Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on The Morning News

1

I'll buzz over to Betty's, bitch.
*slap*

Posted by Mr. Poe | February 19, 2008 8:23 AM
2

Let's make tracks to Betty's!

Posted by Suz | February 19, 2008 8:41 AM
3

Good news that the state senate passed that national popular vote legislation.

Now, in news of possible efforts to undermine the popular vote, here are some serious allegations against the Clinton campaign:
Clinton targets pledged delegates

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign intends to go after delegates whom Barack Obama has already won in the caucuses and primaries if she needs them to win the nomination.

Posted by cressona | February 19, 2008 8:44 AM
4

This is how a girl gets a reputation.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | February 19, 2008 8:47 AM
5

This is how a girl gets a reputation....

Posted by NapoleonXIV | February 19, 2008 8:49 AM
6

It's bad to be a slut, but even worse to pretend to be a slut.

Posted by Julie | February 19, 2008 8:50 AM
7

I'd much rather have the state's electoral votes go to whomever wins the popular vote in WA state, so the Pres. candidates would have to actually, you know, campaign here.

Posted by NaFun | February 19, 2008 8:52 AM
8

So, sex on the first date is just straight out, then?

Posted by Tlazolteotl | February 19, 2008 8:52 AM
9

Hey, maybe Betty would be interested in a three-way. . . .

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty | February 19, 2008 8:57 AM
10

Sure, babe, we can go to Betty's, but only if I get to watch.

Posted by Greg | February 19, 2008 9:03 AM
11

If this was published for Americans, I wonder what the French had back in 1947 for their women. I'm sure it probably wasn't as prude and conservative as this.

Posted by apres_mois | February 19, 2008 9:03 AM
12

if this was written in 1947, i'm sure 1/2 of the guys these girls were seeing were WWII vets. those guys would be ditching those girls the minute they show any prudeness, especially if they were fucking any of the women in Europe while they were over there.

Posted by apres_mois | February 19, 2008 9:05 AM
13

Betty'll do anything. Use a condom, sweetheart!

Posted by Fnarf | February 19, 2008 9:12 AM
14

This Betty sounds like a groovy chick. I'm making tracks to her house right now!

Posted by kebabs | February 19, 2008 9:13 AM
15

Be careful what you ask for (from the Electoral College, not Betty). In 2004, it would have taken Washington's electoral votes from Kerry and given them to George W. Bush.

Posted by Fnarf | February 19, 2008 9:14 AM
16

Betty will use a strap on..bitches!

How much you Sloggers want to bet the GOP and Bush will take credit for "bringing down the Castro regime?"

Posted by Andrew | February 19, 2008 9:15 AM
17

Too bad the US won't lift the embargo on Cuba just because power transferred from Castro to Castro-lite. But perhaps the embargo has less to do with the Castros as much as it has to do the threat of salsa dancing and its pervasive ability to make people sexier than LiLo emulating a dead actress who was molested by the Hollywood Star system after she was molested by the foster factory system. Poor LiLo and Marilyn obviously never read Sally Simpson.

Posted by lime joy | February 19, 2008 9:19 AM
18

fnarf is right. the electoral votes switching from the person the state votes for to the person the country votes for would have our ass in a sling for years to come.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | February 19, 2008 9:22 AM
19

But Bellevue, that has nothing to do with Betty's crib.

Posted by Mr. Poe | February 19, 2008 9:28 AM
20

Even worse, however, is the teaser who leads a lad to expect kisses and caresses she never plans to give

No shit. Fucking cocktease.

Also, Sarah Stevens has a good piece on lifting the embargo over at Huffington Post.

Posted by Mike in MO | February 19, 2008 9:29 AM
21

re: Oregon strip clubs:

Stacy Patching is among those unhappy about the adult entertainment at the Anchor. She takes her five children to Oceanside Beach State Recreation Site after home-schooling them all day. Bad people hang around places with nude dancing girls, she said.

