Just a quick post to give y’all a chance to comment on today’s two main trending stories. First this:
Rep. Todd Akin said Monday that he will not give in to calls for him to end his Missouri Senate campaign after his controversial comments about “legitimate rape.”
“I’m not a quitter. My belief is we’re going to move this thing forward,” he said during an appearance Monday afternoon on Mike Huckabee’s radio show. “To quote my friend John Paul Jones, I’ve not yet begun to fight.”
Akin also said he still sees himself as the right candidate to take on Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), even as many Republicans have begun to doubt it. He apologized for his remarks but said it doesn’t mean he should end his campaign.
“I feel just as strongly as ever that my background and ability will be an asset in replacing Claire McCaskill and restoring some sanity in government,” Akin said. “Just because someone makes a mistake doesn’t make them useless.”
Akin has found himself in hot water after saying in an interview airing Sunday that “legitimate rape” rarely causes pregnancy. Akin was explaining his no-exceptions policy on abortion…
And then this:
The Augusta National Golf Club, home of The Masters tournament, said Monday it had admitted female members for the first time, following years of criticism both public and private over its stubbornly-held policy of admitting only men as members.
Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and South Carolina investment banker Darla Moore were both invited and accepted membership, golf’s most prominent club said in a statement. The club’s next season opens in October.
The step breaks with the 79-year-old private club’s practice of admitting only men, who make up a veritable who’s who of corporate America. The club has been under pressure from corporations, some members, a prominent women’s organization, and most recently President Barack Obama, who said through a spokesman before this year’s Masters tournament in April that he thought women should be invited to join….
I congratulate Darla and Ms. Rice, assuming of course that they wanted to join. If they invited me, of course, I’d have to refuse in light of the Marx rule (that would sound so much better than admitting I couldn’t afford the dues). I’m not sure whether this changes anything in the larger picture, unless they didn’t have ladies’ tees before. But as I said, I’m happy for the new members, especially since I know one of them.
I am not capable of thinking like a feminist or anyone else who is into Identity Politics, but I’m imagining that if I were a feminist, I’d be looking at today as sort of a mixed bag. You win some ground, you lose some ground.
No, scratch that. Given the general reaction to Akin, it looks more like a win-win.
One last thought — someone needs to break it to Nikki Haley that Darla got in and she didn’t…
Related Posts
Do you even play golf? I read that Condi does and would not be surprised if Darla does.
I see it as win-win. Even Romney and Ryan distanced themselves from “legitimate rape” scientist Akin.
The entire GOP has condemned Akin, pulled all support, and asked him to resign. He’s essentially been sent a fish wrapped in newspaper.
Good for Rice and Moore.
FYI, on the tee situation: There are two tee boxes per hole. The Member’s Tees and the Master’s Tees. However, I’m pretty sure the AGNC could have a set of Ladies’ Tees built by tomorrow this time if they really wanted to.
Rep. Akin is entitled to continue his campaign. He just might want to stay home on election night. Of course, that may be in the dog house by then.
Explain that one to your family…
Dr. Rice.
Yep.
We need to cut this Akin joker a break, on account of his being so fabulously OLD. He after all claims John Paul Jones as a “friend,” and Jones has been dead for 220 years.
I tried to send an email to the despicable Akin’s office but it was kicked back. I don’t care how much he tries to apologize or how he tries to parse his words after the fact. IMHO, he let his true heart speak when he uttered his vile crap.
Both sides have functional idiots but it has been a while since one has been on display like a prehistoric dinosaur skeleton like Akin.
He needs to crawl back into his cave and forget about the senate. McCaskill by a landslide.
Hootie is a great example for us all – you win some and you loose some, eveyone of us. It’s more about how we play the game of life that matters.
His is a mixed legacy of highs and lows.
Nice touch by the membership that Darla was one of the first woman admitted to the club – in my view.
I’m glad Augusta National invited them both to join; they both deserve it.
