• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Skin2Skin

Profile Information

  • Location Phila. Suburbs
  • Gender Female
  • Springsteen fan since? 1973
  • Does Mary's dress wave or sway? waves
  • Sex? Female

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ 0
  • Yahoo ladydi_w

Recent Profile Visitors

32,550 profile views
  1. Van Zandt keeps digging his hole.

    Since I agree with Steve on Israel, I am pleased he said what he did. Things are very scary in GB right now with anti-Semitism in the Labour party (masquerading as anti-Israeli sentiment--nothing new there). Sick and damn tired of so called progressives pissing all over Israel. Israel is far from perfect, but the level of hate for that embattled country speaks to something very dark.
  2. US Presidential Race Potpourri Thread

    Feel free to defend the merits of Dennis Hastert and Mitch McConnell. I can certainly do so with FDR, specifically dealing only with his third and fourth terms (since his first two terms pulled this country out of a depression, which I can't imagine you'd say was good for the US). 1) Kept America out of war until we were attacked 2) Got Lend-Lease bill passed, assisting other countries to fight against the Axis powers 3) When the US was attacked, mobilized the country for war with unparalleled efficiency and kept spirits high 4) Satisfied the country sufficiently to be elected to unprecedented 4th term (either he was doing a good job or the American people were idiots--take your pick) 5) Along with other countries, won the second World War AND brought us back to a most prosperous status after the Depression and other GOP gifts-- Peace and prosperity, baby. AND--bonus points 6) Was never found to have molested children under his charge (unlike Dennis Hastert)
  3. That's just to get in--not to actually see anyone on stage. If I want to look at screens all night, I can do that at home. And pick my setlist.
  4. Concert ticket prices for big names are now as outrageous as the amount of money CEOs receive in relation to the average worker. I am fortunate in that, with Bruce as the exception, I prefer going to small venues and seeing acts that aren't "big names," but big talents that speak to my aesthetic sensibilities.
  5. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters.

    And if you think I am mischaracterizing, this is a direct quote from someone with whom I generally agree: "While the media loves the why is Hillary struggling storylines, while they love to tell you she is not good on the campaign trail and there is no enthusiasm for her candidacy, she has simply gone out on the campaign trail and kicked ass. She has connected with people on the trail and has generated enthusiasm for her candidacy."
  6. US Presidential Race Potpourri Thread

    FDR is the exception. The rule is the Dennis Hasterts and Mitch McConnells of the world.
  7. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters.

    Are we arguing around each other? I think we are, and that causes me chagrin. The Clinton campaign lost the moral high ground when they accused the Sanders campaign of things they didn't do, not when they expressed concern about the things four staffers did. You are 100% correct that some Sanders fans are expressing unhappiness with the rules of a game already in play. They would argue that this isn't a game. Oh, to be that young. But they're a little bit right on that. HRC is legitimately winning the nomination and anyone who argues that is desperate beyond reason. I simply don't agree that HRC is a barn-burner candidate who has set the people on enthusiastic fire. There are numerous differences between Sanders and Obama, but the only pertinent one is that Obama and his team understood the way each state counted delegates and did a better job at shoring up votes than HRC. I think the Sanders campaign simply doesn't have the numbers when it comes down to voters--they have executed brilliantly, but the majority of Democrats are supporting HRC. That's what I think. I could be wrong. (I also think the Clinton campaign in 2008 was badly run--she could have won and may have had the majority of voters. She did not, however, win. How is that for sporting?) I am not saying we was robbed. That Sanders has been beaten is something I accepted before it actually happened. He exceeded my expectations. I hope HRC exceeds my expectations in the general, but pretending that she has energized the base would be a tactical mistake I am unwilling to make.
  8. US Presidential Race Potpourri Thread

    I've been saying that ever since I realized just how much I had overestimated the American people... There are two brawlers who will likely be the nominees of their parties. Goddess help us all if the steely eyed, brass-balled chick with the salt concealed in her brassiere loses to the ermine-caped wrestler who has been hit too many times in the head with a folding chair.
  9. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters.

    You asked for examples of improprieties from other states and I provided them. Some of those improprieties have more weight than others. I'm not arguing that they don't. If the Sanders campaign operated like the HRC campaign, there'd be Sanders surrogates hammering on about them until after the general election. A screw-up by the DNC, headed by HRC chief supporter Debbie Wasserman. Them's the facts, baby. Don't kill the messenger. It is beyond me how you get "Sanders' campaign shenanigans" out of this: An independent investigation of the firewall failures in the DNC’s shared voter file database has definitively confirmed that the original claims by the DNC and the Clinton campaign were wholly inaccurate – the Sanders campaign never “stole” any voter file data; the Sanders campaign never “exported” any unauthorized voter file data; and the Sanders campaign certainly never had access to the Clinton campaign’s “strategic road map.” I have no problem with HRC being the Democratic party establishment candidate. It is who she is and she garners the benefits from it. She will be the Democratic nominee in large part because of it. But to tout her victories as a result of voter enthusiasm and her excellence at the stump is simply fantasy, and a dangerous fantasy at that, because the general election will prove those things to be a chimera. I'm not a big fan of caucuses, but yeah--that's where the enthusiasm gap becomes dangerous. Luckily for HRC, that is not how things are played in the general election. Do realize you are arguing with someone who will be working for HRC's election in the fall. If you have to fight with me about her, think about how the less grounded Sanders' supporters are feeling. I've been working really hard in the last month to convince them that they should keep an open mind in the general. I bring up the SC a lot. If you think I'm being unfair to HRC, you have no idea what you're (we're) up against.
  10. de Blasio

