LOL!

Sad, but true.

The ASPCA has been running an ad recently with Sarah McLachlan. She does a voice-over about the ASPCA and the animals they rescue (she appears briefly on camera, but most of it is a voice-over), and the background music is her song "Angel" ... and there is clip after clip of dogs and cats that have been rescued (some of them are injured). Right at the end, there's a cute kitty cat batting at the camera with one paw. It's a tear-jerker and it makes me wonder how ANYONE could mistreat or abandon a pet that depends on you for everything.

I think it's high time the White House had a First Cat again.

</hijack>

Found these updates about the newpaper sell out on the New York Times web site. Cover all the papers. While I have yet to see what the regular press run is for any of the papers, the number of extras is just about amazing 75-100,000. The NYT printed 35% more on its regular first run!
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...0out%20&st=cse

http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45&aid=153617

According to the article in the Trib, the Obama family needs a dog with a hypoallergenic coat because Malia has allergies. Malia really wants a Goldendoodle. I propose that if they're interested a purebred and can't find what they're after at a shelter, they could compromise and go through a breed rescue. Rescues often divert dogs from shelters, so they're helping that cause anyway and able to get the kind of breed they want/need.

The only dogs I know that are good for people with allergies are Chihuahuas and Poodles. Are there any other dogs?

I dislike cats, so I think 8 years isn't long enough to keep a cat out of the White House! lol.

ETA: I googled it and found other breeds that are touted as "hypo allergenic"

Getting our dog was the bribery I offered my daughter if she would tolerate the weekly allergy shots that she needed. She is far more allergic to some breeds than others (she can't be around labs/retrievers hardly at all) but is totally fine with the Malamute. It makes no sense to me because Sammigirl sheds horribly and has lots of dander, but my girl is fine with her. Her reaction to dogs wasn't as bad as her reaction to cats, weeds.. or the other 33 things she tested positive for though. She had a 1 for dogs but a 4 or 4+ for everything else. The only thing she wasn't allergic to was cockroaches. We were NOT getting pet cockroaches :)

I was lucky to snag the last copy of USA Today in my town. That copy was the only paper left
I tried to get the SF Chronicle, Modesto Bee, Tri Valley Herald, Stockton Record...no dice

Breeds of Non-Allergenic dogs (I'm allergic to cats now, so I checked out the whole dog list awhile back)

Poodles
Schnauzers
Portugese Water Dogs
Several breeds of Terriers including Kerry Blue, Cairn, Bedlington
also the "little things" Lhasa Apsos, Maltese, Shih Tzu's, Coton de Tulears, Bichon Frises
Like the "Goldendoodle," several hybrid breeds can be, also

But I think that many short-haired breeds are easier to tolerate than the ones that shed. I'd love to have an English Springer Spaniel again but they carrry and blow coat. On the other hand, a Beagle is pretty short-coated (like a Pug or a Boston Terrier). I think that if you get a dog as a puppy and get it used to being bathed, then a dog is easier to deal with for someone with allergies if you give it a bath every week or two.

A concession from The View's Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Good for her! I only wish more people would follow this line of thinking.

"I will jump in that line and support our president because that is what as an American I believe we should do," said Hasselbeck, who received a fist bump from co-host Whoopi Goldberg.

Sorry, I don't believe her.

I was impressed when my hubby watching Barack and Michelle last night, saying that it will be nice to have an intelligent and classy First Lady.

I couldn't take Cindy and Sarah!!! Not to say that they aren't intelligent (okay maybe 1) and classy (hmmm???) but they are too grating. Wonder if anything will come of Cindy's past drug use and Sarah's very bad temper (they were talking about it on the Bill O'Reilly show tonight about how the McCain team was getting very po'd at her diva attitude.)

Sad ad, but the use of that song annoys me because it's about HEROIN ADDICTION!

Anyway, the ads that made me cry every time I saw them were the Pedigree adoption drive ads with the various dogs that had been abandoned.

Though I can't stand George, I've always thought Laura Bush seemed very bright and always gracious.

I agree!

LOL -- put on Comedy Central NOW. SouthPark on election result.

I don't have a TV. XD

Also agree!

Re: hypoallergenic dogs, there is a sub-breed of rat terriers that is hairless that is hypoallergenic. I love love love love love love love rat terriers, but honestly I can't see the Obamas going for a hairless dog.

http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/americanhairlessterrier.htm

awww...

Awww I really want a shih-tzu named "Chubby." I knew one and he was so awesome that I wanted one for myself. :D

I've been saying this for years.

No one cares anymore, not like they used to. And if they do, it doesn’t appear that way. In the past, huge social movements have caught politicians’ attention and have helped to shape history. Those who are higher up can’t hear us if we don’t speak up. Politicians can only understand the people when they hear the people. It seems as if no one wants to be heard, except by their neighbors and friends who listen to them complain over commercials during the Sunday afternoon football game.

For the KSigs! Take heart...

The "Grand Young Party" : http://www.newsweek.com/id/40211#?l=...9&t=1902591231

What constitutes a "social movement" changes with time and should be based on the contexts. People are stuck in what worked during the Civil Rights Movement or the war protests of the 60's. Those were different times and called for different measures.

