Back when Alan Greenspan was peddling his bad economics there was one Congressman who pointed out to him that his policies were going to ruin the country. That Congressman, then a representative, now a Senator is the only Democratic Socialist in Congress, Senator Bernie Sanders.
That was back when the national debt was only $4 trillion. Naturally the other hundreds of capitalist Congresspeople just went along and bought Greenspan’s snake oil. It just proves that the true liberals (not liberals in the sense the neo-cons use, anyone left of Cheney) know more about economic policy.
MSM Refuse to Release the Video Of Barack Obama Attending Jew-Bash & Toasting a Former PLO Operative…
Introduction: The LA Times is holding a video that shows Barack Obama celebrating with a group of Palestinians who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gives a toast to a former PLO operative at this celebration. If the American public saw this side of Barack Obama he would never be elected president. But, the media refuses to release this video.
LA Times writer Peter Wallsten wrote about Barack Obama’s close association with former Palestinian operative Rashid Khalidi back in April. Wallsten discussed a dinner held back in 2003 in honor of Khalidi, a critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights. Barack Obama has denied his close association with Khalidi, too.
According to Wallsten the evening not surprisingly turned into a classic Jew-bash:
“During the dinner a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.” One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”
Barack Obama also praised the former PLO operative during the event. And, Obama confessed that his family often shared dinner with the Khalidis:
His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases… It’s for that reason that I’m hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid’s dinner table,” but around “this entire world.” …The event was videotaped, and a copy of the tape was obtained by The Times.
Khalidi and the Obamas were great friends in Chicago and often shared meals together. By the way, Khalidi was also best friends with Bill Ayers.
On Wednesday I talked with Peter Wallsten from the Los Angeles Times about the article on Obama and Khalidi:
Wallsten was one of the few mainstream media reporters to report on this radical Obama associate. Wallston said that the article was written after he watched video taken at the Khalidi going away party. When I asked him about the video he said that as far as he was concerned he was through with the story.
I asked him if he was planning on releasing this video of Obama toasting the radical Khalidi at this Jew-bash. He told me he was not releasing the video. He also would not comment on his source for the video. Wallston also said he did not know if Khalidi’s good friend Bill Ayers was at the event or not.
So, there you have it. The LA Times has video of Obama toasting a former PLO operative at a Jew-bash but will not release the video. This is outrageous.
Obviously, this video would do great damage to Obama who struggles with Jewish voters due to his circle of close anti-Semitic friends. Maybe this is the reason it is not being released?
AYERS: RADICAL LOON WHEN OBAMA WAS ONLY 47
October 22, 2008
The media are acting as if they completely and fully vetted Obama during the Democratic primaries and that’s why they are entitled to send teams of researchers into Alaska to analyze Sarah Palin’s every expense report.
In fact, the mainstream media did no vetting. They seem to have all agreed, “OK, none of us will get into this business with Jeremiah Wright, ‘Tony’ Rezko, Saul Alinsky, Bill Ayers and everyone’s impression of an angry Michelle Obama on ‘The Jerry Springer Show.’”
During one of the Democratic primary debates, Hillary Clinton was hissed for mentioning Syrian national Rezko, and during another, ABC moderator George Stephanopoulos nearly lost his career for asking Obama one question about William Ayers.
In the past week, TV anchors have taken to claiming that Obama “refuted” John McCain’s statement that Obama launched his political career at the home of former Weather Underground leader Ayers.
No, Obama “denied” it; he didn’t “refute” it. If “denying” something is the same as “refuting” it, then maybe the establishment media can quit harping on Palin’s qualifications to be president, since she too “refuted” that by denying it.
Back before the media realized it needed to lie about Obama launching his political career at Ayers’ house, the Los Angeles Times provided an eyewitness account from a liberal who attended the event.
“When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the living room of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. They were launching him — introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread.”
The Times has now stripped this item from its Web page, but the great blogger Patterico has preserved it for posterity on his Web page.
Obama’s glib remark that “Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago; 40 years ago when I was 8 years old he engaged in despicable acts with a domestic group. I have roundly denounced those attacks” — doesn’t answer anything.
First of all, the fact that Ayers is a professor of education proves only one thing: He is dumber than any person without an education degree.
Ayers is such an imbecile, we ought to be amazed that he’s teaching at a university — even when you consider that it’s an ed school — except all former violent radicals end up teaching. Roughly 80 percent of former Weathermen are full college professors — 99 percent if you don’t include the ones killed in shoot-outs with the police or in prison — i.e., not yet pardoned by a Democratic president.
Any other profession would have banned a person like Ayers. Universities not only accept former domestic terrorists, but also move them to the front of the line. In addition to Ayers, among those once on the FBI’s most-wanted list who ended up in cushy college teaching positions are Bernardine Dohrn (Northwestern University), Mark Rudd (a junior college in New Mexico) and Angela Davis (History of Consciousness Department, University of California at Santa Cruz).
While others were hard at work on Ph.D.s, Susan Rosenberg was conspiring to kill cops and blow up buildings, and was assembling massive caches of explosives. This put her on the fast track for a teaching position at Hamilton College!
Despite having absolutely no qualifications to teach, having earned only a master’s degree in “writing” through a correspondence course, Rosenberg was offered a position at Hamilton within a few years of President Clinton pardoning her in 2001, releasing her from a 58-year prison sentence for participating in the murder of cops and possessing more than 700 pounds of explosives.
But Obama thinks it’s a selling point to say that Ayers is a college professor.
Hundreds of college professors have signed a letter vouching for Ayers, which would be like Lester Maddox producing a letter from George Wallace assuring us that Maddox is a respected member of the community. No, really, I’ve got the letter right here!
The media keep citing the fact that the money Obama and Ayers distributed to idiotic left-wing causes came — as The New York Times put it — “from Walter H. Annenberg, the billionaire publisher and philanthropist and President Richard M. Nixon’s ambassador to the United Kingdom.”
Great Republican though he was, Walter Annenberg died in 2002. The money came from the Annenberg Foundation, which, like all foundations, distributes money to projects that its founder would despise. John Kerry ran for president on the late John Heinz’s money. That didn’t mean Republican Heinz was endorsing Kerry.
As John O’Sullivan says, any foundation that is not explicitly right-wing will become a radical left-wing organization within a few years. It could be the Association of University Women, the American Association of Retired People, the American Rose Growers, the Foundation for the Study of Railroad Engineers or the Choral Society of Newport Beach.
Left-wing radicals swarm to free foundation money, where they can give gigantic grants to one another and they will never have to do a day’s work. That’s exactly what Obama and Ayers did with Annenberg’s money.
None of the Annenberg money went to schoolchildren. It went to Ayers’ left-wing crank friends to write moronic papers that we hope no one ever reads.
Instead of teaching students reading and writing, Ayers thinks they should be taught to rebel against America’s “imperialist” social structure. In 2006, Ayers was in Venezuela praising communist dictator Hugo Chavez, saying, “We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution.”
