Open thread 5/3

thread

94 Comments

  1. KansasNative
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    When the superconscious mind contacts God, it is sure of success because it is attuned to His unlimited power.

    Through prayer and meditation you will know that you are His divine child, and as His child you can attract at will what you need at any time, anywhere.

    Paramahansa Yogananda

  2. JWink
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 6:21 am | Permalink

    I think of the first two weeks of May as our peak tornado time here in Kansas … so be alert. They can and will happen again.

  3. JWink
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    OPEN-LETTER TO PHILLIP BROWNLEE, WE OPINION EDITOR: What happened to the “local issues thread?” Perhaps leaders of the “good old boy network” objected to giving voice to regular hometown taxpayers of Wichita.

    Remember many of the so-called leaders of the “good old boy network” are now gone from Wichita, taking their bloated taxpayer-funded bank accounts with them, reward for virtually NO production here in Wichita. Some are returning to the east coast where they came from, perhaps to wreak havoc there.

    So, Phillip, how about giving us back the “local issues thread” … OK?

  4. lindainks55
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 7:33 am | Permalink

    Seems now this group of Kansas lawmakers whose misguided plan to allow new coal-fired power plants was wisely vetoed, will throw conniption fits. No they will spend OUR money and the time they promised to spend on state business in suing the governor. Their incompetence knows no bounds!

    My state representative, Jason Watkins, is part of this gang of wasteful and pouty children. I plan to hold him accountable at the voting booth.

  5. outlander
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 7:56 am | Permalink

    http://townhall.com/news/us/2008/05/03/ohio_attorney_general_admits_to_affair_with_employee

    What is it with these state attorneys general? Morrison, Spitzer (before winning NY guv) and now this guy.

  6. lindainks55
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    outlander, too many times those who run for office are the least capable, least competent, most corrupt and power driven. Think about the people you think are intelligent, skilled, capable, trustworthy, admirable — are they running for public office?

  7. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    This is insane. AND and disgrace. WTF? Sunflower spent so much of their own money trying to buy the legislature that now they dont have enough money left to sue the state on their own behalf?

    They have to get the legislature to use TAXPAYER money to sue sebelius and bremby? In what freakin’ alternate universe did THAT idea originate amongst these oh so conservative and fiscally responsible REPUBLICANS?

    Jesus WEPT!

    The republican led legislature uses taxpayer money, in a time of budget cuts, to sue the gov on behalf of a private citizen.

    Woof.

    I’m all for petitioning for redress, but COME ON! Sunflower has no legal dept? They have no money to hire lawyers?

    I cant WAIT for all the small government, fiscal conservative, non-socialist republicans to weigh in on how THIS use of taxpayer funds is ok.

    http://www.kansas.com/news/story/392410.html

  8. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    …and we all know how this same gang of thugs did when they sued over school finance.

    The only folks who win with this neocon kansas legislature are the lawyers who laugh all the way to the bank with their taxpayer financed loot.

    Let’s hope the republican led ks legislature goes 0 for 2 in legal cases.

    NOW will you vote the mfer’s off the island in November?

  9. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    I think the kansas republican legislature, both houses, must be taking their cues from the preznit.

    Ya know how the boy king just holds his breath, stomps his feet, has a hissypissy fit….

    and then the democrats in congress cave and give him whatever he wants.

    Looks like the kansas folks are doing the same, with neufeld taking the boy king’s role for this production.

    I bet that sebelius wont cave like pelosi and reid.

    Irresistible force? Meet the immovable object.

    They need a disclaimer though on the show bill.

    “This kabuki theatre financed by taxpayer dollars.”

  10. annie_moose
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    sad

    http://www.life.com/Life/essay/gulfwar/gulf01.html

  11. HLP
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2871

  12. kansasdem
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    Who, on God’s green earth, invited Karl the Super Liar Rove to Wichita? Who is paying him? And who in their right-wing-nut mind would honor the traitor with their presence?

    Whoever that might be, please ask the Liar how he feels about lying to Scott McClelland and sending him out to the podium of the White House press room to lie to the American people.

    Then ask him how he feels about lying about “architecting” the firing of Bush-appointed conservative Republican US attorneys for political reasons

    Then ask him about how he feels about lying to federal grand juries.

    Then ask him whether he’s going to lie again, or plead the Fifth, or flee the country, when he gets the supoena to testify before Congress about his role in the political prosecution of a governor.

    If you have time, also ask him about his old friends Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, the Rev. John Hagee and so many others — ask him about his belief in End of Times political theories, the K Street Project, Mission Accomplished . . .

    Maybe it is a good thing he’s coming to Wichita. So much to ask him.

    It would also be interesting to see the guest list.

  13. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    Gosh, would you be surprised to know that it was… wait for it… Wichita REPUBLICANS who invited the rovester.