As for Gov. Haley, the SC New Democrats sent out a dig at her, similar to your dig. I wish they wouldn’t and I wish you wouldn’t. Nikki Haley’s rejoinder is as predictable as it will be successful.
“This situation reminds me of when I competed in a beauty pageant as a child in Bamberg. There was a white winner and a black winner, and they had no idea what to do with me.”
To be clear, the quote is simply my prediction; Gov. Haley hasn’t said anything yet, that I know of anyway.
“Dr. Rice”
Where’d she go to medical school?
Yes, Kathryn, I’m a lifelong golfer. But I only play when I can do so very cheaply. For that reason, I used to play a lot more when I was young (like, every day during certain stretches) than I do today.
I was spoiled by playing on military courses growing up. (Back when I was in school with Burl in Hawaii, I’d go play at Navy-Marine frequently after school.) I basically showed up with my clubs, signed my name and went out and played, and my Dad paid a nominal fee each month for us to have that privilege.
Those were the days of big military budgets, back in the Cold War. Today, it costs as much to play at a military course as at some civilian country clubs. And they are also often (if not always) open to the public, so they’re harder and harder to distinguish from civilian courses.
Some of them aren’t even part of military bases anymore.
The nice thing about that is that I am again free to play at places where I spent so many hours in my youth, such as at the former NAS Memphis and the former Myrtle Beach AFB. It just costs me a lot more — although those two remain fairly reasonable compared to country clubs.
Golf is just an expensive proposition, without trying to play at Augusta National…
Here’s how to critique Gov. Haley properly:
When Gov. Haley heard that Augusta National invited Darla Moore to be join, she said, “After all I’ve done for GA, you’d have thought they would’ve invited me!”
To make this not funny by explanation, the specific I am referring to is the port fiasco, althoug perhaps it works in the general as well (by running SC poorly, she makes GA look good).
@Michael — Generally non- medical doctors only use their titles when it pertains to their field of study. Dr. Fenner is not generally so styled unless he is in academe or acting as a computer scientist.
The medical person who led him to believe that a raped woman would not get pregnant was a close friend of Jones also. And how does “legitimate rape” differ from illegitimate rape? Could someone please explain this to me?
As to Akin quoting John Paul Jones, didn’t Led Zeppelin leave Jones off their first reunion tour? Does that make that quote useless, much like a Senate candidate calling something “legitimate rape”?
Ho Hum. What is the big deal about this Akin guy? He’s your typical tea party Republican. Many of them have come out over the years saying similar things about rape and birth control. His comments were pretty mainstream in today’s GOP. Heck Paul Ryan was until very recently a big fan of Ayn Rand, the woman who had a crush on William Edward Hickman, a famous killer and dismemberer of a 12 year old girl. Until the voters understand just how radical today’s GOP has become we will continue to fester in a Romneyhood world of plutocracy and a reverential worship of the “job creators”.
Bart is one of the good guy conservatives!
🙂
Akin.. “a gutless little twerp” according to Piers Morgan
It’s time for my weekly statement again: I disagree with everything Bud just said.
By the way bud, if the Akin comment is “mainstream”, why did he get entirely abandoned by the GOP?
They have done everything but put him in a car and then back away, saying they can’t go with him this time, IYKWIM.
The naked swimmer was sort of overshadowed by Akin’s comments. He lucked out on the timing of that revelation.
Ok, I’ll admit there are plenty of Democratic idiots out there. John Edwards pretty much takes the cake on disgusting behavior. But what really sets the GOP apart, especially the Tea Party wing of the GOP, is how they seem to interject these crazy assertions into policy discussions. The crazy dems at least seem to act like idiots away from the media.
Could there be some kind of creepy virus (possibly alien) infecting the Republican political community that causes them to do an say and do demonstrably non-politic things? It’s the only explanation I can think of that can explain some of things they’ve said and done recently. Maybe the Dems have found a way to infect them with the ‘insanity bug.’