He has backed a line of schoolbooks such as one titled “Teaching Science for Social Justice.”
Forget about Ayers’ domestic terrorism when Obama “was 8 years old.” Does he agree with Ayers’ idiot ideas right now?
Give it up, guys….Obama’s not the bogey man you so desperatly want to convince everyone he is. BTW, Good Christians shouldn’t spread falsehoods about others…that’s breaking the 8th comandment
Maybe you should practice what you preach.
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:53 am | Permalink
Give it up, guys….Obama’s not the bogey man you so desperatly want to convince everyone he is. . . . .
________________________________________________
Good morning Mary!
You’re right! Obama is worse than we think!
________________________________________________
BTW, Good Christians shouldn’t spread falsehoods about others…that’s breaking the 8th comandment
Maybe you should practice what you preach.
________________________________________________
Desperation is the inability to make a political point without denigrating a person’s religion.
You don’t have a problem with Obama’s history of associations with crooks, liars and terrorists?
Can you respond without calling me a hypocrite? If not, you might reevaluate your position.
Ann Coulter, there’s a figure that any politician would want to embrace.
The fact of the matter is, Coulter is a professional troll whose mission in life appears to get outraged responses from “liberals” and over the top ugly amens from nutjob righties, and posting a column of hers is just second hand trolling by proxy.
“Desperation is the inability to make a political point without denigrating a person’s religion.
You don’t have a problem with Obama’s history of associations with crooks, liars and terrorists?”
But they are Hypocrites HLP….they are hypocrites that’s what they do!
Typical lib garbage. HLP lists a documented, reasoned statement…and gets accused of being a pathetic, tin foil wearing hat koolaid drinker (whatever the hell that is supposed to be). Did mxz ever refute/discuss even ONE of the points raised? Of course not, the lib means of ‘debate’ is to ignore the arguments raised and make personal insults instead.
yada yada yada. No substance just insults. Sorta like 3rd grade arguing “you are a poopy head” instead of addressing the issues.
If you know enough about Republic Party politics to enjoy the lowest price of gasoline in the nation… and also know enough to tank up on Election Day because the price will skyrocket on November 5th…welcome to Wichita.
“losers” Boy…that REALLY refutes every statement made above, doesn’t it?
You ever going to grow up and pretend to discuss things like an adult? Or will you just sit back and throw out your juvenile insults to everyone who dares to disagree with you?
From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.
1. “Chicago-my home town,is an excellent example of how obama & company run things here.First of all its all democrats in office here and we lead the nation in many interesting stats.#1 we pay the highest taxes,sales,property, fuel,& food).#1 in murder rate 436+(my condolences to the Hudson family)#1 in pension deficit 40 billion in the hole.our schools are the bottom 2% and our transit system is also in bankruptcy. Look up these facts yourselves people-is this the kind of change you want?”
2. “I am originally from the Netherlands. Socialism has held Europe back, Europe has been doing worse than the US economically for decades. Europeans are sick of socialism, they’re voting it out, trying to get away from it. Unfortunately the unelected European Union bureaucracy is replacing the sovereignty of the nationstates. Socialism kills democracy. It happened in Europe, now it’s happening in the US.”
mxyzptlk Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:57 am
“They claim to be Christians but their actions are the opposite. Hate and lies are the works of Satan. Those are the works they emulate.”
No one, Christian or otherwise needs take the verbal attacks that are dished out here continually by the DimLibs.
I have on several occasions, just yesterday and the day before, tried to tone down and be courteous but the DimLibs continue to pour it on.
So take the log out of your own eye, hypocrite.
Again, guano farmer is too stupid and incompetent to read previous posts and the link with comment provided.
So for the mentally challenged here it is again.
Good Christians shouldn’t spread falsehoods about others…that’s breaking the 8th comandment
Maybe you should practice what you preach.
———————————————————-
Hey Mary, when is it that telling the truth about the other candidate is considered spreading falsehoods just because it doesn’t square up with the lies you been told and choose to believe.
Barack Obama even says he’s a socialist, what do you think “spreading the wealth around” means? btw – you won’t be on the receiving end of the wealth, you will most likely be on the giving end. And if you don’t work and collect disability or welfare, you will still be giving because you will just get less so others can receive it also. WAKE UP!!!!
Heheheheheh. Well, since I’m so stupid, why dont you just humor me bigotbox and post a link for this
“From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.”
Just so we can check it out.
Unless, of course, it is indeed from one of the aforementioned wingnut sites.
PRINCETON, N.J. – John McCain is a maverick and Barack Obama is a postpartisan problem-solver. But you wouldn’t know it by looking at their economic plans. Both candidates’ proposals faithfully reflect the traditional economic priorities of their respective parties. That makes the track records of past Democratic and Republican administrations a very useful benchmark for assessing how the economy might perform under a President McCain or a President Obama. The bottom line: During the past 60 years, Democrats have presided over much less unemployment and much more robust income growth.
The $52.5 billion plan Senator McCain announced last week includes $36 billion in tax breaks for senior citizens withdrawing funds from retirement accounts and $10 billion for a reduction in the capital gains tax. Those are perks for investors, most of whom are relatively affluent. (McCain is also proposing a two-year suspension of taxes on unemployment benefits, but that’s a fraction of the plan’s cost.) He also favors broader tax cuts for businesses and wants to extend President Bush’s massive tax cuts indefinitely, even for people earning more than $250,000 per year.
McCain’s proposals reflect the traditional Republican emphasis on cutting taxes for businesses and wealthy people in hopes of stimulating investment – “trickle down” economics, as it came to be called during Ronald Reagan’s administration. But will proposals of this sort really “stop and reverse the rise of unemployment” and “create millions of new jobs” as McCain has claimed? The historical record suggests not.
President Bush’s multitrillion-dollar tax cuts, which were strongly tilted toward the rich, could not prevent (and may even have contributed to) significant job losses. On the other hand, when Bill Clinton raised taxes on affluent people to balance the federal budget (while significantly expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit for working poor people), unemployment declined substantially. Under Clinton’s watch, 22 million jobs were created.
Prefer a broader historical comparison? In the past three decades, since the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries oil price shocks of the mid-1970s and the Republican turn toward “supply side” economics, the average unemployment rate under Republican presidents has been 6.7 percent – substantially higher than the 5.5 percent average under Democratic presidents. (The official unemployment rate takes no account of people who have given up looking for work or taken substantial pay cuts to stay in the labor force.) Over an even broader time period, since the late 1940s, unemployment has averaged 4.8 percent under Democratic presidents but 6.3 percent – almost one-third higher – under Republican presidents.
