WE Blog

As the election proceeds, it is becoming more and more concerning and evident in the press that the possibility of the democratic candidate may be stolen from whichever candidate

It’s a bedrock principle that a candidate should get the same share of nominating delegates in a state that he or she gets of the popular vote. This proportional representation, is threatened by the good ole boy concept and power promises to those super-delegates who are swayed by old politics, to vote for a certain candidate, regardless of the state vote. There is also early evidence that the supers are breaking based upon race based politic’s instead of the positions of either candidate. (Read comments by J. Jackson J of ILL)

If you have concerns for the Kansas super delegates, I urge you to voice your opinion to them yourself. The almight powerful party controllers have been been bombarding them with advice and pressuring them to support candidates base opon other than the majority vote of the people.

The remaining UNcommitted super delegates from Kansas are:

Nancy Boyda
Larry Gates
Helen Knetzer
Dennis Moore

Four others are already committed (only one for Hillary). There is a possibility of appointment of one more for Kansas later this spring.

http://www.politico.com/superdelegates/

It’s a terrible worry, American Way and so sad that so much of your time is spent worrying about it.

White men hold superdelegate power balance
By: Josephine Hearn
Feb 15, 2008 06:05 AM EST
“In an ironic twist to the historic Democratic nominating contest between an African-American and a woman, the balance of power may be held by a more familiar face: the white male.
According to a Politico analysis, close to half of the 700-plus Democratic superdelegates who could end up determining the party nominee are white men.
That strong response could portend a messy intraparty fight in the event that superdelegates cast the decisive votes for the nominee.
But superdelegates have never reflected the diversity of the Democratic party as a whole, nor were they designed to. They represent the party insiders, a group that white men still dominate.”

Wow, seems the Dem/Libs are quite as pristine as far as racism, sexism and equality matters as they love to pretend they are. Should be an interesting free-for-all cat fight at the convention again.
I can’t wait.

Wow, seems the Dem/Libs are quite as pristine as far as racism, sexism and equality matters as they love to pretend they are.

Should read ‘aren’t', as opposed to ‘are’.

oops.

Since so many are “worrying” about who may decide the Democratic Party nominee, I am free to not worry. If this possibility becomes reality it will get my attention.

“After all of this carnage, how stupid does one have to be to avoid seeing that it is the “gun-free zones” that are the problem? Almost without exception, these multiple victim psycho shootings take place in “gun-free zones.” How slow on the uptake does one need to be to not see this? How deeply brainwashed with the nanny state dogma does one have to be in order to cling to the delusion that “gun-free zones” do anything but draw maniacs to them like moths to a flame?

We are not advocating that every college freshman show up for orientation with a laptop, a semi-auto pistol and 250 rounds of ammunition. That is absurd. That is the caricature of our position that the gun prohibitionists try to hang in the air whenever we criticize their utter failure known as the “gun-free zone.” They know they have failed, but instead of discussing the issue intelligently they move to the reduction to the absurd because they know how quickly the flaws in their logic will be revealed in the light of rational analysis.

We advocate the complete abolition of gun free zones. Law-abiding adults have a natural right to self-defense regardless of where they are, be it church, shopping mall, school or any other public place. Everybody and their brother does not need to be armed, just remove the advertisement that this is one place where a psychopath can be absolutely guaranteed to meet no resistance. It’s simple. Not only do “gun-free zones” not work, they actual have the opposite effect. They draw murderous maniacs like a magnet.”

From Syd at Front sight press

Just think how Ron Paul must feel… Raising ALL that $$$$$ and couldnt buy any votes!!

American Way
Posted February 16, 2008 at 11:13 am | Permalink
“Did you mean, “are NOT quite””

Yes, you got it, they ARE NOT quite as pristine as far as racism, sexism and equality matters as they love to pretend they are.