Now, now, Bud, you’re letting your partisanship carry you away. If you keep on like this, with your wild, unsubstantiated charges, next you’ll be claiming that a conservative Republican has been swimming naked in the Sea of Galilee.
Get a grip, man!
Bryan I consider it a badge of honor that you disagree with all that I say.
But let’s just look at a few facts. The various GOP candidates for POTUS pretty much all agreed with Akin’s main point that abortion should be illegal with be no exceptions for rape. Akin simply made that policy position a rational. Rick Santorum (the next to last man standing in the primary process), to his credit, simply said human life begins at conception and should be protected regardless of how it was created. And many in the GOP have joined in an extremely unpopular movement to define life at conception, the personhood ammendment. Romney and Ryan both have agreed. (Although Romney has held virtually all positions possible on this issue).
So basically what the GOP establishment is doing is going after someone who made an outrageous statement while at the same time generally supporting the policy principal articulated by Mr. Akin. Again, why all the hand-wringing over this. It’s just not that far removed from what many in the party have supported for years.
It’s the Debil!
@Karen McLeod, yes. It is a cynical, agenda based, Chick Tract view of science and society.
Akin took the anti-abortion stand firmly into Crazy Idiot Land by using the term “legitimate rape” – which implies there are a lot of women lying about being raped – and by stating the absolutely ludicrous belief that “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” NO. No it doesn’t.
The fact that this man is on the House SCIENCE, Space and Technology Committee is terrifying, since he clearly prefers misogynistic myths over science.
So Bud, I would again ask my question, which you didn’t answer:
If the Akin comment is “mainstream” and all the rest of the conservatives “pretty much all agreed”, why did he get entirely abandoned by the GOP?
Since you don’t want to answer, I’ll tell ya.
What Akin said is factually wrong, regardless of your opinion on abortion. Women’s bodies do not have the ability to detect rape-sperm from non-rape sperm and shut down the reproductive process. That’s a fail in biology 101 and offensive. Factually dumb as a bag of hammers and offensive. Great combination there.
It’s not a matter of pro-life. The guy doesn’t seem to understand how ladies get pregnant. To say that a woman should still have the child if she gets pregnant is one thing, and defensible.
To say that a woman is less likely to get pregnant if it’s “legitimate rape” shows a serious lack of knowledge regarding basic human reproduction and anatomy as far as it’s currently understood.
The thing is, Akin was trying to come up with a way that he could say “no abortion in the case of rape” by saying that it’s not really a problem – no one gets pregnant when raped. He was being ideologically cowardly, but he probably thinks he’s become a martyr.
The fact that this man is on the House SCIENCE, Space and Technology Committee is terrifying, since he clearly prefers misogynistic myths over science.
-Rose
I couldn’t agree more. But Akin is not alone. There are so many congressmen that deny the existence of global warming and/or adhere to young earth creationism (the idea that the universe is less than 10,000 years old). Akin is not the only crackpot in congress.
Bryan, the GOP is above everything else a political animal that wants to get elected. They understand that Akin’s words are political suicide even if they really don’t find them all that extreme. Many probably go along with the notion that the female body can reject sperm when a woman is raped. Yet many DO go along with other radical ideas such as personhood at conception, a notion rejected by a substanial majority in Mississippi. Many defended the concept of making birth control more difficult to obtain. That’s pretty radical. Indeed the GOP of 2012 is extremely radical and dangerous. Akin just articulated in a ham-handed way what some Republicans secretly believe.
Should be – Many probably don’t go along with the notion that the female body can reject sperm …
Akin and Ryan co-sponsored H.R. 3, the so-called “Sanctity of Life” bill, that introduced the term “forcible rape” (as opposed to the pleasurable rape that women secretly crave, right?). Since 216 House Republicans voted FOR this idea, we can’t assume it’s a fringe effort. It’s part of Republican core values. Akin and Ryan are just the visible peak of the horrendous iceberg of neocon social values.