    Hee hee heeeeeee.

    Toddly must be really scared.

    GO DONALD!

  14. lindainks55
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    “…and we all know how this same gang of thugs did when they sued over school finance.”
    ——————

    farmgrrl, don’t suppose the word “activist” will always be used in front of the word judge now that these pouty sore loser children are the ones bringing the courts into the situation.

    It’s a wonder they don’t all have appointments within the bush administration. They do seem as incompetent as those he likes to surround himself with.

  15. lindainks55
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    You know “things” aren’t goin’ good when bush comes to visit Kansas, when Rove has to be brought in. Kansas. Boy, “things” must be desperate for the Republican Party!

  16. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    They wont be “activist” judges unless they rule against the republicans. If they rule in favor of the republicans, the judges will be hailed with “upholding the rule of law”.

    SSDD

  17. JMWalker
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    Ridiculous . . . suing the guv for doing her job. Maybe we should form a collective and sue the so-called Republican coal plant coalition for wasting Kansas taxpayer funds. Better yet, impeach them, or vote the morons out of office. But then, the morons would use taxpayer money to fight it.

    Another example of the ever tightening box the repubes live in.

  18. American
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    ksfarmgrrl,

    You sound just like Jeremiah Wright.

    Hey all of you LIFs out there!!!

    Are you all obsessed with George W or something?It’s all you talk about.

    Oh! I’m sorry.

    He’s responsible for your bad mood too.

  19. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    No soup today troll. Crawl back under your bridge.

  20. KansasNative
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    HLP send your linx to President sissyboy.

    He’s all about global warming now and sez YOU are wrong!

  21. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:34 am | Permalink

    Ya know, Walker, the problem with morris and neufeld and their associated wingnuts is that their seats are safe. The locals who send them to Topeka are so full of koolaide they’re just robo voters. AND their voters are dumb enough to believe putting this Holcomb plant in their back yards is good for them. That it’s economic development.

    Hell, lead smelting is economic development too, but most folks dont want to live next door to one. Is western kansas so desperate that all we can hope for are crumbs from the master’s table that turn out to be gristle and bone?

    Maybe.

    The people who support this plant are just too dumb to know that even animals dont foul their own nests.

    But ya gotta give it up to sunflower and the repukes on this one. They’ve got the folks in western Kansas thinking they are spreading rose petals while they crap in their own nests.

    Good trick that one!

  22. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    … and still no comment from the resident wingnut population here about using taxpayer money to sue a governor over a veto they couldnt override? Even when they were handing out pork for votes?

    AND they are suing on behalf of a private company. WTF? Sunflower spent so much money buying the legislature that now they cant do their own legal work?

    Kansas… as wingnutty as you think…

  23. JMWalker
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    It’s the box, grrl, and only the box. They can’t allow themselves to think out of it for fear they might turn Liberal:-)

  24. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:59 am | Permalink

    Excellent point, Kgrrl. You’re absolutely right–the taxpayers shouldn’t be funding this.

    Isn’t it RepubliCONs who are always complaining about “tort reform” so they can eliminate “nusiance lawsuits?” Aren’t they the ones demanding that the judicary stop “legislating from the bench?”

    Besides, if we can’t sue Bush for lying us into war, Sebelieus can’t be sued for exercising her routine veto power as Governor.

  25. Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:24 am | Permalink

    The law allows Guv to veto legislation… Legislature couldnt get the over-ride… End of story… HOW can they sue the Guv for the Veto??? Anybody know how that works??

  26. Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:26 am | Permalink

    Isnt that asking judges to be “activist” to make a legal ruling on legislative action??

    Hey, the PFLAG and others should have done that on the anti-gay legislation!!

  27. lindainks55
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    Chas, seems the “legislators” in question have already been bought and paid for. Maybe Sunflower wants their money back since they didn’t get what they paid for. Conniption fits by adults are pretty unseemly and the best we can hope for is they get these idiots UNelected. I’m not holding my breath.

  28. Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    Sounds a little like they dont really believe in the Law that they pledge to uphold in their oath of office??

  29. Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:48 am | Permalink

    ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:37 am | Permalink
    … and still no comment from the resident wingnut population here about using taxpayer money to sue a governor over a veto they couldnt override? Even when they were handing out pork for votes?
    ———————-

    They were handing out pork and I wasn’t there? Heck, I wanted to barbeque today too. :)

  30. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    heheheheh. “Legislating from the bench”. Good one Captain.

    So… the “bench” is gonna do neufeld’s job for him? The one he couldnt get done by hook or by crook?

    And the cons wanna whine about “subjective” morality.

    Ya see, this is what I mean about having the stomach for a fight against the repukes. Local, state or national, they are INCAPABLE of saying “we lost, good fight, let’s move on”.