As the father of a 10 year old girl, let me just say that I find home schoolers far more scary than strip clubs.

My daughter already understands that taking off your clothes for money is a tough way to make a living (thanks to a conversation necessitated after a socialist auntie launched into a prostitution-is-feminism diatribe.) Explaining why the world *isn't* only 5000 years old, and why we have to respect religious people even though we don't actually believe in their god, is actually a more nuanced dialog.

Posted by Big Sven | February 19, 2008 9:33 AM
22

Fnarf is right about what? Let's state the obvious: Bush won in 2004. The legislation only takes effect if enough states pass similar laws. It should give WA more influence because candidates couldn't ignore states that weren't swinging.

To be a bit mathy for a second, Fnarf's scenario illustrates a bit of a theorem: the presidential winner with this legislation is either unchanged or the popular vote getter.

If you want to be partisan obviously the only popular vote winner who lost the election recently was Gore. I think this is more important than partisanship though.

Posted by daniel | February 19, 2008 9:38 AM
23

Cressona here's the meat of the story

“I swear it is not happening now, but as we get closer to the convention, if it is a stalemate, everybody will be going after everybody’s delegates,” a senior Clinton official told me Monday afternoon. “All the rules will be going out the window.”

Rules of good behavior, maybe. But, in fact, the actual rules of the party allow for such switching. The notion that pledged delegates must vote for a certain candidate is, according to the Democratic National Committee, a “myth.”

Wouldn't want to change the rules mid-stream

Posted by McG | February 19, 2008 9:41 AM
24

Let's see with the new way Gore wins in 2000 and Bush wins bigger in 2004 except that he wouldn't have cause Gore would have been runng for re-election.

Margins in states would matter, every vote would be of equal weight - hmmmmm good idea.

Posted by McG | February 19, 2008 9:57 AM
25

"Unfair, maybe, but that’s the way it is!"

Such sunny acceptance of an absurd double standard. Don't bother trying to change anyone's perceptions, girls; this is just the way it is!

Posted by Aislinn | February 19, 2008 10:01 AM
26

Exactly, guys can be sluts too.

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 19, 2008 10:49 AM
27

No mention of the city-dividing strong mayor proposal in Federal Way.

Posted by K | February 19, 2008 11:09 AM
28

Aislinn, I wouldn't get TOO hung up on arguing with a 60-year-old etiquette book.

Posted by Fnarf | February 19, 2008 12:59 PM
29

I'm not arguing, Fnarf, that was just the funniest part to me. This book came out a few years before my grandmother hit dating age, and it amuses me that, despite this being the sort of societal grooming she received, she definitely "petted" more than one fellow at a time well into her fourties, when she married for the second time and finally settled down a bit. This is the woman who sat me down when I was 17 and hell-bent on saving myself until marriage, and she told me exactly why that was a terrible idea. We're lucky not all girls were willing to let "that's the way it is!" hold them back.

Posted by Aislinn | February 19, 2008 1:46 PM
30

"it's always up to the girl to keep things under control" because after all, we know males can't control their animal desires; they're primitive beings, poor dears.

*rolling eyes*

Posted by Geni | February 19, 2008 2:29 PM
31

But Fnarf, you're missing the point: "on casual dates, the free-and-easy female rates more criticism than her male counterpart" is for the most part STILL TRUE. Men can brag about how many sex partners they've had; women can't -- we would lose status, whereas you would gain it. However corny this book may be, it would be naive to think our society has completely outgrown these ideas.

Posted by Irena | February 19, 2008 5:40 PM
32

Sigh, Irena's right. Sadly.

Very sadly.

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 19, 2008 5:54 PM
33

Irena, I think what you say is true in high school and college, but not for grownups. When you're in your 30s+, male promiscuity just looks sad and dysfunctional.

Posted by Big Sven | February 19, 2008 8:02 PM
34

@31: True, but what kind of douchebags would you be talking to?

Posted by Gloria | February 21, 2008 5:07 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).