And I don’t remember any discussion of magic ladyparts in sex ed. But then I haven’t memorized the newly revised textbooks that also embrace creationism as “science.”
Quotes from Bud:
“the GOP is above everything else a political animal that wants to get elected”
That’s the point, bud. Winning elections is what politics is. If it’s just about your principles, we have a different name for that – it’s called philosophy.
“Many probably go along with the notion that the female body can reject sperm when a woman is raped.”
No they don’t. Find me one Congressman who has said this. You can’t. Again, you’re so excited that you’ve found a member of the “opposing team” who has said something dumb, because you want to paint the rest of us with the same brush. Also Bud, you’re not exactly a leading authority on what conservatives think.
“Many defended the concept of making birth control more difficult to obtain.”
What? Do you mean paying for it? I have no idea what this even means.
“Indeed the GOP of 2012 is extremely radical and dangerous.”
Bud, I know you honestly believe this. But just as a piece of constructive criticism, you should avoid making conclusory statements like this. They don’t persuade anyone. You have to give people the “WHY”. I assume you are trying to persuade people, however.
Reasons the GOP is radical:
1. Proposals to increase military spending from an amount already equal to the next 20 nations combined.
2. Plans to turn medicare into a voucher system.
3. Budget proposals that not only extend Bush tax cuts but actually give even more tax cuts to the wealthy.
4. Ongoing chatter about Obama’s birth place.
5. Plans to further cut the social safety net.
6. Despite huge tax cuts, increases in military spending and a strange absense of what loopholes to close the GOP claims to be fiscally conservative.
7. A partywide obsession with outlawing abortion even in cases of rape and incest.
8. Proposals to require ‘papers please’ laws.
9. A push for personhood laws even though they’ve been reject in MS and CO.
10. Tea Party candidates that say extremely radical stuff like raped women cannot get pregnant.
11. Rejection by most party members of scientific conclusions about evolustion, geology, astronomy and climate change.
12. A presidential standard bearer who has not empathy for the middle and working classes.
13. A VP candidate who borrows ideas from a woman who admires a killer/dismemberer of a 12 year old girl.
Thats 13 easy examples of GOP extremism. If folks won’t be persuaded by fact, then oh well, I’ve done my best.
@bud
You’re not helping your cause.
“Find me one Congressman who has said this.”
Try the 216 Congressmen who voted for H.R.3.
Kathryn and SD2,
The Wall Street Journal went with “Dr. Rice” in its “The Gender Barrier Falls at Augusta.”
Doug and bud,
I agree with Doug on this one; bud, you’re not helping your cause.
Burl and Karen and Bart and Rose,
Good comments and I agree.
Only two things seem perfectly clear in this entire imbroglio: 1. The GOP desperately wants to shed Akin. 2. They’re stuck with him, no matter how hard they wish they weren’t.
I’ll take Bryan’s criticisms to heart and focus more on why Obama should be re-elected rather than continue with negative comments about the GOP.
First of all Barack Obama is a good family man who extols the virtues of what a good male role model should be in the 21st century. He quit his long smoking habit in large part because he wants to set a postitive example for his daughters. I believe it is important to have a man like this representing the office of the presidency at a time when, unfortunately, many men abandon their families or serve as negative role models. I feel a certain pride in our president’s moral character that was lacking in our last 2 presidents. This is reason number 1 why I support Barack Obama for re-election. In future posts I’ll give more positive reasons for this decision.
@bud
Romney has never smoked and is by all accounts a good family man. So he’s got Obama beat on your number one reason.
Maybe he could take up smoking now, and quit right after Labor Day…
Yes, I’m being facetious, but you know what? That would address something that’s missing in Romney — something to overcome. Some sign that he’s had to struggle with something in his life, just once. It would go a long way toward humanizing him.