    I’m tellin’ ya, the only way to rid us of this scourge is to burn ‘em down, and then salt the earth underneath them so nothing ever grows there again.

    I see no other way. I’m glad some of you have retained your optimism about “reaching across the aisle”. But….

    How’s that working in Kansas? In D.C.?

    They cant be worked with. Wooden stake, silver bullets, cross, fire and salt.

    Garlic even.

  31. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    Chas, we dont have unlimited resources in the gay community, especially in Kansas, for lawsuits.

    I mean, we cant get the taxpayers, via the legislature, to fund ours.

    Unlike Sunflower…

  32. Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    With Basebll Season in full swing, we need to be careful about using that term, “Wingnuts” since it is the new name of Wichita’s Minor League ball club!! LOL

  33. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    Oh, and one more thing…

    I saw the shark outside the chiropractor’s office this morning. His back is killin’ him from all of neufeld’s jumpin’….

  34. Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

    I know KFG — it was just a thought… I dont see how anybody can sue Guv, for following the Law…

  35. ksfarmgrrl
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

    “With Basebll Season in full swing, we need to be careful about using that term, “Wingnuts” since it is the new name of Wichita’s Minor League ball club!!”

    They should have known better. It’s waaaaay too accurate. Common usage and all to define Wichita and well, most of Kansas. More than seventy percent.

  36. Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    LOL how true KFG — I think the baseball team thing had to do with aircraft industry, and past efforts at building planes that used many “wing nuts” to hold planes together… of course “wing nuts” isnt quite the same as “wingnuts” LOL

  37. kansasdem
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    On second thought, re. Karl Rove’s visit, maybe it would be worth the 50 bucks just to see who’s there and who’s crazy enough to pay $150 to get their picture taken with him. What would you do with the picture? You couldn’t hang it in a public place; you’d lose your business. You think it’s possible that Bush will grant him a blanket pardon for any future indictments?

  38. RFL
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    70% of Kansas consists of “wingnuts”?

    farmgirl considered the majority of Kansas to nutish. Given that she is leftwingnut, I guess we can then say that she and her nut friends are even more nutish since they are in the minority.

    But what’s wrong with being a nut? Be proud of your nutishness everyone!

  39. Posted May 3, 2008 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

    With Bush?? Sure, a blanket pardon is possible… a bit un-precedented, but possible…

  40. JWink
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

    CHANGING THE SUBJECT … TO THE DECLINING SERVICE FROM THE DOWNTOWN POSTOFFICE ON WACO.

    Did you notice the stamp machine at downtown Post Office on Waco has been removed? You can no longer purchase a stamp to mail an envelope without standing in the long, slow moving lines. Even then, you might have to purchase a roll of stamps, I’m not sure.

    The former stamp window has been more or less converted to passport office for those who wish to go to Mexico and return.

    Then Thursday about 4 PM, I witnessed the worst case of government customer service I have ever seen. A veteran, no less, received his very modest V.A. check which contained some minor damage, some wrinkles and a torn missing corner.

    The veteran explained that he did not have a checking account and was on a very limited income level. He appealed to the postoffice to cash the check since a grocery store would not and sent him back to the postoffice.

    A postal service representative screamed at him that the postoffice couldn’t cash the check even though they had caused the problem.

    A long line of postal customers, a prominent lawyer and I overheard this veteran pleading for some kind of dispensation … to no avail.

    What is going on? Is the postal service going done the drain? Have they lost all decency in dealing with the public?

  41. Posted May 3, 2008 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

    I see no other way. I’m glad some of you have retained your optimism about “reaching across the aisle”

    It’s not optimism so much as practicality. You’re right, the leaders of the RepubliCON party out-machivel Machivelli.

    Somebody like Rush Limbaugh or Newt Gingerich or Marvin Neufeld or Sean Hannity or MaxGrobnik or Hank Price, they can’t be reasoned with, let alone worked with.

    But a lot of people who don’t think about politics much–the silent majority–are inadvertantly supporting the CON agenda just because they’ve never been offered anything different.

    Obama offers those people something different. Those are the people we can convince and build a new coalition with.

  42. Posted May 3, 2008 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

    BTW, I am seething that the Kansas Republican party would invite KKKarl Rove here for a fundraising dinner.

    This man is Satan Incarnate. He’s everything slimy and bad, he’s everything wrong with American politics rolled into a ball and given human form.

    Kansas Republican insult all Kansans by giving this . . . thing a venue in our city.

  43. Posted May 3, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    You expected anything different, CapN???

  44. Posted May 3, 2008 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    Just for Grins >>>>

    If Bud Abbott and Lou Costello were alive today, their infamous sketch, “Who’s on First?” might have turned out something like this:

    COSTELLO CALLS TO BUY A COMPUTER FROM ABBOTT

    ABBOTT: Super Duper Computer Store. Can I help you?