Lower unemployment under Democratic presidents has contributed substantially to the real incomes of middle-class and working poor families. Job losses hurt everyone – not just those without work. In fact, every percentage point of unemployment has the effect of reducing middle-class income growth by about $300 per family per year. And the effects are long term, unlike the temporary boost in income from a stimulus check. Compounded over an eight-year period, a persistent one-point difference in unemployment is worth about $10,000 to a middle-class family. The dollar values are smaller for working poor families, but in relative terms their incomes are even more sensitive to unemployment. In contrast, income growth for affluent people is much more sensitive to inflation, which has been a perennial target of Republican economic policies.
Although McCain portrays Senator Obama as a “job killing” tax-and-spend liberal, the new $60 billion plan Obama unveiled last week also has a tax break as its centerpiece – a tax break specifically tailored to create jobs by offering employers a $3,000 tax credit for each new hire over the next two years. Obama’s proposal would also extend unemployment benefits by 13 weeks for those who remain jobless, as well as match McCain’s in suspending taxes on unemployment benefits.
Obama’s new proposal complements $115 billion in economic stimulus measures he had already announced, including $65 billion in direct rebates to taxpayers and $50 billion to help states jump-start spending on infrastructure projects. All of this is squarely in the tradition of Democratic presidents since John F. Kennedy, who have relied on public spending and tax breaks for working people to stimulate consumption and employment during economic downturns.
These and other policies have produced not only lower unemployment under Democratic presidents but also more economic output and income growth. In fact, over the past 60 years, the real incomes of middle-income families have grown about twice as fast under Democratic presidents as they have under Republican presidents. The partisan difference is even greater for working poor families, whose real incomes have grown six times as fast under Democratic presidents as they have under Republican presidents.
Of course, past performance is no guarantee of what will happen when the next president takes office. However, given the striking fidelity of both presidential candidates to their parties’ traditional economic priorities, the profound impact of partisan politics on the economic fortunes of American families over more than half a century ought to weigh heavily in the minds of voters.
“Obama is a Marxist Muslim Arab Jesus Black White Terrorist Technocrat Racist Do-Gooder Liberal FDR Stalin Hilter Commie Fascist Gay Womanizing Naive Cynical Insider Noob Boring Radical Unaccomplished Elite Slick Gaffe-Prone Pedophile Pedophile-Seducing Liberation Theology Atheist Etc. & Anti-Etc. with a bunch of scary friends from – wait for it! – the Nineteen Hundred And Sixties.”
Nothing about that CONspeak sounds desperate, does it?
The results are simple: Democratic presidents have consistently higher economic growth and consistently lower unemployment than Republican presidents. If you add in a time lag, you get the same result. If you eliminate the best and worst presidents, you get the same result. If you take a look at other economic indicators, you get the same result. There’s just no way around it: Democratic administrations are better for the economy than Republican administrations.
Skeptics offer two arguments: first, that presidents don’t control the economy; second, that there are too few data points to draw any firm conclusions. Neither argument is convincing. It’s true that presidents don’t control the economy, but they do influence it — as everyone tacitly acknowledges by fighting like crazed banshees over every facet of fiscal policy ever offered up by a president.
The second argument doesn’t hold water either. The dataset that delivers these results now covers more than 50 years, 10 administrations, and half a dozen different measures. That’s a fair amount of data, and the results are awesomely consistent: Democrats do better no matter what you measure, how you measure it, or how you fiddle with the data.
But it turns out there’s more to this. Via Brendan Nyhan, I recently read a paper by Princeton’s Larry Bartels that adds some fascinating details to this picture.
________________________________________
The first thing Bartels did was break down economic performance by income class. The unsurprising result is shown in the chart on the right.
Under Democratic presidents, every income class did well but the poorest did best. The bottom 20% had average pretax income growth of 2.63% per year while the top 5% showed pretax income growth of 2.11% per year.
Republicans were polar opposites. Not only was their overall performance worse than Democrats, but it was wildly tilted toward the well off. The bottom 20% saw pretax income growth of only .6% per year while the top 5% enjoyed pretax income growth of 2.09% per year. (What’s more, the trendline is pretty clear: if the chart were extended to show the really rich — the top 1% and the top .1% — the Republican growth numbers for them would be higher than the Democratic numbers.)
In other words, Republican presidents produce poor economic performance because they’re obsessed with helping the well off. Their focus is on the wealthiest 5%, and the numbers show it. At least 95% of the country does better under Democrats.
________________________________________
But this raises an interesting question: if 95% of the country does better under Democrats, and if economic performance is the most important factor in most presidential elections, then how do Republicans ever get elected? The most common hypothesis — spelled out in detail in last year’s What’s The Matter With Kansas? — is that cultural issues often override economic considerations. But Bartels proposes a surprising alternative explanation illustrated in the two charts below. The top chart shows income growth during non-election years, and it displays the usual characteristics: under Democrats, income growth is strong overall and the poor do a bit better than the well off. Under Republicans, income growth is weak overall and is tilted heavily in favor of the already prosperous.
But now look at the bottom chart. It shows economic performance during election years and it’s a mirror image of the top chart: Republicans produce better overall performance, and they produce especially stupendous performance for the well off. Democrats not only produce poor overall performance, they produce disastrous performance for the well off, who actually have negative income growth.
In other words, voters aren’t necessarily ignoring economic issues in favor of cultural issues. Rather, Republicans produce great economic growth for all income classes in election years, and that’s all that voters remember. They really are voting their pocketbooks.
Bartels doesn’t essay an explanation for this. Do Republican presidents deliberately try to time economic growth spurts — and are Democratic presidents too lame to do the same? Is it just luck? Or is the difference somehow inherent in the different ways that Democrats and Republicans approach the economy (with Democrats typically focusing on employment and Republicans on inflation)? At this point, your guess is as good as anyone’s.
Bottom line: if you’re well off, vote for Republicans. But if you make less than $150,000 a year, Republicans are your friends only one year in four. Caveat emptor.
Why the McCainiacs – and especially their fellow traevllers in the media – perpetrated the Ashley Todd hoax:
The aftermath of Ashley Todd’s story
By Jay Bookman | Friday, October 24, 2008, 04:50 PM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
McCain volunteer Ashley Todd has now confessed that she made up the story about being attacked by a large black man who carved the letter “B” into her cheek.
The young lady has issues, and I hope she gets the help she needs. End of story.
But let’s talk in a little more depth about the eagerness and even glee with which some in the right-wing blogosphere jumped on that story and immediately claimed it as proof of their worst nightmares coming true. So much of that story was unbelievable from the very beginning, yet certain people wanted to believe it so badly that they ignored all the warning signs and launched into full battle cry.
Andy McCarthy at the National Review’s Corner responded with a post so embarrassing he has now taken it down so nobody can see it.
Dan Riehl at riehlworldview.com posted under the headline “Thugs for change,” claiming that “Obama’s run his campaign just like a street thug out of Chicago. Now we get to see what some of his worst supporters are like.”
Noel Sheppard at newsbusters.org chastized AP for daring to be skeptical of the initial report. Most of all, he wanted to know why the AP didn’t report that the alleged perp was black. How dare they exclude a detail that had no bearing whatsoever on the alleged crime!!