Burl,
I looked at HR 3 (the link below) but I didn’t see where it mentioned a woman’s body rejecting sperm from a rape. In fact, section 308 says the following:
“Sec. 308. Treatment of abortions related to rape, incest, or preserving the life of the mother
‘The limitations established in sections 301, 302, and 303 shall not apply to an abortion–
‘(1) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest; or
‘(2) in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.”
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr3/text
Doug, you misunderstand me. I don’t regard that as the number 1 reason to vote for Barack Obama but merely the first reason on a list. Frankly I don’t find Mitt Romney’s character as good as Obamas (without getting into the details here) but I’ll admit he seems to be a good family man and on that particular point he would not be ruled out for my consideration as president. (Newt Gingrich on the other hand would be ruled out immediately).
Brad has a good point.
@Brad
How about having a wife with MS?
Good question. Of course, that’s the kind of personal-adversity story that could backfire on a candidate.
This report, for instance, suggests that the stress of the campaign caused her MS to flare up. That could raise the kinds of questions that were raised about John Edwards back before everyone fully realized what a sleaze he was: Hey, you’re a rich guy who doesn’t have to work; why don’t you stay home and look after your sick wife rather than putting this additional strain on her?
Which suggests something else I was thinking of when Bud raised his “good family man” thing about Obama…
I’m sort of doubtful that you can really call anyone who runs for president today a “good family man.” It’s hard to see a way that it’s good for your kids. It implies a trade-off in which the candidate has decided to put the country (or his own ego, if you’re less inclined to be generous) before his family.
That, I’m thinking, is the case even if someone is the greatest candidate in the world, and even the greatest Dad in the world (up to the moment he decides to run, that is)…
As someone who missed far too much time with my kids when they were growing up because of work — which I’m almost certain will be THE thing I regret most on my deathbed — I’ve had a lot of occasion to think about this sort of thing. And at least I was there SOME of the time. I can just barely imagine how awful it would be for the children of someone running for president.
Maybe Romney doesn’t feel the need to play out any personal struggles he has had in public. That would be an admirable trait as compared to, say, quitting smoking.
Maybe not. In any case, as far as I know, both are perfectly fine “family men,” except for the thing about deciding to put their families through the campaign grinder.
It won’t play any role at all in my vote, one way or the other.
In fact, as I think of it… both guys, in terms of personal, private character, seem to have a lot in common. Neither is what you’d call an everyman. Neither is a touchy-feely, warm sort of personality. It’s a little hard to imagine KNOWING either of them on a deep level, and that’s both an asset and a drawback for each of them as politicians.
They both seem sort of… seamless, generally lacking in the kinds of idiosyncrasies that make a person seem approachable — or reproachable, for that matter. Bill Clinton, both Bushes, Al Gore, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter all had personal traits that you could criticize or make fun of. Not so much with these guys. Not, at least, in terms of the way they conduct themselves in public — or in private, far as we know.
I don’t know if this is making sense or not. But take 2008 — John McCain is a mass of quirks and personal idiosyncrasies, both positive and negative, and made for quite a contrast with no-Drama. We don’t have the same kind of contrast this year, as much as Democrats try to carve our toeholds in the smoothness of Romney’s face with the odd story about the dog on the car roof and such.
We don’t have the same kind of contrast this year, as much as Democrats try to carve our toeholds in the smoothness of Romney’s face with the odd story about the dog on the car roof and such.
-Brad
Brad you’ve alway come across as rather callous when it comes to animals. This is yet another example of that. The dog story, while not a deal-breaker, brings my opinion of Romney’s character down a couple of notches. And we could get into the draft dodging, the school hazing incident and a number of other things. But lets just say that Obama gets an A for character, Romney a C-.
“The dog story, while not a deal-breaker, brings my opinion of Romney’s character down a couple of notches.”…bud
So, if I understand this correctly, bud is against the family dog riding on top of the family station wagon in a dog carrier and it lowers Romney’s character down a couple of notches. Now on the other hand, apparently EATING dog raises Obama’s character by a couple of notches.