    COSTELLO: Thanks. I’m setting up an office in my den and I’m thinking about buying a computer.

    ABBOTT: Mac?

    COSTELLO: No, the name’s Lou.

    ABBOTT: Your computer?

    COSTELLO: I don’t own a computer. I want to buy one.

    ABBOTT: Mac?

    COSTELLO: I told you, my name’s Lou.

    ABBOTT: What about Windows?

    COSTELLO: Why? Will it get stuffy in here?

    ABBOTT: Do you want a computer with Windows?

    COSTELLO: I don’t know. What will I see when I look at the windows?

    ABBOTT: Wallpaper.

    COSTELLO: Never mind the windows. I need a computer and software.

    ABBOTT: Software for Windows?

    COSTELLO: No. On the computer! I need something I can use to write proposals, track expenses and run my business. What do you have?

    ABBOTT: Office.

    COSTELLO: Yeah, for my office. Can you recommend anything?

    ABBOTT: I just did.

    COSTELLO: You just did what?

    ABBOTT: Recommend something.

    COSTELLO: You recommended something?

    ABBOTT: Yes.

    COSTELLO: For my office?

    ABBOTT: Yes.

    COSTELLO: OK, what did you recommend for my office?

    ABBOTT: Office.

    COSTELLO: Yes, for my office!

    ABBOTT: I recommend Office with Windows.

    COSTELLO: I already have an office with windows! OK, let’s just say I’m sitting at my computer and I want to type a proposal - What do I need?

    ABBOTT: Word.

    COSTELLO: What word?

    ABBOTT: Word in Office.

    COSTELLO: The only word in office is office.

    ABBOTT: The Word in Office for Windows.

    COSTELLO: Which word in office for windows?

    ABBOTT: The Word you get when you click the blue
    “W”.

    COSTELLO: I’m going to click your blue “w” if
    you don’t start with some straight answers. What about financial bookkeeping? You have anything I can track my money with?

    ABBOTT: Money.

    COSTELLO: That’s right. What do you have?

    ABBOTT: Money.

    COSTELLO: I need money to track my money?

    ABBOTT: It comes bundled with your computer.

    COSTELLO: What’s bundled with my computer?

    ABBOTT: Money.

    COSTELLO: Money comes with my computer?

    ABBOTT: Yes. No extra charge.

    COSTELLO: I get a bundle of money with my computer? How much?

    ABBOTT: One copy.

    COSTELLO: Isn’t it illegal to copy money?

    ABBOTT: Microsoft gave us a license to copy Money.

    COSTELLO: They can give you a license to copy money?

    ABBOTT: Why not? THEY OWN IT!

    A few days later:

    ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?

    COSTELLO: How do I turn my computer off?

    ABBOTT: Click on “START”

    ?The End?

  45. outlander
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

    Well, I’d love to hear Rove speak, but $50 is a little steep, especially since you can catch him on Fox.

    The person that I really wanted to hear was Rumsfeld, because of his lengthy and historic career. But he was shouted down by the free speech liberals.

  46. DavidB
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

    In October 2004, the United States Army issued an urgent bulletin to commanders across Iraq, warning them of a deadly new threat to American soldiers. Because of flawed electrical work by contractors, the bulletin stated, soldiers at American bases in Iraq had received severe electrical shocks, and some had even been electrocuted.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/world/middleeast/04electrocute.html?hp

    Heck of a job!

  47. BlueJay
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    ” but $50 is a little steep, ”

    It IS?

    And you think you are a Republican?

    If 50 bucks is a hurt on ya, you are voting for the wrong party.

  48. Monkeyhawk
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

    “outlander” admits –

    “The person that I really wanted to hear was Rumsfeld, because of his lengthy and historic career. But he was shouted down by the free speech liberals.”

    If Rummy actually gave a “free speech” these days, I might actually attend. But he’s on the wingnut lecture circuit these days. He doesn’t lie for free anymore.

    Don’t we all know that the Kochs are underwriting Rove’s appearance?

    It’s the Republic Party version of cruising south Broadway.

  49. MaxGrobnik
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

    Australia’s Gun Laws: Little Effect
    Thursday, May. 01, 2008 By DANIEL WILLIAMS/SYDNEY

    “The hypothesis that the removal of a large number of firearms owned by civilians [would lead to fewer gun-related deaths] is not borne out by the evidence.”

    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1736501,00.html?imw=Y

  50. Posted May 3, 2008 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

    “The authors are not recommending that the gun law be repealed, though they do write of their hope that their findings might give policy makers “greater confidence” in approaching firearms policy in the future. “We’ve set out to scientifically investigate what was happening [with gun deaths] before and after 1996,” she says. “We are simply presenting the evidence as it stands.” The new Kevin Rudd-led Labor government has no plans to review the existing laws.”
    ===============================

    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1736501,00.html?imw=Y

  51. Political_mama
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

    That’s pretty funny Chas. It’s very true.