Josh Painter at redstate.com blamed the attack on Barack Obama, suggesting an “Obama thugocracy” was coming: When Obama “urged his supporters to get in their face, did it not occur to him that some of his more deranged followers might take him literally?” Painter asked.
He was echoed by fellow redstater Erick Erickson, who wrote: “Hey! The dude was just doing what The One asked him to. Full pardon on January 21st.”
At Atlas Shugs, they posted the woman’s photo and called it “the new face of the Republican Party.”
“Shame on those that doubted this poor girl,” the post read. “Always ready to jump on the side of the leftists and thugs. ugh. Americans, I implore you to get off your asses and save this country from the radical left coup on the White House, Senate and House…. Perhaps the Obots misunderstood Obama urging his followers to Get In Their Face and GET IN THEIR FACES!” They got the advanced course of Camp Obama to cut up their faces.”
But perhaps the most interesting response came from John Moody, executive vice president at Fox News:
“If Ms. Todd’s allegations are proven accurate, some voters may revisit their support for Senator Obama, not because they are racists (with due respect to Rep. John Murtha), but because they suddenly feel they do not know enough about the Democratic nominee,” Moody wrote. “If the incident turns out to be a hoax, Senator McCain’s quest for the presidency is over, forever linked to race-baiting.”
Now, that is utter nonsense on two counts. First, while the incident did indeed turn out to be a hoax, it has in no way linked McCain to racebaiting and will have no impact whatsoever on the outcome of this race.
But Moody’s claim that Obama supporters might have revisited their position if the story were true is more intriguing, and more revealing as well. Moody claims that under those circumstances, people might suddenly feel they know less about Obama and thus change their vote. But what is the logical trail between those two thoughts? Such an attack would tell people absolutely nothing about Obama.
The real explanation lies in the answer that Moody rejects: racism. A lot of white Americans voting for Obama have had to overcome various degrees of racism to get themselves to that point. That doesn’t make them bad people; to the contrary, they’re thinking things through, and that’s great.
However, for many of those people, an attack of the sort described by Ashley Todd would heighten those internal, emotional obstacles to voting for Obama. That’s precisely why some on the right — with notable exceptions such as Michelle Malkin, a person I do not ordinarily respect much — were so quick to try to make it a huge deal.
John McCain’s Pennsylvania communications director told reporters in the state an incendiary version of the hoax story about the attack on a McCain volunteer well before the facts of the case were known or established — and even told reporters outright that the “B” carved into the victim’s cheek stood for “Barack,” according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.
John Verrilli, the news director for KDKA in Pittsburgh, told TPM Election Central that McCain’s Pennsylvania campaign communications director gave one of his reporters a detailed version of the attack that included a claim that the alleged attacker said, “You’re with the McCain campaign? I’m going to teach you a lesson.”
ksfarmgrrl Posted October 27, 2008 at 8:09 am
“Heheheheheh. Well, since I’m so stupid, why dont you just humor me bigotbox and post a link for this
“From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.”
Just so we can check it out.
Unless, of course, it is indeed from one of the aforementioned wingnut sites.”
He guano, do you sound like a hyena all the time, “Heheheheheh”.
I didn’t post a link the first time because there are close to 4500 comments at present to Obama’s call for the redistribution of wealth statement.
You think you can find the ‘two’ I posted.
What an ignoramus you continue to prove yourself to be. Hey, go to town once in a while and see if you can learn to converse at a higher level than the chickens and pigs. Oh wait, are there other pigs on your farm, or just you.
If these damaging secrets aren’t public knowledge is it because of incompetence on the part of conservatives? If the MSM did no vetting why haven’t the conservatives, like Ann Coulter, taken up the slack? Why are all these “truths” that only a few know about kept secret?
Those who know these secrets are so weak, so unable to get the attention of the public, so utterly stymied by their inabilities to compete with others in the media they can’t write about it, speak about it? They can’t even get a video they know all about exposed! Do they know all about it because they have a copy? Were they present but forgot to do their own video?
That has to be the reason the eeeviil libaruls have been able to take over the MSM, don’t you think? If conservatives were actually capable of competing, thinking, writing, speaking. wouldn’t the free markets not only have encouraged competing ideas but grown them?
In our world of everyone armed with cameras and recording devices, where hardly anything happens without appearing on YouTube, it’s most amazing that these “facts” remain secrets! Too bad about the total incompetence of those conservatives who want these secrets shared.
BAGHDAD – Iraq’s government has an unusual money problem as much of the world grapples with a credit crunch – it can’t spend its oil riches fast enough.
” What is it about Alaskan politicians? Palin is given a $150,000 wardrobe, which she wears, but doesn’t own it. Stevens was given furniture, but he doesn’t own it, yet it still sits in his home. Stuff is given to them, but they don’t own it? Steven and Palin must attend the same seminars on electoral ethics, or is this just an Alaska thing?”
Repubs kept whining because Obama couldn’t ‘close the deal’ back in what July? Now that he’s closing the deal their spreading falsehoods and crying like cur pups.
It’s time for real leadership, and repubs see the writing on the wall. LMAO.
Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another. Voting for a man who has similar pigmentation does not racism make.
Obama has a friend who is a critic of Israeli policies, so what? Rashid Khalidi is an anti-Zionist, but criticizing Israel does not a an anti-semite make.
Khalid is a respected scholar. The right wing frighteners wave an Arab name in the air and try to make it sound like a man is a terrorist.
(Born in New York City, Khalidi is the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University, and director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs.
Can I get a lapel flag pin that says: “Marxist Muslim Arab Jesus Black White Terrorist Technocrat Racist Do-Gooder Liberal FDR Stalin Hilter Commie Fascist Gay Womanizing Naive Cynical Insider Noob Boring Radical Unaccomplished Elite Slick Gaffe-Prone Pedophile Pedophile-Seducing Liberation Theology Atheist Etc. & Anti-Etc. with a bunch of scary friends from the 60s?”
Barack Obama’s campaign killed all interviews with a Florida TV station after Sen. Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, faced tough and critical questions from a reporter at the Orlando station, the Orlando Sentinel reported .
During a satellite video Thursday, WFTV’s Barbara West quoted Karl Marx and asked Biden how Obama’s comment to “Joe the Plumber,” about spreading the wealth wasn’t being Marxist.
“Are you joking?,” Biden asked.
West replied, “No.”
Click here to watch the interview.
Later in the interview West questioned Biden about his comments that if Obama wins the election next month, he would be tested early on as president and wanted to know if Biden was implying America was no longer the world’s leading power.
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
The Obama camp then killed a WFTV interview with Biden’s wife Jill, according to an Orlando Sentinel blog.
“This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best for the duration of the remaining days until the election,” wrote Laura K. McGinnis, Central Florida communications director for the Obama campaign, according to the Sentinel.
(Control of the press is paramount. I am shocked the democrats let these honest questions slip through.)