Like I said it could turn out to be a real cat fight, showing the world the Dem/Libs are NOT capable of managing the country after all.

blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/02/open-thread-215/#comment-294488

Chas.
Posted February 15, 2008 at 1:14 pm | Permalink
With all of the racisdt, bigoted puke spew on here today, one would think there was a KKK convention in town LOL

Angry White Men = Angry Bigots

Think Archie Bunker on steroids!!

blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/02/open-thread-215/#comment-294756

Chas.
Posted February 15, 2008 at 6:12 pm | Permalink
Just for SOL >>>>

Main Entry: big•ot
Pronunciation: \?bi-g?t\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660

A person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
{Merriam-Webster Dictionary}

Things that make you say hmmmmmmmmm. Was chas defining himself for the blog?

Yeah Sol, Regular, and now Max are all the same blogger!

Chas is going thru China Syndrome mode.

It is AMAZING how overt the news media and the candidates are about discussing their criteria for selecting a nominee based on Race or Sex, etc…

Listen to em refer to skin color more often then Robert Byrd and the KKK.

They slice and dice us into all kinds of special groups by age, race, sex, as if there were NO anti-discrimination laws on the books!

Gay Democrats won’t vote for Obama, and neither will the racist Democrats.

Bigoted male Democrats are torn between voting against Obama or Hillary. They may even vote for McCain.

Hispanics were favoring Hillary, but now will vote for Obama. Blacks will only vote for Obama, because Obama is black. (That must be a law or something)

Older and younger non-gay white female bitches are now voting for Hillary. All gays are voting for Hillary.

Middle class white males and females are voting against both Obama and Hillary.

There are no difference on where Hillary and Barrack stand On The Issues, which apparently don’t even matter.

The inexperience level for Barrack and Hillary is the same.

Brrack did vote against Iraq, so that may be the only substantive difference, except for their differences in Skin Color and Sex of course.

Barrack does whine and cry less then Hillary,and that’s a big difference to me. I can’t imagine listening to that shrill bitch whine and cry every day on the news. Her fake “loud and firm” voice is so staged, it’s obvious she has NEVER been in a command role before.

Ever hear of “Command Voice”? Hillary can’t even fake that!

Oh, and both Brack and Hillary will ban guns – and just last week they displayed their lack of support for the 2nd Amendment.

Nope sol is for real.

But “Max”,”Regular”, and “boxlock” are just more stage nics for the blogs resident head case and welfare cheat.

EXCELLENT posts JR and Chas.

I shall save the 3 above posts and treasure them always.

Sol, you see the post I wrote to you yesterday?

http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/02/open-thread-215/#comment-294859

OK JR, I can live with bigot for chas. Fair ’nuff.

We’re all of us a little bigoted in one way or another sol.

Me I hate soulless Republicans.

You got me thinking the other day Sol.

I’m not much into conspiracy theories, but what I’ve read so far is very scary indeed.

Puzzle pieces keep falling randomly into place? Dots keep getting connected.

You read any of the Left Behind series?

blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/02/open-thread-216/#comment-295209

Chas.
Posted February 16, 2008 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

The guilty profess their innocence the loudest.

in = it in Sollies world.

Great article that describes many Lib posters here Sol. Maybe HillaryCare! will provide the help they need.

In the Left Behind series, a fictional account of the end days, the Anti-Christ is supported by a group of financial all-powerful elitists who control the worlds finances. Eventually there is One world currency, One world bank, and One world government controlled by the UN.

Sound familiar?

The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.
James Madison

Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter or lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Abraham Lincoln

Commerce with all nations. Alliance with none.
Thomas Jefferson

Peace is not the absence of conflict. It is the ability to handle conflict through peaceful means.
Ronal Reagan

It is not we non-interventionists who are isolationists. The real isolationists are those who impose sanctions and embargos on countries and peoples across the globe and who choose to use force overseas to promote democracy. A counterproductive approach that actually leads the U.S. to be more resented and more isolated in the world.
Ron Paul

Wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows.
Martin Luther King Jr.

That’s not a forehead… that’s a fivehead.

Humanity has only survived because human beings are, inherently, liberal.

Those who are not or tend toward the selfishness of conservatism only prosper or survive due to liberalism in society.

Consider the harsh life of the stone ages. Gonk may have been a mighty hunter in his own right. But alone, he could only catch small prey. It literally took a community to feed a community.

Conservatism is a social disorder. A fiscal conservative is a three year old child who never grew up. They can see no further than their own universe.

Which of course, revolves around them.