  52. Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:05 pm | Permalink

    Thanks :-)

  53. Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

    So, which horse won the KY Derby?? Anybody see it??

  54. HLP
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

    Good race, Big Brown won going away. Second place, Eight Bells broke both front ankles after crossing the wire and was immediately euthanized.

    Sad end to a great race.

  55. Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

    Reminiscent of Barbaro

  56. BlueJay
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:28 pm | Permalink

    I am glad I did not watch.

    I am sorta glad the folks in the stands did.

    To have to watch that horse put down right in fromt of them. Maybe it will make them think twice about their “sport”.

  57. Boxlock
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 9:48 pm | Permalink

    MaxGrobnik
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

    Australia’s Gun Laws: Little Effect
    Thursday, May. 01, 2008 By DANIEL WILLIAMS/SYDNEY

    “The hypothesis that the removal of a large number of firearms owned by civilians [would lead to fewer gun-related deaths] is not borne out by the evidence.”

    Max,
    THANKS for posting that, I had not seen it yet.
    Of course everyone should already know what the result of a study of that nature would reveal, but as witnessed here on the blog many are either ignorant, or so fixed on their agenda they won’t recognize the truth.

  58. Mary_Caruso
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:06 pm | Permalink

    “but as witnessed here on the blog many are either ignorant, or so fixed on their agenda they won’t recognize the truth.”

    So true, Box…you’re a perfect example of that.

  59. Political_mama
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    I think it borders on animal cruelty to run a horse to the point it breaks its legs.

  60. Mary_Caruso
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:13 pm | Permalink

    “What never really seems to occur is a real, thorough discussion on the fact that often the only common denominator in these tragedies is the use of guns. There is no other weapon that is legally available that can kill so many in such a short period of time. It’s amazing that more people don’t make that simple acknowledgment”

    From the same source you provided the link to, Box.

  61. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:14 pm | Permalink

    “The authors are not recommending that the gun law be repealed, though they do write of their hope that their findings might give policy makers “greater confidence” in approaching firearms policy in the future. “We’ve set out to scientifically investigate what was happening [with gun deaths] before and after 1996,” she says. “We are simply presenting the evidence as it stands.” The new Kevin Rudd-led Labor government has no plans to review the existing laws.”
    ===============================

    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1736501,00.html?imw=Y

  62. Mary_Caruso
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:14 pm | Permalink

    I agree Pmom…I hate any “sport” that involves the use of animals.

  63. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    PMama, I would think there will be a full investigation on the horse’s tragic accident… If there isnt, there should be…

  64. Mary_Caruso
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    Australia’s gun deaths are 1/15th of the USAs.

  65. sursum
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:21 pm | Permalink

    Max, Chas: A few countries have gun ownership rates equal to or greater than the US, countries that tend to be more rural (Australia, New Zealand) and Canada where hunting is a more widespread than in the US. What gun control advocates worry about are hand guns and fully automatic weapons, the weapons of choice for crime. Hunting weapons are not in jeopardy, it is concealed weapons they want to get off the streets. I know what gets to folks up north (got family there)is the handguns being smuggled into their neck of the woods, arming the drug gangs and causing murders to double in the last 10 years. Toronto, about the size of Chicago, used to have about 35-45 murders a year, it is up to 80 now and the weapons used were smuggled/stolen hand guns. Pro and anti-gun advocates read all kinds of things into data but just about everywhere, US gun attitudes is baffling. There was CBC item in Dec. 2006 (I just googled it) where Howard said the gun buyback was a great success. The same item suggests that hanging and other method seems to have filled the void created by lower gun related deaths!

  66. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    Hmmm, gun death statistics.

    Well, let’s see, one could be unfortunate enough to live in Africa in certain countries, where people are routinely shot, hacked to death and if you’ve really drawn the ‘death card’ you and your family can starve to death when the local warlord steals U.N. donated food.

    Yeah, let’s compare those statistics…

  67. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    “And suicide by firearm? Here again, rates were falling pre-1996. And while the decline gained speed after 1996, suicide by other methods began declining then, too. McPhedran and coauthor Jeanine Baker say suicide needs to be examined in a broader context that includes growing public awareness of mental health issues and increased use of antidepressants.”

    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1736501,00.html?imw=Y

  68. American
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

    ksfarmgrrl,

    If you don’t like Kansas, why do you live here?

  69. outlander
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:32 pm | Permalink

    Chas: Investigation? She broke her ankles! Thoroughbreds are susceptible to that. It is unpredictable. Too bad.