CLEVELAND – Republican John McCain says he’s breaking with President Bush’s economic policies and would put a tight lid on government spending.
____________________________
But but but Palin says that every Special Needs child can go to private schools and the government will pay!!!
“So that’s a “yes” on bigotbox posting from the wingnuts sites?
Why else is he ashamed to post the link?”
Hey chicken guano kfg, You-tube is not a wingnut site, do you bother to read or just shoot off you filthy mouth. Go wipe the chicken guano out of it.
I did post the link, are to to stupid to see that too.
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:56 am | Permalink
“So that’s a “yes” on bigotbox posting from the wingnuts sites?
Why else is he ashamed to post the link?”
Hey chicken guano kfg, You-tube is not a wingnut site, do you bother to read or just shoot off you filthy mouth. Go wipe the chicken guano out of it.
I did post the link, are to to stupid to see that too.
————————————————–
What a compassionate and toned down response.
““From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.”
Funny, but when I click on that, it isnt a link. And anyone who reads would think it was from ANOTHER, as in “different” blog site than a previously posted one.
What the hell is so hard about reposting the link?
I don’t care that she gay….I couldn’t care less, it’s her promoting the ridiculous concept it is normal and needs protection and equal standing to man/woman marriage relationships.
Which is never will be.
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:00 am | Permalink
I don’t care that she gay….I couldn’t care less, it’s her promoting the ridiculous concept it is normal and needs protection and equal standing to man/woman marriage relationships.
Which is never will be.
————————————————
Again,what are you afraid of?
The only question that wasn’t answered was when Biden asked West “Who’s writing your silly questions for you?”
Turns out the Anchor Bunny’s questions for Biden were provided to her by her husband who’s a media manipulater “consultant” for the Republic Party.
Her “hard-hitting” interview style with John S (for Senile) McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term) included zingers such as, “Are you going to cut-and-run from Florida or are you still gonna fight for votes here?”
“What the hell is so hard about reposting the link?”
I don’t know if you are addressing my post and link but it IS the You Tube link I posted and the comments that follow.
Everybody with half a brain saw that from the first post except you kfg…guano for brains.
Biden to Florida news anchor: ‘Are you joking?’
8:33 AM Mon, Oct 27, 2008
Joe Biden was interviewed last week by Barbara West of WFTV-TV (Channel 9) in Orlando, Fla.
Among the questions:
“Aren’t you embarrassed by the blatant attempts to register phony voters by ACORN, an organization that Barack Obama has been tied to in the past?”
“How is Sen. Obama not being Marxist if he intents to spread the wealth around?”
“Are you forewarning Americans that .. American’s days as a world’s leading power are over?”
Biden didn’t lose it on camera, but he did ask if one of the anchor’s questions was a joke. Later he said, “I don’t know who’s writing your questions.”
After the interview, reported the Orlando Sentinel, the Obama campaign canceled an interview the station had scheduled with Joe Biden’s wife Jill. And it informed the station that no one from the campaign would be granting the station any further interviews.
West told the Sentinel she was just doing her job, asking “tough questions
“xcept, it’s not funny because religious wingnuts like that are dangerous. They are EXACTLY the kind of people who go out and hang a queer on a fence.”
Another example of her insanity.
She still has realized she is merely a puppet whose strings I pull to watch her dance.
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
—–
When I watched the video of this interview over the weekend, I noticed Biden answered each question completely. Even tho the questions were inane, he answered them. He attempted to make the interview worthwhile by pointing how how senseless the questions were, but the questioner either was unable to go off script or unable to recognize reality. I suspect both.
Here’s the latest incarnation of his tormented attempts at simple human decency. It’s from this morning:
#
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 8:03 am | Permalink
mxyzptlk Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:57 am
“They claim to be Christians but their actions are the opposite. Hate and lies are the works of Satan. Those are the works they emulate.”
No one, Christian or otherwise needs take the verbal attacks that are dished out here continually by the DimLibs.
I have on several occasions, just yesterday and the day before, tried to tone down and be courteous but the DimLibs continue to pour it on.
So take the log out of your own eye, hypocrite.
I suspect the “log” he refers to was in his skivvies, not his eye.
Freebird1971,
What are you kfg’s little mouth box, pun intended.
You remind me of the bullies sidekick on ‘A Christmas Story’, unable to stand on your own.
Pathetic.
The above is a link to an excellent discussion of the “financial crisis” enveloping the world, compliments of “my favorite little college in Maine”. One of the panelists is Robert Diamond, an alum, who heads Barclays PLC; I don’t recall the identity of the other panelists, one of whom is the head of a private equity firm. For the consideration of anyone with the time to listen. It (the podcast) requires QuickTime.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:17 am | Permalink
HEH Freebird. I see he’s an equal opportunity meanie. EVERYONE who doesnt agree with him is treated badly.
———————————————–
Dealing with people like him its simply a case of mind over matter,I don’t mind because they don’t matter.
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink
Freebird1971,
What are you kfg’s little mouth box, pun intended.
—————————————————-
Nope. Just open minded. Even though we have never met and are light years apart, I would like to consider KFG someone I could be a friend to.
kfg is a fine person in her own right. She reminds me of some of the Texas gals I knew; rougher than a freshly cut pine log; saltier than a brine pickle and more stubborn than an unfed mule in a wheat pasture.
She’s opinionated and makes some generalized attacks on just about everyone she disagrees with.
I can almost see her small fist in a clinch, thumb up, swiping her nose – sniffing to see who’s gonna throw the first punch.
I’d just let her be if I was you. You aren’t going to changer her.
She’s not the enemy, just different from what we expect.
Of course, that’s what makes life interesting.
I’d still treat her like a lady even though it would probably irritate the hell out of her.
Sort of like how John S (for Senile) McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term) forgot who his close friends and endorsers were yesterday on “Meet the Press.”
I’m gonna have to go back and look for those posts. I’ve forgotten most of my Agenda, other than mandating everyone in the new People’s Republic of WE Blog learn a ballroom dance, preferably an anti-American dance like the tango.
And if you $150,000 worth of clothes I promise not to wear them.
Freebird when you read this blog doesn’t the inability to understand what is happening in this election scare you.
As a nation we have let a ‘wanna be plumber’ ask a question of a political candidate and watched him being hoisted on the fencepost of liberality. His entire life has been aired and now it has been discovered that the ‘facts’ leaked were illegally obtained.
Still we defend this messiah who wants to be prez. He has cut himself off from contact with the press for over a month now, with the exception of the debate. We have watched the MSM put every possible personal detail they can uncover about a woman who is running for the vice prez position but we are screaming ‘they are lies’ at those who print the truth about Obama’s ties to terrorism and organized crime.
As a nation we are going to get the prez we deserve. I firmly believe that. I hope a year from today the libs are as estatic as they are now. I hope BJ has that hand he always has out filled. I hope farmie finally has her deepest desires become reality.