Wonder how PETA feels about the issue? At least the family dog survived the trip, Obama’s dog didn’t survive dinner. In fact, the dog was dinner.
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 Too funny for words to adequately describe.
To quote Oddball from “Kelly’s Heroes”… “WOOF! WOOF! WOOF! WOOF! That’s my other dog imitation…”
That might seem like a non sequitur, but it was when Oddball said it, too.
The dog story is so bizarre. People (some dumb people) drive around here with their dog loose in the back of their pickup. Romney’s was secured.
The dog may not have been safe in a rollover; but a dog in a car is probably a deadly instrument to passengers inside a vehicle in a rollover anyway.
The only personal stories that give me pause about Romney were the report about his prep school bullying and the way he tried to revise the historical record of his actual departure from Bain.
Romney actually seems like he would be the kind of guy to really love his family dog. Not sure Obama would be that kind of guy.
Secured on top of the vehicle, in the full draft of highway speed wind and so frightened he reportedly had diarrhea.
Dogs should be safely secured inside the vehicle either behind a dog grate and/ or with a seat belt harness. This is not new.
Better on the roof than on a dinner plate.
http://activitypit.ning.com/forum/topics/let-them-eat-dog?page=1&commentId=1981927%3AComment%3A2398403&x=1#1981927Comment2398403
Yea, it’s not the comparative safety of being secured on the roof vs. being loose in the back of a pickup truck, say, that bothers me about the dog on the roof thing. Most dogs in the backs of pick up trucks, while perhaps not safe, are nevertheless gleefully oblivious to their danger and having a great time. I’m not advocating letting dogs ride in the backs of pick up trucks, but it is the lack of compassion for an animal’s obvious terror that is the troubling element in this story.
What makes you think Romney would and Obama wouldn’t necessarily love a family dog. I really don’t get that at all.
“Secured on top of the vehicle, in the full draft of highway speed wind and so frightened he reportedly had diarrhea.”
How does a non-family member know the details of a short family trip that happened years ago?
I think GW Bush, Obama, and Romney are all guys who love their wives and children. Bush and Obama both have overcome some bad habits that we know about. I’m with Kathryn on Romney’s treatment of the family dog; the dog should have been with his people or left at a nice kennel if the car couldn’t accommodate him. It’s the first sign that Romney doesn’t connect with what others are feeling and that sign continues to play out.
I’d actually give way more weight to the dog story than to the hazing incident. Romney was young and immature at the time he shaved the kids head. Not a good indicator of his character but still a youthful indescretion. Had he just come clean on that incident later as an adult I’d probably give him a pass. The dog incident was just cruel. And he did it as an adult with 5 sons. Why didn’t he just board Seamus? That shows a lack of character and judgement.
“Now on the other hand, apparently EATING dog raises Obama’s character by a couple of notches.
Wonder how PETA feels about the issue? At least the family dog survived the trip, Obama’s dog didn’t survive dinner. In fact, the dog was dinner.”
What the hell? Is this one of those urban myths like people adopting stray dogs in Mexico and find out they’re large rodents?
Didn’t we all grow up in an era when kids slept in the back of the family station wagon on long trips?
I’m not saying it’s right today, but a little perspective here please.
@Steven Davis: Because the details have been widely reported.
SD II, the “short” family vacation involved a 12 hour drive.
“What the hell? Is this one of those urban myths like people adopting stray dogs in Mexico and find out they’re large rodents?”….Rose
August 16, 2012 White House press briefing by Jay Carney….
“During the White House Press Briefing today, Jay Carney admitted that the President Obama was only “joking” when he referred to Mitt Romney’s dog on the campaign trail.
Carney added that in the past, Obama has joked about eating dog meat.
(He) talked about, as a boy, eating dog meat in Indonesia because that is something that is done there,” Carney said.”