    You have to remember that if there isn’t horse racing, the horses don’t exist. They were born and bred to run and they love it.

    Big Brown is a magnificent horse. He had plenty left at the end today. Triple Crown?

  70. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

    They will investigate the horse… perhaps she shouldnt have been running in the race… perhaps she was abused in training…

  71. outlander
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:40 pm | Permalink

    “They will investigate the horse… perhaps she shouldnt have been running in the race… perhaps she was abused in training…”

    Who are “They” Chas?

    Perhaps, as usual, you don’t have a clue.

  72. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:41 pm | Permalink

    The same commission that investigated Barbara two years ago… Racing Commission??

  73. Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:42 pm | Permalink

    ooops Barbaro

  74. HLP
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:55 pm | Permalink

    Hey Outlander,

    I watched the race today and I was impressed with the way Big Brown answered the call coming into the stretch. He seemed to have a lot left.

    Triple crown is possible!

  75. Boxlock
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:01 pm | Permalink

    Mary_Caruso Posted May 3, 2008 at 10:06 pm |
    “but as witnessed here on the blog many are either ignorant, or so fixed on their agenda they won’t recognize the truth.”
    “So true, Box…you’re a perfect example of that.”

    Mary, did ya read the article hon???

    It said the gun confiscation, and the horrendous cost of the buy-back, has NOT made any difference in gun deaths. Here…now read this real SLOW, okay?

    “But these changes have done nothing to reduce gun-related deaths, according to Samara McPhedran, a University of Sydney academic and coauthor of a soon-to-be-published paper that reviews a selection of previous studies on the effects of the 1996 legislation. The conclusions of these studies were “all over the place,” says McPhedran. But by pulling back and looking purely at the statistics, the answer “is there in black and white,” she says. “The hypothesis that the removal of a large number of firearms owned by civilians [would lead to fewer gun-related deaths] is not borne out by the evidence.”

    Just to show you what a free country is like and make you feel better I’m sure, I ordered another firearm, and minutes ago ordered 500 rounds of ammo online for it.
    WHAT A COUNTRY!!!
    Want to go shoot’in, why I bet you would love it, and turn into a regular ol Anne Oakley.
    Night sweetie :lol:

  76. Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

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

    Blessings ALL!! Happy Ascension Sunday!!

  77. Boxlock
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:16 pm | Permalink

    Chas Posted,
    “Blessings ALL!! Happy Ascension Sunday!!”

    AND….Soon the beginning of PENTECOST

  78. BlueJay
    Posted May 3, 2008 at 11:37 pm | Permalink

    Nice to know you are also a ghoul Outlander.

    That other land that you remind yourself you belong to instead of this one?

    Not a place I want any part of based on you.

  79. Posted May 4, 2008 at 12:48 am | Permalink

    BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Four U.S. Marines were killed by a roadside bomb in the western Iraqi province of Anbar on Friday, the U.S. military said on Sunday.

    *****

    BTW, last month’s 52 US deaths is the highest since August 2007, as the “surge” was winding down.

    The number of reported deaths now stands at 4071, with no end in sight.

  80. beber
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 6:30 am | Permalink

    “I agree Pmom…I hate any “sport” that involves the use of animals.” — Mary Caruso

    Is eating a sport?

  81. Boxlock
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 6:54 am | Permalink

    Mary,
    It occurred to me that a definition of terms might be in order, the difference between ‘ignorant’ and ’stupid’ or foolish.
    I feel that being ignorant of issues are ok, that only means that you are unlearned..It does not make you a Dummie, and it does not make you stupid.
    I, all of us, have been ignorant of many things in our life’s, but it was because we had no experience in that area of life, and not been educated or presented with the facts.
    To me being stupid is to know something and yet refuse to accept it, even after you have been taught, or shown. Or it could be just a state of denial as well.
    Or worse, it could be bull-headed adherence to a personal agenda when given the facts that contradict.

    The Australian study clearly shows the confiscation of guns has had little effect on anything except to have taken freedoms away and cost a heck of a lot of taxpayer money. Those are the facts!
    The study stated that, “What never really seems to occur is a real, thorough discussion on the fact that often the only common denominator in these tragedies is the use of guns.” That only says a discussion hasn’t occurred, it does not say, by extension, that removal will solve the violence problem. That’s a little like taking the leap of logic that if 99% of people that commit murder eat carrots, and if we simply ban the eating of carrots murder will drop. Yes guns are used in the commission of violent acts, but the objective is to eliminate violence, and simply eliminating guns, as shown by this study, does eliminate the violence.
    So I repeat;
    “The hypothesis that the removal of a large number of firearms owned by civilians [would lead to fewer gun-related deaths] is not borne out by the evidence.” And, “But these changes have done nothing to reduce gun-related deaths”.
    Now you have the facts, at least from this unbiased and well done study on one of the largest gun confiscations in recent times.
    Since you now have the facts…what is it, ignorant (not bad, just uninformed), or Stupid? It’s your call.