But more than anything else I hope our nation has healed some of the many wounds we have suffered because of this election. We have seen liberities abused and the left didn’t raise their voice. We have seen the press become a tool of the Obama campaign in spreading lies and the left cheered them on.
I could have been an Obama fan. Used to have some admiration for a young man who came this far. No longer. This man is dangerous. Socialism is destructive. Spreading the wealth is just wrong.
Just to save those here who will claim that I ‘lie’. These are my own personal opinions. Therefore I am allowed to post them without a source.
My being scared will not effect the outcme one way or the other.Like my dad used to say “you play the hand that’s dealt you.” No matter who wins I will do the best I can for those I hold near and dear,it’s all I can do and no amount of worry or fear is going to change a thing.
The Moose-Dresser showed up at a campaign appearance in mom jeans and a hair shirt from “Out of the Closet,” a second-hand store in Anchorage. Wait ’til word gets out to the wing-nuts that “Out of the Closet” is a pun and its profits go to help gay causes.
Ashley Todd McCain Volunteer Attacked and Mutilated in Pittsburgh (picture)
The 20-year-old-woman pictured above was minding her own business last night as she went up to an ATM in College Station, Texas, to get some money. As she was leaving the machine, a scary, dark figured man spooked his way over to her. She panicked and screamed; the guy wanted her money…$60 total.
Considering the potential horror of the situation, all was well as the guy was allegedly content with just stealing her money. That’s until the guy — 60 bucks richer and with no one else in sight– noticed Ashley Todd had a McCain sticker on her car.
Instead of just leaving her unharmed after robbing her, Todd says the black guy took to a fit of rage after seeing her McCain sticker and decided to beat her down. He then decided to mutilate her face in revenge, carving a backwards B on it…apparently to symbolize Barack Obama.
It appears to me the success of Democratic administrations and the failures of Republican administrations leave no options for Republicans but waging a culture war. The Republicans can’t achieve peace, economic stability, exemplary education models, affordable health care for all Americans, respect for science, so attempt to legislate morality. Their hate and intolerance is their only hope.
Under Republicans we’re not only safe from gay marriage, but safe from economic stability, safe from reaching the potential of Americans actually. If the work of religion was left to the churches, what would Republicans have to even speak about? If they attempt conversation about the economy, education, science, the environment, health care, diplomacy they show their incompetence.
Commie/Socialist, certaintly NOT a strict Constitutionalist. your pick:
radio interview in which Barack Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court to rule on redistributing wealth in its civil rights rulings has given fresh ammunition to critics who say the Democratic presidential candidate has a socialist agenda.
The interview — conducted by Chicago Public Radio in 2001, while Obama was an Illinois state senator and a law professor at the University of Chicago — delves into whether the civil rights movement should have gone further than it did, so that when “dispossessed peoples” appealed to the high court on the right to sit at the lunch counter, they should have also appealed for the right to have someone else pay for the meal.
In the interview, Obama said the civil rights movement was victorious in some regards, but failed to create a “redistributive change” in its appeals to the Supreme Court, led at the time by Chief Justice Earl Warren. He suggested that such change should occur at the state legislature level, since the courts did not interpret the U.S. Constitution to permit such change.
“The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical,” Obama said in the interview, a recording of which surfaced on the Internet over the weekend.
“It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.
“And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way — that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted.
“And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that,” Obama said.”
It’s not really extraordinary or newsworthy that a young white girl, working away from home, fabricated a story about being attacked and sexually assaulted by a larger black man she invented in a bid to get attention. It is newsworthy that her sketchy story garnered so much outrage and political spin before being almost immediately recanted. What is most newsworthy however is that John McCain’s campaign worked to make it newsworthy in an effort to divide Americans, bait racial conflict, and inflame outrage at great risk to Americans themselves.
Ben I will give you that she fabricated a lie and spread it. The press figured this out and reported on it. Actually I suspected it when the B was backwards. She has mental issues. Still she broke a law an should be charged.
Now what do you say about the reporter who lied about the taunts he claimed were being yelled at a Palin rally. It was proved to be a blatant lie. No witness could be found who could agree it happened or identify the culprit. How widely has this deception been spread? Where is the outrage from the left that this lie was told to make McCains supporters look rabid?
Ben this election should have been over months ago. The left hasn’t been able to close it because there is a problem with their candidate. I hope ‘we told you so’ isn’t heard from the right this time next year.
While the title of this article looked appealing it is basically a redo of the argument, “if conservatives, were truly conservative, or more conservative, they’d win”.
I believe this is a fundamentally flawed argument and it is a myth that I hope you guys hold on to.
As Ralph Nadar’s father asked and answered, “which type of economy will always survive?” “Capitolism, because socialism will always be used to revive it.” Bank, market bailouts anyone?
I believe and I am sure there are people in disagreement here, the tenets of conservatism under the tenure of G.W. Bush have been shown to be totally unuseful. Now, this is where someone is supposed to post the G.W. Bush is not a conservative and the conservative agenda has never really been tried – talking point… [Thank you, Thomas Frank for that last one]
Love this from the same source as above:
“The massive collapse in confidence in our financial, political, educational and intelligence institutions is among the most important developments of our time; positioning conservatives as the advocates for modern, accountable and responsive institutions would produce a governing blueprint that meets the challenges of this era and begins to win back public confidence.”
Hell yes, when someone robs you and burns your house to the ground, one always looks to the perpetrator of the crime for some help. I swear, you can’t make this stuff up.
okob – perhaps if the McCain campaign and their media sycophants had not pushed the Ashley Todd story as true so much it would not matter as much. Has Hannity retracted?
here’s a New York Times story from September 2003, clearly showing that the first substantive Fannie and Freddie reform from inside government came from the Bush administration. Spurred by worries that Fannie and Freddie were cooking their books and taking too many risks, Treasury Secretary John Snow proposed placing the companies under Treasury oversight with strict controls over risk and capital reserves. The NYT labeled the proposal “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago” and noted:
Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.
So five years ago, there was one of those rare moments in Washington when the branches and personalities of government—in this case, the Bush administration—are less interested in protecting or expanding their turf than in fixing a looming catastrophe. What was Frank’s response to the proposal?
“These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Linda this is so you and yet you tell us daily how ‘tolerant’ and ‘accepting’ you are. Where is this tolerance. Is it when you accept my faith and don’t call me and others like me names. Is it when you are so intolerant of the right that you can’t even carry on a discussion with me because I disagree with you on several issues. It it when you have secret luncheons and come back with your group think to excoriate the right for the rest of the day.
Please don’t talk to me about tolerance until you practice it. Civil discussions can be had here. I do it with Ben most of the time but you can’t start by calling the other side hateful and intolerant.
“We have seen liberities abused and the left didn’t raise their voice. ”
BS! Thousands of us were opposing the Bush administration’s attacks on our Constitutional Rights from day one.