Now you have your source of the “urban legend”, direct from the mouthpiece of the President. It was the President himself.
Both incidents took place a long time ago. You forgive Obama for eating dog but condemn Romney for doing what many families did when they went on vacation and took the family pet with them.
Think about it for a moment and try to use a little common sense and sanity. Five kids, wife, and dad in a station wagon going on vacation. They wanted to take the dog. Now, how would you handle the situation?
“The dog incident was just cruel.”…bud
I agree with Doug, you are not helping your case. If anything, based on your recent comments, I don’t think the island of Santa Catalina off the California coast is far enough left for you.
As a boy….eating dog meat as a boy
Not the same as a family man lashing the dog in a crate on the roof….
Obama was a young boy. Romney was a grown man with 5 sons. BIIIIIG difference. I stand by my revulsion of Mitt Romney and poor ole Seamus. And yes I give Obama a full pass on the dog eating. Easy call.
Was this a solid-sided create or a wire-frame one?
Were they driving 70 miles an hour down the freeway, or slowly through heavy summer traffic?
Was this the sort of thing people did back then when they had a big family and Chevy Suburbans were still mostly used by DOT and the Forest Service?
Actually, why am I wasting my time considering this?
@ Kathryn and bud,
If the situations were reversed, you would be condemning Romney for eating dog as a boy and making excuses for Obama as an adult for carrying the family dog on top of the car in a crate.
“Nuff said.”
“Actually, why am I wasting my time considering this?”…Mark
Agree with you. Totally pointless.
@@Steven Davis: Because the details have been widely reported.”
By CNN crack reporter Rosie O’Donnell.
What American boy eats dog meat?
Bart, you’re wrong. I’ve already given Romney a pass on the hazing incident because he was young. Obama gets a pass for eating dog because he was very young. Adult Romney was cruel to his defenseless dog. Indeed, enough said.
An American boy who respects his mother, rather thanitching a tantrum when he doesn’t care for wha’s of the menu.
Having trouble with that virtual keyboard?
I lived in Ecuador as a kid. We ate fried bananas (back when that would have seemed exotic in this country). Dog wasn’t on the menu, but then I wasn’t living in Indonesia.
Dang autocorrect!
Dog was frequently on the menu of the Louis and Clark expedition. Other people, including Sarah Palin’s fellow Swiss citizen’s still eat it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_meat
Anyone know how dog tastes? Is it like horse, or more like possum?
Maybe it’s just that I spent all day yesterday transporting six horses in an open stock trailer. They arrived, as always and every time, none the worse for the travelling.
Dang silliest story I have ever heard people raise a ruckus over.
Horses are not dogs.
@Kathryn – You’ll go to any length to protect the chosen one.
“Dog was frequently on the menu of the Louis and Clark expedition. Other people, including Sarah Palin’s fellow Swiss citizen’s still eat it.”
Absolutely predictable response in defense of Obama eating dog. Bring Palin’s ancestors into the picture as an example of the cultural acceptablilty of canine cuisine.
“Bart, you’re wrong. I’ve already given Romney a pass on the hazing incident because he was young.”…bud
Little bit of selective memory there bud? Can’t pinpoint the exact comment by you but when the story first broke about Romney’s haircutting adventure, you used the same termonology to describe his actions – cruel, bully, lack of character, and a couple of other choice adjectives to describe young Romney. Nah! You haven’t given him a pass on anything.
Following the customs of the culture you are immersed in as a child is hardly worthy of condemnation, no matter how foreign seeming the custom in question is to those not of that culture.
Yes, I did sleep in the back of a station wagon, in fact, but I don’t recall that strapping dogs to the tops of cars was any any kind of norm for the day like letting kids sleep in the back of station wagons was. Luggage, yes. Dogs in carriers, no. I think the unsafe norm was probably just to have the dog loose in the car with the unseatbelted kids.
If the situations were reversed for the candidates, I would be having serious reservations about Obama. I would not be defending it.