  82. Boxlock
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 6:59 am | Permalink

    Important word left out in my post above;
    “does eliminate the violence.” Should read;
    ‘does NOT eliminate the violence’

  83. Political_mama
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    Racing horses is cruel, running is what they love to do, but not while being ridden to the point of injury.

  84. sursum
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    Boxlock: I agree gun restraint does not restrain violence but close proximity of a weapon, that is carrying a concealed weapon, tends to take violence to a higher level of consequence. I do not agree that strict enforcement or tightenening of gun laws takes away any freedoms and I think that the Aussies or anyone else who have tighter controls would be amazed at suggestions their freedom is impuned.

  85. Boxlock
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    sursum,
    Read what the Aussies and the Brits think of their restrictive gun laws. Of course many, many do, all those that lost their guns and their hobbies of the shooting sports.
    How can YOU say you don’t believe “tightening of gun laws takes away any freedoms” for someone else. It may not be apparent to to you, if you don’t participate, but it sure as heck does for me. And, though not apparent to you it’s still denying you yours as well.
    You can’t speak for me or for million and millions of other Americans. I know you are smart enough to know that.

  86. sursum
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 6:01 pm | Permalink

    Boxlock: I say tightening gun laws does not take away your freedom. The laws are on the books, but plea bargained away by the system. That’s a good place to start the tightening. No problem with target shooting with hand guns or any other firearm for that matter, but if you read items not featured by the NRA you will note that most Aussies and Brits are glad there is a more restrictive laws about gun ownership. Anyone can/should/does get a gun but with proper backround checks, just like here. Hell, target shooting was, is(?),an Olympic sport and shooting is an Internationally sanctioned sport. I believe concealed weapons are wrong and what is a freedom in one place is a danger to society in another place. I’m in another place.

  87. sursum
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

    Boxlock: I found the following poll results: For more Gun Control: US-52%, Canada-59% and the UK-79%. Less Gun Control: the US-5%, Canada-12% and the UK 18%. The Aussies when polled a the time of their new laws overwhelmingly wanted them even tougher but no specifics were noted. The laws on hand guns in the UK, Canada and Australia started in the early 1920’s out of fear, in part, of local Bolsheviks and concealed weapons. This was right after the Revoltion in Russia, as an exhaused, weakened and fearful British Empire, truamatized by 5 years of slaughter in WW1, took steps to control all percieve threats foreign and domestic. Boxlock, you of got me going on this and it’s been a learning curve, but I now quit the thread!

  88. Boxlock
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 8:06 pm | Permalink

    Thanks sursum, it has been an interesting and civil exchange of ideas.
    Our form of government protects the minority. We do not operate on a strictly majority rules basis. And just because a poll comes up with a result that a majority wants something, that doesn’t always make it right, Constitutional or anything, it just makes it a number.
    I enjoy firearms, history, collecting, studying, shooting, etc. I have no desire to ever have to use one for defense or to commit a crime. I have both a concealed carry permit and a federal firearms license to collect, buy and sell ‘curios and relic’ firearms. That being the case restrictive firearm laws greatly reduce my freedom. And also my ability to protect myself and family…by the way which the police are not responsible for. They are only responsible to protect the public, not individuals. Their work is typically ‘after the fact’ and thats too late for me personally.
    I strongly believe we as Americans should be given almost complete freedom as long as we are responsible with it and don’t harm others, and take the freedom from those not responsible with it, along with severely punishing them.
    Have a good evening and thanks for the conversation.

  89. Boxlock
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 8:13 pm | Permalink

    sursum, one more thing.
    You said, “Anyone can/should/does get a gun but with proper backround checks, just like here.” And you also said, “I believe concealed weapons are wrong and what is a freedom in one place is a danger to society in another place. I’m in another place.”

    I too believe people should go through the proper background check, I have been checked by both local, state and federal agencies. My finger prints are on file with the state and feds. I have never been convicted of a crime or domestic violence and I have had training in the proper handling, use and law concerning firearms.
    Very few, and I mean very few CCW permit holders have committed crimes or even had their license revoked. They are not a threat, period.
    Violent people are a threat to society not law abiding gun owners.
    No response expected or necessary. Good night.

  90. MaxGrobnik
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 9:05 pm | Permalink

    Box,

    Mary isn’t gonna budge on gun control. She and her Clinton/Obama clones won’t be happy until ALL guns are banned.

    She’s ignorant yes. Stupid, no.

  91. MaxGrobnik
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    Box,

    .223 vs .556 for an AR?

    Many options for the AR. Leaning toward DPMS or Rock River at the moment.