It is the mocking extremists who use words like “Messiah” to describe Senator Obama, not his supporters. We think he is a top-of-the-line American offering change to the political landscape we all know is desperately needed. You want a ‘maverick’? It’s Sen. Obama. Not the old man.
You criticize the press for looking closely at a woman who could be President if a 72 year old man fall ill? You suggest that maybe the press should NOT look at her life and views? Surely not. (She thinks dinosaurs lived a short time ago and that your wife should be forced bear her rapist’s child…)
As for the smear du jour: “socialist”, keep trying only a few more days to find a lie that will stick.
bth
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:59 am | Permalink
okob – perhaps if the McCain campaign and their media sycophants had not pushed the Ashley Todd story as true so much it would not matter as much. Has Hannity retracted?
————-
Ben it is ironic that from what I wrote acknowledging that the right took this story on its face as true that you would then bring up one newsman, Sean Hannity and ask if he had retracted the story.
Where did you show your outrage that lies were told about McCains and Palins supporters, one of those by Obama in the debate? Outrage can’t be onesided.
You might ask yourself on how many stations did you see the name calling story. Was there an FBI investigation into the B story? You are a smart man Ben but today I think the left has developed a terminal case of myopic vision.
This campaign can’t be about issues. Who said that?
Rick Davis, campaign manager for John McCain’s presidential bid, insisted that the presidential race will be decided more over personalities than issues during an interview with Post editors this morning.
“This election is not about issues,” said Davis. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.”
“To be useful, those inquiries must be broken into parts. The GOP is in bad shape; conservatism is not.”
—
I agree with this statement! If (and that is a BIG if) “conservatism” had the same meaning that brought glory to The Grand Old Party. If “social issues” were left in the churches where they belong.
But that would mean they would need to concentrate on issues. Can’t do that! Republican administrations have failed too often to make this election about important issues.
Ben do you remember the remark he made about the McCain supporters at the Palin rally. He referenced the very incident that was proved to be false the next day.
The lie I remember most is when he said he didn’t announce his candidacy for the state senate in Ayers living room. This was a bold faced lie. It has been proven by what the people around him at that time said. Before Ayers became a liability and it wasn’t a good thing to be connected to him.
Linda I don’t agree with this one man and his opinion. It has to be about issues. We can’t elect a good debater or a handsome man or a good personalty. We have to elect a person with the ability to lead. With a clear cut vision of where this nation has to go.
#
bth
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:59 am | Permalink
okob – perhaps if the McCain campaign and their media sycophants had not pushed the Ashley Todd story as true so much it would not matter as much. Has Hannity retracted?
=====================
Yeah, how dare the McCain campaign thought the young lady was telling the truth.
To the fine conservatives on the blog…for you;
“So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, good night,
I hate to go and leave this pretty sight.
So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, adieu,
Adieu, adieu, to yieu and yieu and yieu.
I’m off to the sunny and warm south-land for a week of trade show and meetings. Not much time for the blog….fortunately.
To the DimLibs;
I know you’ll miss me but for once in your miserable lives suck it up and act like adults instead of the spoiled children you are, ha!
Linda you have just posted something I completely agree with. Social issues should be left out of the public forum. They should be left out of our public schools. Left in the churches – not so sure. Shouldn’t a Christian have the right to have their opinion heard in the public square if a atheist, or buddist, or muslim, or you fill in the _____________ gets to voice their opinion.
Why should only Christians be silenced. Why shouldn’t you be tolerant of my position?
In a democratic society we should all have the right to voice our opinions, we should all be free from persecution because of this. On this we can agree.
I would trust you’ve been a participant in the forum long enough to know that I refer to everyone by the nym they choose to use.
If you’re really upset about posters calling other posters names, I expect you to severely criticize “Regular” next time he draws out his little “MonkeyHock” epithet. Next time “Boxlock” drags out stuff like his favorite “Lezzie-carpet-munching-chicken-dung-pig,” I’m sure you will summon up your moral outrage and denounce such behavior, right?
Where I sometimes show intolerance for religiosity is when certain practitioners of theology drag the God Card into what should be a discussion of secular policy.
Your creed or dogma or catechism or theology can govern your moral compass and help you achieve a personal philosophy all you want. But in the United States, we’re not supposed to accept “Because I think God thinks so,” as civil law.
As I’ve said many times, I am a Lapsed Agnostic; I’m not sure what it is I don’t believe in. But just about every fundamentalist of any religion seems hell-bent to convince me I’m not one of them. If nothing else, this election season has been about CONs trying to brand Barack Obama as an “Other.” That doesn’t seem like the message Jesus tried to teach, but your messiah mileage may vary.
““The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society,” Barack Obama
This act (the Federal Reserve Act)
establishes the most gigantic trust on Earth…
When the President signs this act,
the invisible government by the money power,
proven to exist by the Money Trust Investigation,
will be legalized…
The new law will create inflation
whenever the trusts want inflation…”
Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr.
December, 1913
“IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY
WE HAVE IN EFFECT TWO GOVERNMENTS…
We have the duly constituted government…
Then we have an independent,
uncontrolled and uncoordinated government
in the Federal Reserve System,
operating the money powers
reserved to Congress by the Constitution.”
- Congressman Wright Patman,
(former) Chairman of the House Banking Committee
“Those that create and issue the money and credit
direct the policies of government
and hold in their hands
the destiny of the people.”
Reginald McKenna,
(former) president of the Midlands Bank of England.
lol.. a chopped up interview… discussing the Warren Court. Not a lot of Marxism being discussed.
I suppose one could say that raising the minimum wage is a form of “wealth redistribution.” When I get a merit raise, some wealth has been redistributed.
But Governor TWINKIE uses phrases like “your proerty will be collectively owned” Where the F*** does that hogwash come from? Just make it up and run with it Republicans.
After the election, I predict a split in the Republican Party. The moderates (who will probably get some appointments from an Obama Adminstration), and a far-right Radical Extremist splinter group of former Republicans.
A huge American-financed wastewater treatment plant in the desert city of Falluja ..was supposed to be the centerpiece of an effort to rebuild Iraq, a country smashed by war and neglect, and bring Western standards of sanitation.
Instead, the project, which has tripled in cost from original plans to $100 million and has fallen about three years behind schedule, has become an example of the failed and often oversold program to rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure with American dollars and skill.
The project was so poorly conceived that there is no reliable electricity to run pumps and purification tanks, and no money left to connect homes to the main sewer lines, which now run uselessly beneath Falluja’s streets, according to a report by federal investigators to be released Monday.
The Republicans’ attempt to make the case that Barack Obama is hoity-toity and they’re hoi polloi has fallen under the sheer weight of the stunning numbers:
The McCains own 13 cars, eight homes and access to a corporate jet, and Cindy had her Marie Antoinette moment at the convention. Vanity Fair calculated that her outfit cost $300,000, with three-carat diamond earrings worth $280,000, an Oscar de la Renta dress valued at $3,000, a Chanel white ceramic watch clocking in at $4,500 and a four-strand pearl necklace worth between $11,000 and $25,000. While presenting herself as an I’m-just-like-you hockey mom frugal enough to put the Alaska state plane up for sale on eBay, Palin made her big speech at the convention wearing a $2,500 cream silk Valentino jacket that the McCain staff had gotten her at Saks. – http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26dowd.html?em
A rash of new polls in Arizona shows a tightening presidential race, a situation that has even some Republican strategists seriously fretting the possibility that John McCain could lose his home state.