Without liberalism to level the social and economic playing field, conservatives would shortly find themselves the victim of society taking matters into its own best interest.

“And while we lived by the constitution, how did the US survive the first hundred years?”

Did you miss it?

The US only managed to survive the first 100 years BECAUSE of progressiveness and liberalism.

But let’s not take just 1778-1876

Consider the early colonists. Many of my ancestors were among them. Some high and mighty. Others not so. They had to cooperate to survive.

Ya didn’t much see colonists striking into the wilderness as individuals or even single families.

Consider the early colonies. The Northern colonies bore the brunt of the Crown’s tyranny. The South less so.

Would any individual state have been able to declare independence from England and carried it off? In FACT less than half of the population of the aggregate colonies even wanted independence.

Starting to get the idea or do I need to go on?

Yeah JR, the U.S. won its freedom by holding tea and cake parties for the British. Then, the Colonists simply talked the British to death.

…yeah, that works…

Go away James and take your meds.

The civil war was fought over some states wanting to maintain and expand the status quo (slavery) vs progressive elements who had long fought against slavery.

Let’s take the conservative approach.

States rights right?

Well President Lincoln could have been a conservative. He could have just agreed to disagree with the Confederacy and let them strike out on their own.

We’d probably STILL be at odds with the CSA and US/CSA historical relations would resemble the Balkans.

“BTW, glad to hear you agree with the good Dr.”

You know, Mr. Dev VB, there are a LOT of Republicans that should read that statement over and over again.

Democracy, almost by definition, is a ground up movement. It cannot be forced on any society, no matter how well intentioned.

Dr. Paul is correct in his assessment.

Consider the early colonists. Many of my ancestors were among them. Some high and mighty. Others not so. They had to cooperate to survive.

I see that you agree with me JR. The country needed not socially liberal government policies. They relied on themselves.

Outstanding JR.

They asked Monica the other day if she would endorse Hillary for President….

She thought about it for a few minutes…

Then she said:

I dont think so… Close… but no cigar!!!

ROFL!!!

LOL!!! Gronk the caveman was a liberal? Oh mannnn. Talk about twisted history.

Primitive tribes lived in a purely socialistic society. According to anthropologists, the early tribes owned nothing individually, everything was for the good of the whole. Pure socialism.

Actually, we do NOT agree sol.

The early colonists had little choice but to work together.

Today, the few CAN basically enslave the many.

It is only liberal policies that interfere and prevent America from descending into feudalism.

Your take on the social welfare system is about 15 years out of date sol. Thanks to welfare “reform”.

And even if you’re dated knowledge was correct.

What’s wrong with some welfare?

We subsidize farmers to protect the fertility of the land and prices by paying them not to farm.

If we were to pay a small portion of the population a marginally liveable stipend, conditions for those who DO choose to work would be elevated by the diminished pool of exploitable labor. Too, this would work to help people to find their true calling as opposed to just keeping themselves consistently fed by signing up for the first employer that will toss a wage their way.

JR,

The way I see things, a business should be left alone unless it is breaking the law. If the CEO takes a billion dollar bonus, then asks labor to take a pay cut, labor is more than free to not work there.

If you don’t agree with the above, don’t support them with your dollars.

I think it is the antithesis of freedom for the government to tell a business how to distribute funds earned.

Simplistic model, but would you like the government to regulate what your kids did for chores and how much you should compensate them with allowance?

Read the story about the Pilgrims and their early failed socialist experiment.

Then their later successful experiment with capitalism and private ownership of land.

The socialists here would have you beleive the early Communes is how Americans survived.

And that cave man example, they might of helped each other out.

Grog might have shared a big buffalo with the camp, but only if he got something in return.

The lazy JR clan bringing their empty plate to the fire side would be laughed at, and scraps might have been thrown at them if Grog and the productive clan members felt generous that day.

The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well.

They were going to distribute it equally. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. Nobody owned anything. They just had a share in it.

Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives. He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus turning loose the power of the marketplace.

That’s right.

Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism.

And what happened? It didn’t work! Surprise, surprise, huh?

What Bradford and his community found was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personal motivation!