    Any opinion? Nathan?

    Oh btw, http://buy.cheaperthandirt.com/buydefault.asp is a great site for ordering supplie online.

  92. GMC70
    Posted May 4, 2008 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

    Max:

    Go with one chambered for 5.56. They two are ALMOST identical, but not quite. A chamber for 5.56 will shoot .223; a chamber for .223 will not properly chamber 5.56, as I understand it.

    Enjoy. I hope to be buying one soon too.

  93. StevenEDavis
    Posted May 5, 2008 at 2:08 am | Permalink

    Capn,

    Recommended reading here - will loan you my copy if you’re interested:

    http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9781582434032-0

    This guy documents several different ways, with a number of converging sources, that the surge/occupation is not the solution to the violence/insurgency in Iraq, rather it is the cause of the violence/insurgency there.

    The obvious prediction from his hypothesis is that the violence will only worsen as the our occupation continues.

    Over the last 1000 years Iraq has been invaded and occupied by all manner of foreigners: The crusades, Napoleon in the 19th century, the British for most of the early 20th century. (BTW, we have made almost all of the same mistakes the Brits did in Iraq).

    Pre-invasion polls of Iraqis indicated they favored the removal of Saddam, but viewed the cost of a foreign occupation as being too high. The Sunni - Shia divide was not nearly as pronounced as Bushco thought. They were Iraqis first, even though they did not care for the other side under better circumstances. A similar thing might be if we were invaded, we might be able to forget our partisan divides to figure out a solution.

    It is a very good book. Makes way too much sense.

  94. Monkeyhawk
    Posted May 5, 2008 at 4:17 am | Permalink

    Jonathan Schwarz posted this on another board:

    We’re Going to Lose

    Here’s “Jesus Made Me Puke” by Matt Taibbi, an excerpt from his new book The Great Derangement:

    Fortenberry began to issue instructions. He told us that under no circumstances should we pray during the Deliverance.

    “When the word of God is in your mouth,” he said, “the demons can’t come out of your body. You have to keep a path clear for the demon to come up through your throat. So under no circumstances pray to God. You can’t have God in your mouth. You can cough, you might even want to vomit, but don’t pray.”

    The crowd nodded along solemnly. Fortenberry then explained that he was going to read from an extremely long list of demons and cast them out individually. As he did so, we were supposed to breathe out, keep our mouths open and let the demons out.

    And he began…

    “In the name of Jesus, I cast out the demon of incest! In the name of Jesus, I cast out the demon of sexual abuse! In the name of Jesus…”

    “In the name of Jesus,” continued Fortenberry, “I cast out the demon of astrology!”…

    “In the name of Jesus Christ,” said Fortenberry, more loudly now, “I cast out the demon of lust!”…

    “In the name of Jesus Christ, I cast out the demon of cancer!” said Fortenberry…

    “In the name of Jesus, I cast out the demon of handwriting analysis!” shouted Fortenberry…

    “In the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, I cast out the demon of the intellect!” Fortenberry continued. “In the name of Jesus, I cast out the demon of anal fissures!”

    It’s things like this that make me convinced progressives, whoever we are, will ultimately lose and mankind will destroy itself.

    That’s because incest, sexual abuse, astrology, lust, cancer, handwriting analysis, intellect, and anal fissures are genuine problems for people. Anyone who suffers from them naturally wants to know WHO’S RESPONSIBLE.

    Bad political movements provide easy answers in the form of all-encompassing worldviews: it’s the demons, or the Joos, or the filthy Arabs, or the dirty Mexicans, or the capitalist swine, or Jane Fonda. (Or all of them working together.) Cast them out and all your problems will vanish.

    By contrast, good political movements cannot provide easy answers, or in most cases any answers at all. What we think we can do is get us all $4 an hour more, plus health care and a little more control over our lives. What we can’t do is end human suffering.

    Rationally speaking, this would be a giant improvement, particularly since the likely alternatives involve the deaths of billions. But irrationally speaking, we don’t want to just suffer less, we want to stop suffering. And this is something honest movements can’t offer.

    That’s the problem. We’ll need to go to the barricades just to solve the problems that can be solved. But the larger problems will remain, and in the end, everyone will have to deal with them alone. It’s hard to get people to the barricades on this platform.

    Mine eyes have seen the glory of a slight increase in pay
    Plus a little bit less teasing for teenagers poor or gay
    And a crappy little state for Palestinians someday
    And that is all we’ve got
    Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
    Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
    Glory! Glory! Hallelujah!
    And that is all we’ve got!

    posted by Jonathan Schwarz at 11:04 AM

One Trackback

  1. By 3 Online Bank Accounts on May 10, 2008 at 11:05 pm

    3 Online Bank Accounts…

    Interesting - because that is the same thing I found out last Thursday….