about the evils of big money?
    Do I hire lobbyists while pledging to get rid of lobbyists?
    Do I call a vote with choices limited to what’s already been decided, say every vote will count, then change the rules in the middle of the vote?

    “The same one-sided tactics,” my ass.

    Unity08 is a hugely funded bunch of well-connected, TV-broadcasted, puff-pieced PR professionals who are doing the Daily Show and Bill O’Reilly. I’m a guy with a keyboard who looks crap up. If Unity08 can’t handle one guy with a keyboard who looks crap up, then what the hell is it doing in politics?

    If you can name one concrete fact about Unity08 I’ve stated that is incorrect, name it here. Source your assertion that it’s incorrect. Then I’ll begin to respect you. Until then, I’ll treat you as just somebody in the public relations industry who’s trying to hide who he is, telling me to please stop telling the truth out loud. And no, in case you were wondering, I don’t respect that.

  19. Joseph says:

    By the way “Them” was referring to the mainstream media. NOT Unity08. I was saying you’re using the same tactics as the inaccurate, biased, and controlling media you try NOT to be.

    Have I claimed anything that you SAID was untrue? No. I’m claiming that what you IMPLY and therefore don’t need to stand behind MAY be untrue. I’ve never claimed to know the truth about Unity08, I just think they have a good idea on how to fix things. I’m just asking that instead of just being “a guy with a keyboard who looks crap up” why not be “a guy with a keyboard who looks crap up and then tries to fix the crap”. And, as a matter of fact, I’ve never asked you to stop “telling the truth” (although I don’t know how questions=the truth…it seems more like the absence of knowledge).

    I like reading your posts, and I think your questions are extremely valid. But i’m tired, and this applies to your posts and the popular media, of hearing “This candidate/idea/position sucks/or is good for X, Y, and Z. Now moving on…”. Either the media brings up problems with something without suggesting solutions, or states a positive case for something without pointing out flaws. I’ve seen your unanswered questions for Unity08 on here, and I’ve seen your annoyance at the popular media not delving deeper. So instead of repeating yourself

    1. Like the media does.
    2. Like a broken-record.

    How about writing posts asking people to write letters/e-mails/call Unity08 to ask the questions and/or media outlets and getting THEM to ask the questions.

    I mean, seriously, what if Unity08 actually turns out to be what they claim to be? An honest attempt to get people involved in the election using the internet? Would you still write multiple posts about individuals that are writing letters to media outlets about it, implying that Unity08 is corrupt?

    As for “Unity08 is a hugely funded bunch of well-connected, TV-broadcasted, puff-pieced PR professionals who are doing the Daily Show and Bill O’Reilly. “…maybe they are. But how does that mean that the process won’t work? Even if you’re right, they still aren’t the DNC or the RNC, and if they are telling the truth, they are advocating a much better option by having a third party on the ballot than what either the RNC or DNC are selling.

  20. Jim says:

    When you talk about what you think I’m implying, you’re talking about what you think. You’re having a conversation with your own head. Have that conversation with yourself. If you want to have a conversation with me, deal with what I actually do and actually say, please.

    I tried to talk to the Unity08 corporate leadership, beginning more than a year ago, much less aggressively than I do now. The only instances in which I’ve changed what Unity08 does have been through assertive confrontation — anything less, they ignore. Then, yes I’ve called a few media people. None followed up. If ANY media person wants to do ANY serious work on Unity08, a simple google search for “Unity08” will bring up links to the entire set of posts I’ve done on Unity08, right there, on the first page. I document my factual claims with source links. It’s all ready for a mainstream media person to process and turn into an article as soon as anyone in the mainstream media tries, which I’m confident they will if Unity08 ever gets its act together. Making that information available to anyone who wants to seriously look into Unity08 is my goal. I’ve achieved it, I think, and I will supplement it whenever Unity08 tries to pull another fraudulent trick like getting its PR releases put in newspapers under the pretense that they are actually letters to the editor written by ordinary citizens.

    If you think, after having read everything I’ve written about Unity08, that Unity08 is a good idea, then clearly I’m never going to reach you. So go enjoy yourself, give Unity08 staffers some money for their own large fee arrangements, and eat a Happy Meal.

  21. Ralph says:

    Why didn’t Jim try to contact the mainstream media about Unity 08?

    Go back and check his post from this February entitled “Time to Spread the Word on Unity 08.” (You’ll find it in the left hand column, under Categories: Unity 08.)

    Check the comments. Together, the writers and readers at Irregular Times contacted dozens and dozens of major news outlets, trying to get the story out. Nobody picked it up.

    Irregulartimes is up on the web. Google “Unity 08” and you’ll find their articles.

    But gee, not a peep from the mainstream media.

    Are we to believe they can’t find this information? Are we to believe that no one at a major news network has Googled “Unity 08” and spent five minutes perusing the results?

    Or does it have to do with the nice cozy relationships Unity 08 has with the press?

    You’ve got hundreds of powerful, well-connected people gushing and doing sunny puff pieces about Unity 08. And you’ve got one stay-at-home dad digging up the truth in his pajamas. Who do you pick on to try to get “BALANCE?” The one guy up against the whole system, of course!

  22. Iroquois says:

    In his pajamas? No! Say it isn’t so! I want to think Jim gets up and shaves every morning, puts on a clean, non-sweatshop t-shirt with a political slogan, (and those ethically produced sneakers) and is a fully put-together human being before he starts typing on his laptop while he referees the kids’ breakfast.

    Joseph, Jim does not “just present criticism”. He is an extremely meticulous researcher. You can read exactly what Unity08 says and follow the links to their website to see it for yourself. Then you can read the facts Jim has found, and follow those links to read that for yourself.

    You don’t have to rely on Jim’s opinions or his judgments. You can read the source documents for yourself and make your own judgments.

    If Jim wanted to be one-sided he wouldn’t link to their website so everyone could read it and he wouldn’t respond to their officials’ remarks here. You can still read all the comments the Unity08 officials have posted here, even though they have deleted numerous remarks of Jim’s from their own website.

    I follow most of the Jim’s links–because they tend to be interesting–and I have never found a link that doesn’t say exactly what Jim claimed it said.

    Joseph, you claim “they still aren’t the DNC or the RNC”–but how do you know that? They are so secretive about the sources of their money and equally secretive about where they stand on any issue. Ralph Nader’s campaign turned out to be largely funded by the GOP. Is it any coincidence that Nader’s third party was a “spoiler” party that siphoned votes away from the Democrats and helped elect a Republican president?

    I find your contention that people will just stop voting unless Jim stops digging up facts about Unity08 to be truly bizarre. Why would you expect people to vote for a pig in a poke? The time to dig up facts is before people start voting.

  23. shemp says:

    wow, you guys take yourselves pretty seriously, don’t you? everything comes out in the wash in the end. oh, its a viable option, oh, its full of lobbyists… whatever… people will hear little shouts here and there about why u08 is good or bad, they’ll make their decision to participate or not and the process will come to its logical conclusion, whatever that may be. In the meantime, it appears the need to know you’re right will continue to be more important than the actual issues. I expect both of you will still be arguing months after Hillary has taken office. : )

  24. Jim says:

    Yeah, see, we stopped arguing 11 days ago. Or do you just mean you don’t want anybody to disagree?

  25. Jim says:

    Do you have anything substantive you’d like to say about the matter, shemp? Or are you content with “whatever”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!