But while most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years – trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it – the Pilgrims decided early on to scrap it permanently.

http://phantomlady.wordpress.com/2007/11/21/the-truth-about-thanksgiving-what-they-dont-teach-anymore/

Finally, in the spring of 1623, Governor Bradford and the others “begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery,” according to Bradford’s history.

They had thought “that the taking away of property, and bringing in community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing,” Bradford recounts. They were wrong. “For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much imployment that would have been to their benefite and comforte,” Bradford writes.

After the Pilgrims had endured near-starvation for three winters, Bradford decided to experiment when it came time to plant in the spring of 1623. He set aside a plot of land for each family, that “they should set corne every man for his owne perticuler, and in that regard trust to themselves.”

The results were nothing short of miraculous.

Bradford writes: “This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other waise would have bene by any means the Govr or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave far better content.”

With proper incentives in place, the Pilgrims produced and enjoyed a bountiful harvest in the fall of 1623 and set aside “a day of thanksgiving” to thank God for their good fortune. “Any generall wante or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day,” Bradford writes in an entry from 1647, the last year covered by his history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanksgiving#1621_Thanksgiving.2C_The_Pilgrims_in_Massachusetts

I know everyone wants to support the troops. So check this out!

Pleefer,
If you don’t mind me asking how’d you do the hyperlink above.
I know everyone wants to support the troops. So check this out!

Here

take out everything twixt the quotation marks “..”, plug your new url in there and type whatever you want where it says, “>here<”. the whole code is everything from:

a href=”http://blahblahblah.com” target=”_blank”>write something here</a

begin this entire thing with a

or just go here and it’ll teach you some basic html…scroll down a bit to see the chart

you bet.

The reason it doesnt work, is not because it is some bad idea, or evil plot… but because of individual GREED…. No matter how much some folks can benefit from that system, there is always some dumb yo yo who wants just a little bit more than his designated share!! GREED defeats it… just like in the New Testament story…

That might cause a huge split in the Democratic party Boxlock or at least a lot of unhappy campers.

Hey Boxlock,

Interesting link. It might just be wishful thinking. I think she might have had the lock on the super delegates a couple of months ago, but they might be slip sliding away.

Clinton Inc. has been working the super delegates for years, many of them owe the Clinton machine. However, out of approximately $900 thousand dollars donated to the super delegates by Obama and Clinton Obama has funneled the most, almost $700 thousand.

That and the fact that Hillary seems to be weak and a drag on the ticket might start the super delegates to tip toward Obama.

“That might cause a huge split in the Democratic party”

Your opinion of the Democratic Party is unwanted and unneeded, McCreepy.

To me, it is hilarious (no pun intended) that Republicans are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO concerned bout our nominating process. What they should be worried about is the fact that they do not have anything more than a “Bob Dole” candidate to toss into the arena.

Come on. John McCain? That is who you folks want to be president? Bush III?

Christ.

You guys have the black Jimmy Carter and a return of the Clinton years. They are both liberal, more liberal than anyone you’ve lost with lately. Not a bit of difference.

It will come down to which half of your party wins, the racist half or the sexist half.

Good luck, you’ll need it. We have a real candidate.

“We have a real candidate”

Did ya dig up Teddy Roosevelt?

Hey, come on you guys.
Tell me you are all really tight friends here and your trashing each other like this is just good natured banter.
Hank, I don’t know….do you really want to get together for a blog picnic and shoot. I guess I’m missing something, cause I don’t want to get shot.

“And not one other poster says anything to you about it.”

That is because they all agree with me, McCreepy.

I am laughing at you Hank.

Look at what you are reduced to.

A candidate that you yourself did not support just a few days ago.

And the support of an insane nic switching blogger.

Pray we will be kinder to you and yours than you have been to me and mine.

Well, it’s Sat. nite, and I have much to do tomorrow… So, I leave the Blog with this Prayer of the Evangelical Agnostics, by Susan Werner, on the album, “The Gospel Truth” –

Thy Kingdom Come,
in every nation;

Thy Will be done,
In everything we do;

Lord lead us not
Into temptation;

But deliver us
From those
Who think they’re You!

– Susan Werner –

Good night; Good luck; and God bless;
Whatever you conceive God to be!!