A lot people want to rally or march but don't understand that rallying and marching doesn't constitute a social movement the way that it used to. If people just want to be visible and have a gigantic fish fry, such gatherings work. If people want to work toward a common longterm goal, we need to rally people behind the cause and not literally hold a rally.

no worries i am definitely not ashamed of how i voted at all. :) i am a proud supporter of McCain, a man who has gone above and beyond what his call was for this country. what i was meaning was that IF President-Elect Obama turns out to be the biggest thing to this country since George Washington, then i might feel a lil twinge of embarrassment that i did not see that from the beginning as apparently so many of my fellow Americans did. i will never feel ashamed for voting McCain/Palin, but time will tell if i will ever think, "dangit" for not thinking P.E. Obama was capable. that is all. :)

YYYYYAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!! :) :p :D :cool:

Is this a joke or not? If not, welcome back, even if it's just for a day or two. ;)

Hey, there aren't too many places to have good post-election convo without running into idiots with keyboards. ;) Those political boards are too intense for me.

Again, this is an overstatement. Laws regarding electors vary from state to state. Some states (I can't tell you whether it is a majority of states or not) have laws that prohibit an elector from voting for a candidate other than the one who won the polular vote in that state. For example, technically in North Carolina, if you voted for Obama and Biden, you were not voting for them per se, you were voting for the 15 electors nominated by the NC Democratic Party. Likewise with McCain/Palin and the 15 electors nominated by the NCGOP. The electors nominated by the party of the candidate that wins the popular vote are themselves elected as NC's electors. NC law says that "[a]ny presidential elector . . . who fails to attend and vote for the candidate of the political party which nominated such elector . . . shall forfeit and pay to the State five hundred dollars . . . . In addition to such forfeiture, refusal or failure to vote for the candidates of the political party which nominated such elector shall constitute a resignation from the office of elector, his vote shall not be recorded, and the remaining electors shall forthwith fill such vacancy" as provided by law.

The US Constitution says electors cannot vote for more than one candidate (President or VP) from their own state.

According to an article in the NYTimes, exit polls showed that voters with median incomes of $40+ thousand (the average for plumbers and pipefitters) and voters with median incomes >$200,000 both broke for Obama.

Feel free to question the source and to question exit polls. ;)

Boy, if only you could see my registration card, you'd get quite the kick out of this . . . ;) I'm sure C is taking heart, though, once he gets his ass out of ConLaw.

I would hope the future of the party would be better at beer pong...but I digress ;)

I cringed at the woman who talked about Palin being the future of the party, but otherwise I thought they had some interesting things to say. It will be an intriguing next four years for the GOP, and I'm eager to see how the party responds to this election.

I heard that Bobby Jindal plays a mean game of Beirut.

Which section please? And also, what about Alaska and Maine, who split up their votes. Or do they have different electors? Sorry for all the questions.

You can watch the episode online: http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/207897/

Article II, sections 2:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Note the "in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct." That means each state decides how to appoint electors. Most states have a winner-take-all system, where the electors from that state vote for whoever won the popular vote in that state.

As for Maine and Nebraska (not Alaska), they apportion their votes, I believe, by Congressional district. One elector comes from each Congressional district and votes for whoever won the popular vote their Congressional district. The remaining two electors vote for whoever won the popular vote statewide.

As for the other question, the first paragraph of the Twelfth Amendment:

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.

^^^Yeah, I wonder how many people know that the process (the technical, actual process) of the electoral college isn't anywhere near being complete yet? The general election is just the start, here's the rest of the schedule:

November 4, 2008 - General Election: The voters in each State choose electors to serve in the Electoral College. As soon as election results are final, the States prepare seven or nine original "Certificates of Ascertainment" of the electors chosen, and send one original along with two certified copies (or three originals, if nine were prepared) to the Archivist of the United States.

December 15, 2008 - Meeting of Electors: The electors in each State meet to select the President and Vice President of the United States. The electors record their votes on six "Certificates of Vote," which are paired with the six remaining original "Certificates of Ascertainment." The electors sign, seal and certify the packages of electoral votes and immediately send them to the President of the Senate, the Archivist of the United States and other designated Federal and State officials.

December 24, 2008 - Deadline for Receipt of Electoral Votes: The President of the Senate, the Archivist of the United States, and other designated Federal and State officials must have the electoral votes in hand.

January 6, 2009 - Counting Electoral Votes in Congress: The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes (unless Congress passes a law to change the date).

http://www.archives.gov/federal-regi...q.html#process

I've been a couple of times to see the meeting of the electors in CT. Kind of interesting - at the time I attended, the public was allowed to watch, and it's a good thing to witness if you're curious about the process.

This just in...Obama has won NORTH CAROLINA

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081106/...north_carolina

Hey, good work, MC! ;)

I totally understand what you are talking about. And I know that we aren't voting for the candidates. But if what I quoted was an "overstatement" it wasn't mine, but the government's overstatement because I quoted them directly.

Thank you both!

okay, so it was Nebraska..interesting...

Ah well, should we say "close enough for government work"?. :D

Yes...Americans! I'm ready to just an American.

Wow. This was most shocking for me!

I showed up at 8AM trying to get a copy of the New York Times, only to find that all issues were sold out in my city! I immediately called and ordered a reprint! ha ha.

I kept screaming at the TV.... Where in the hell has he been? That is the REAL JOHN MCCAIN! He has been locked in the closet for the whole election process. I totally felt for him. He has worked how many years for this? I'm just glad to have him back.

Paging KSigkid!

I think you'll like this article my father sent me from the American Spectator: http://www.spectator.org/archives/20...-freedom/print