<p>
It’s ridiculous. And if you get to a certain size they charge a few dollars more–as if the material costs $3 an inch. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>(Sorry Jym for being off topic! :))</p>
<p>Such a rip. Mrs p2n buys a couple and its like $80 or more.</p>
<p>Truth be told, I never burned a bra or a draft card or a flag or any of that stuff. I did hand out leaflets for the moratorium against the war (but didnt accost anyone the way zoosermom described in another thread). And on that very same day I learned to drink coffee (it wa cold out and they brought around warm coffee. I drank it and the rest is history…)</p>
<p>My very first time I drove into Manhattan was the day of the Columbia protests marching down 5th Ave (1971). I was so afraid I’d hit a protester. </p>
<p>Ooh, dating myself. True confessions. I have given thought to burning my AARP card.</p>
<p>Jym, what was the political commentary - all I said was that McCain once fought for getting the money out of politics?</p>
<p>I am just thinking if one person mentions one candidate, that invites someone else to mention something about the other candidate, and off we go to the races. But, along the lines of corranged and p2n’s posts, lets not make mountains out of molehills :)</p>
<p>Now see, thats exactly what I am talking about lizschup… people have gotten sooooo touchy! Please, stay and discuss the reason why everyone is so sensitive about politics. I thought it would be a good idea not to bring politics itself into the thread. Didnt mean to offend. I really did think your post was thoughtful and insightful.</p>
<p>At my company (petroleum) there aren’t a whole lot of water cooler discussions. It’s amazing how monolithic as a company we can be. I guess I’m the edgy one being Libertarian.</p>
<p>What? We’re discussing bras. 
</p>
<p>I’m not touchy in the least - I was actually trying to be respectful of your thread. I think it’s unrealistic to talk about politics without naming names and my comment about McCain was quite neutral.</p>
<p>I once campaigned for a particular candidate. Then on election day, I stood at the required perimeter around the polling place, handing out leaflets. </p>
<p>I didn’t get attacked by the hawks or the doves. But I was standing under a tree, and got “bombed” by an extremely large pigeon. I figured that bird didn’t like my candidate.</p>
<p>Now, if that happened today, I could turn really quickly, and . . .</p>
<p>What I don’t understand is how some people are so extreme. I mean, it’s like NOTHING Obama does or McCain does is ever good.</p>
<p>People posting new threads every day about various random and usually trivial incidents are just sad to me… I understand your viewpoint, but I find it hard to believe that anyone who disagrees with you on a large level coincidentally is the anti-Christ who can do nothing wrong. I’m not even exaggerating in all cases.</p>
<p>Take Palin, for example. There are some people who love her irrationally. Others hate her irrationally. But the negative response has been more prominent here, so I’ll roll with that. Some posters slam everything about her. They don’t leave anything to chance. There is no middle ground. Every ten minutes, another news article presenting one side of an argument. All the time. Nothing good. Ever.</p>
<p>This applies to McCain and Obama as well. Where has all the perspective gone? People are blinded by their own enthusiasm, and I honestly can’t cope with the raging inferno. I guess I should stay out of the kitchen. But I would rather have sparks and insight, not flaming. I guess I’m odd.</p>
<p>I have been thinking about this a lot during the last few days, and I agree with Mike. Political views are shaped by values and ideals, and it is hard to see those trampled by others who might have little regard for them. </p>
<p>Today, I had a couple of political conversations IRL with friends who vote differently than I do most of the time. The conversations were perfectly civil, I think because we know and respect each other and are careful to listen and not push too hard. Politics does not have to be a zero-sum game. My candidate is perfect but yours is a perfect moron does not help the dialogue. Sometimes, I can be as partisan as the most partisan, but when I’m reasonable, others seem to respond in kind.</p>
<p>Baelor, just wanted to add that I agree with your post 100%</p>
<p>…Because politics are like an investment? You make a bet and then it either brings a payoff to you or you lose. Check the Yahoo stock message boards - posters are ripping each other’s heads off on some of those.</p>
<p>“This applies to McCain and Obama as well. Where has all the perspective gone? People are blinded by their own enthusiasm, and I honestly can’t cope with the raging inferno. I guess I should stay out of the kitchen. But I would rather have sparks and insight, not flaming. I guess I’m odd.” My view is that the media fans the flames increasing the divisiveness between us to make money plain and simple.</p>
<p>I agree with Baelor. And I’m very tempted to pull out that old peacemaking trick we use on our children. “Now, Olivia, I want you to tell me 5 good things about Jenny. And Jenny, I want you do the same…” </p>
<p>Btw…I don’t think ‘evangelical churches’ haved cause a loss of community or connectiveness. If anything they have brought together similarly-minded people and created community. The problem is some people dislike or fear that community. I think the same thing can be said regarding Islam or any faith or any organization people perceive as different or difficult to understand.</p>
<p>To put the bra to the side for a minute (oops) and be serious:</p>
<p>I think the effectiveness of negative ads and negative campaigning leads to a lot anger. The negative ads usually have an unfair element, where views of the candidate being attacked are misrepresented. This all leads to a great deal of defensivess and attacks in response.</p>
<p>^ Good point. I agree that attacks that appear unfair cause a lot of animosity.</p>
<p>Also, perceptions of unfair media coverage throw fuel on the fire (It’s why MY husband yells at the tv, anyway…)</p>
<p>Idmom,
I think you misunderstood what I said. I did not say that the evangelical churches caused the loss of community but rather that they became popular because of the lack of community - they filled a void and met a need. I’ve seen news coverage interviewing that one pastor in Arizona ( can’t think of his name) and he talked about this phenomenon.</p>
<p>Yes, Hayden you are absolutely right about the negative ads, which unfortunately work on uninformed voters but enrage people like me. Swift Boaters come to mind. All the more reason to get the money out of campaigning. Only candidates should be allowed to speak on TV commercials and they should all be given a set amount of free time to speak. The idea that a paid TV commercial represents freedom of speech is ludicrous.</p>