Blessings all!!

(1) Illegal Aliens and (2) Public Education . . . a problem? Not at all – we have a law that says “No child will be left behind . . . behind what?

As complex as the liberal/socialists want us AVERAGE COMMON REGULAR AMERICANS to believe that deportation is for illegal aliens, it is not complex at all. They can go home the same way they got here – its called attrition and it could be done after their employment sources are “dried” up. The federal government apparently feels it is “powerless” (or they feel they need the vote of an illegal alien in order to retain their seat in Congress) to enforce existing laws regarding the IRCA of 1986. It can’t be anymore difficult than enforcing existing laws prohibiting bank robberies; kidnapping; rape; murder; car theft; separation of church and state; terrorism; illegal drugs; etc., etc., etc. I am assuming that they are still want enforcement for the laws they forward to the White House for signature. But, some are probably willing to compromise on any depending on the lobbyist with whom they last visited.

Now they are literally hiding behind coded words and meaningless phrases, such as “triggers” to avoid upsetting a group of people that cannot legally cast a single vote. They can play politics all day long and at the end of the day, well, it is just the end of another day in Washington, D.C. How about subjecting these illegals to a literacy test in their own language about the history and governmental processes of the United States in order to be considered for legal entry (meaning standing in line rather than fence-leaping). Even with all the triggers in place that the most imaginative person or feckless bureaucratic committee can conjure; they are still going to cross into the USA and find work somewhere.

If not through attrition then here is an alternative: Deportation of illegals could be very economical when compared to the costs of education, health care, housing assistance, food stamps, crime, and other welfare expenses. Today, a one-way ticket on Delta Airlines from Atlanta to Acapulco costs only about $300. The cost to send a family of five back to Central America might cost no more than $1,500, while the annual cost for them staying here might be as much as $23,000 per individual. Therefore, the problem is not complex and not relatively expensive to resolve. Moreover, we could upgrade the tickets to first class and have those folks really enjoy their brief accommodations and in-flight service. Beats traveling business class with your chin on your knees or your knees rubbing the back of the seat in front of you and a handful of stale pretzels and a soda pop. Who knows, we might even be sending a terrorist or two back home.

Federal minds seem to become “fogged in” and their speech becomes mendacious when it comes to the subject of, “Gee Whiz and Golly Willikers, we just can’t get all these illegal aliens back home – the problem is just too complex?” The feds need to give us AVERAGE, COMMON, REGULAR, AMERICANS credit for having effective mental thought processes unless they feel that public screwlls curriculum are really working. Moreover, the public screwlls must be working according to federal curriculum guidelines as I was asked several years ago by a tenth grader (with a glazed and dazed look), “Did you fight in the Civil War?” (I was wearing my old Civil War sweatshirt with the dates 1861/1865 on the front). My response was slow and measured and somewhat cynical, “No, I was too young for that war.” She then said she misspoke and meant World War I. I then told her that I was too old for that war. I told the tenth grader that the Civil War started 140 years ago this month and that I was born in 1943, (it was April 2001 at the time). I was then met with a blank stare.

Two days later, I asked our office intern (not Monica Lewinsky) but also a tenth grade student in a public screwll, if she knew whom the first President was and she answered that she did not know. She also did not know who wrote the Emancipation Proclamation or what it was. I had a co-worker whose son was involved in studying Black History for February tell me that the last slave ship to come to America was in 1880. I told her that importing slaves into the United States was banned in 1808 and she said I was wrong and that her son was told it was 1880. I asked her if the teacher meant North America or South America and she didn’t know the answer to that. She also told me that Tina Turner had written “Proud Mary” (the John Fogerty song). Come on people, let’s do our homework!

Stupid blog.

“I almost forgot, where in our Constitution does it give power to Congress to investigate professional sports?”

MLB has an anti-trust exemption, therefore, they have a right to investigate if they choose.

The NFL does not have an exemption so Specters (R-Dumbass) has no business messing with the league.

“the question is why is this such a high priority item for the Majority Democrat Congress?”

And when the Republic controlled Congress investigated MLB in 2005, did you complain?

I think not.

Actually I did Clark, but I wasn’t on this blog then.

test