    Mayor de Blasio must be held accountable for what has transpired in his city that falls under his responsibilities--just as Governor Snyder must be held accountable for what has transpired in his state that falls under his responsibilities. It works all the way around.
  11. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters. I know that Arizona (and many other states) are red states. But the Democratic establishment and the DNC still have power in those states and those folks are all-in for HRC. Look, I'll be grateful that HRC doesn't hesitate to use strong arm tactics in the general. She'll need to be a street fighter there. But against Bernie Sanders? Accusing him of dirty tricks as her campaign did in the "data breach" story? Let's not play games here.
  12. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters.

    P.S. I just wanted to make it clear that I am not one of the "fan boys" you dismissed. I am a realist and also not a boy. I hate to make this point, but I spend time in a political group on FB of people who are in the 30-50 year old range--and they're almost all for Bernie and almost all of them are filled with disgust regarding HRC. There are idealists of all ages, some of whom are very politically savvy and some of whom are not. I consider myself reasonably knowledgable about politics and I am not remotely ashamed to have supported Bernie's candidacy. I've supported mostly "losers" in my political life and I have never regretted that I supported them, only that they lost. That's how I feel today. President Obama was the ONLY candidate I've ever supported in the primaries who won. It felt great to win. Had I been more concerned with who won or lost, I'd have gone with the candidate of inevitability. Her name was Hillary Clinton, and I liked her a lot at the beginning of the 2008 primaries. Now I am ready to support her. But she's no Barack Obama and my heart won't sing if/when she becomes President. I will, however, be incredibly relieved.
  13. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters.

    If Bernie "should stay in," he can't do so as a whipped puppy. He has to act as if he still has a chance or he'd be labelled much more as a spoiler. I'm not sure he has accepted defeat at this point, but then again, neither had Hillary Clinton nor her excessively savvy husband. They stayed in long after the point of viability and said nothing about knowing it was in vain. Either way, from the very beginning Sanders has not done a hit job on HRC, leaving aside the issues of email, not breathing a word about the false Benghazi story, and certainly not nearly producing the kind of hit job she's going to see in the general. HRC's campaign, otoh, has a lot to answer for. No one has posted this, so I must: Remember that faux scandal? And I haven't even mentioned the voting improprieties from the Clinton campaign that occurred in several states. Bernie has absolutely not won over older Black voters (for several reasons). But he has made significant inroads with Black voters 25 and under (I think he's been winning this category in the last few weeks), and no one can suggest this disparity is due to Bernie being a race-unfriendly candidate. (I am glad older Blacks, particularly older Black women, are passionate about their support of HIllary--the enthusiasm gap in every other demographic is real and disturbing. And I desperately want HRC to win the general.) I posted a link that showed Jane Sanders being very clear about Bernie not running as a third party candidate. So his disappointment in not being able to spread his revolutionary fervor is already tempered. I have no doubt that Bernie will do everything reasonably possible to bring his supporters into the fold. He knows what Donald Trump is and represents at least as much as you or I do. At this point, HRC supporters would do well to remember how badly she will need them in the general. Most Sanders supporters are far less sanguine about supporting HRC than I am. Complacency about Donald Trump's candidacy would be a grave mistake on the part of all Democrats.
  14. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters.

    There are people on this site who have shared a hell of a lot more vitriol towards HRC than Spiritual could ever muster. If I felt Sanders were harming HRC for the general, I'd be angry. He isn't. Don't make me go back and research the massive loads of crap the Clintonistas were spewing in 2008 in May and June. No one was sure Bill Clinton would even give a speech at the convention long after HRC "accepted reality." I'm further along in the process than Spiritual is. I never thought Bernie would do as well as he has, and have been delighted by his unexpected strength. A lot of Sanders supporters still hold on to hope--including the hope that HRC will end up in the pokey vis-a-vis the (bullshit) email scandal. (And not just Sanders supporters--ask the conservative fans how they feel about it. Yet somehow they get a pass? Nah, I can't go for that. No can do.)
  15. Trump's New Target...Sanders Supporters.

    Who are the fan boys? Bernie has as much right to continue as HRC did in 2008. HRC is the one who needs to reach out to Bernie (and to his supporters, I may add). Spiritual was not the one who got personal here. (Besides, he doesn't live in the US. No need for overkill.) Anyone want to argue the fact that Hillary lied about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia? Or that she voted for the Iraq war? Or that she was for single payer before she was against it? I wouldn't put it quite the way Spiritual did, but he's not wrong.