Polls taken for both parties now show the Arizona senator leading Democratic nominee Barack Obama by a slim margin and within the margin of error. The surveys come as Obama builds his national lead and Republicans on all levels brace for what may prove to be a second tidal wave election that hands Democrats huge majorities in both chambers of Congress.
“Halloween decoration showing a mannequin dressed as vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hanging by a noose from the roof of a West Hollywood home is drawing giggles from some passers-by and gasps of outrage from others.
The mannequin is dressed in brunet wig, glasses and a red business suit. Another mannequin dressed as John McCain emerges from a flaming chimney.
Chad Michael Morisette, who lives in the house, told CBS 2 News that drivers and bus passengers have been stopping to snap pictures of the macabre scene.
Morisette says the effigy would be out of bounds at any other time of year, but it’s within the spirit of Halloween.
He says “it should be seen as art, and as within the month of October. It’s Halloween, it’s time to be scary it’s time to be spooky.”
I guess It’s okay if you are a Democrat. Can you imagine the Hue and cry if it was a figure of Obama? In either case? Hanging by a noose, or emerging from a flaming chimney?
I personally think while the above is tastless, it is not really a big deal. But can you imagine if a Republican did this? Outrage across the land!!
guess It’s okay if you are a Democrat. Can you imagine the Hue and cry if it was a figure of Obama? In either case? Hanging by a noose, or emerging from a flaming chimney?
Tasteless, yes. I wouldn’t have done it, and like outrageous things.
But when you compare it to Obama in a noose, you’re forgetting that people who looked like him were regularly and publicly hung for little or no reason at all—and not that long ago. Or the openly racist attacks on Obama we’ve seen on Obama, just this year.
I’m not sure what that says about you.
Tacky? You bet. But I don’t think anyone would mistake a Halloween display as demonstration of violent intent. You’re really grasping for straws. lj.
“All Americans should be given the same amount of income. All Americans should have the same amount of money to spend.
From each according to his ability, to each and every American according to his need.”
__________________________________________
Ummm… The first statement makes NO sense whatever…. The second statement is a DIRECT contradiction of the first….
From each according to his ability…. ABILITY… not equality….
To each according to his need…. NOT EQUALITY…. but NEED…
The inability to see the two statements is fairly good proof that AmWay, and others have NO concept of the socialism that they project so much in their hateful comments….
Must be time for a gret American re-education program in basic history….
“You have been tried by twelve good men and true, not of your peers but as high above you as heaven is of hell, and they have said you are guilty. Time will pass and seasons will come and go. Spring with its wavin’ green grass and heaps of sweet-smellin’ flowers on every hill and in every dale. Then sultry Summer, with her shimmerin’ heat-waves on the baked horizon. And Fall, with her yeller harvest moon and the hills growin’ brown and golden under a sinkin’ sun. And finally Winter, with its bitin’, whinin’ wind, and all the land will be mantled with snow. But you won’t be here to see any of ‘em; not by a damn sight, because it’s the order of this court that you be took to the nearest tree and hanged by the neck til you’re dead, dead, dead, you olive-colored son of a billy goat.”
But when you compare it to Obama in a noose, you’re forgetting that people who looked like him were regularly and publicly hung for little or no reason at all—and not that long ago. Or the openly racist attacks on Obama we’ve seen on Obama, just this year.
I’m not sure what that says about you.
Tacky? You bet. But I don’t think anyone would mistake a Halloween display as demonstration of violent intent. You’re really grasping for straws. lj.
Okay, I will change my posting. Because of the “racial” component. If it was Biden hanging from a noose, their would be a hue and cry througout the nation. It is only conjecture, but my guess is that it would be true. Not thinking of Obama as a “black man”, but rather a Presidnential candidate was my undoing, I guess. Sorry for the gaffe. Can’t treat people the same because of their race, that’s for sure.
And I understand the significance of what you are saying. Which is why I changed the proposal.
Monkey I think you must have misread what I posted. I wasn’t talking about the play on names that I play ocassionally and which some on here do daily, I was talking about the attutitude of hate and intolerance while lambasting the other side for doing what you yourself just did. This from a person that your KFG calls germie daily.
We are no better than those who rail against us if we do this. Just because we say we are tolerant doesn’t make it so. When our actions scream so loudly that you aren’t.
When I have said I am against same sex marriage and have many times given my reasons for this I am called hateful and intolerant. When I have said we need to stop the social engineering that goes on in our schools I am called closed minded and hate filled. What happened to a country where we had elections based on the content of the character of the candidates? Where we discussed issues and the constitutionality of a position.
In short what happened to the political process where civility reigned and we knew that in 4 short years there would be another cast of characters and we would start the process again.
Wall Street Journal on the ACORN fraud and a possible Obama connection.
Of course, the latest tactic by democrats is to put the fear of God into any state which even DARES to investigate the reports of fraud. They call that voter repression.
Obama and Acorn
Community organizers, phony voters, and your tax dollars.Article
At the recent Emmy Awards, historian Laura Linney averred that America’s Founders had been “community organizers” — like Barack Obama. Too bad they aren’t like that any more. Mr. Obama’s kind of organizers work at Acorn, the militant advocacy group that is turning up in reports about voter fraud across the country.
APAcorn — the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — has been around since 1970 and boasts 350,000 members. We’ve written about them for years, but Acorn is now getting more attention as John McCain’s campaign makes an issue of the fraud reports and Acorn’s ties to Mr. Obama. It’s about time someone exposed this shady outfit that uses government dollars to lobby for larger government.
Acorn uses various affiliated groups to agitate for “a living wage,” for “affordable housing,” for “tax justice” and union and environmental goals, as well as against school choice and welfare reform. It was a major contributor to the subprime meltdown by pushing lenders to make home loans on easy terms, conducting “strikes” against banks so they’d lower credit standards.
But the organization’s real genius is getting American taxpayers to foot the bill. According to a 2006 report from the Employment Policies Institute (EPI), Acorn has been on the federal take since 1977. For instance, Acorn’s American Institute for Social Justice claimed $240,000 in tax money between fiscal years 2002 and 2003. Its American Environmental Justice Project received 100% of its revenue from government grants in the same years. EPI estimates the Acorn Housing Corporation alone received some $16 million in federal dollars from 1997-2007. Only recently, Democrats tried and failed to stuff an “affordable housing” provision into the $700 billion bank rescue package that would have let politicians give even more to Acorn.
All this money gives Acorn the ability to pursue its other great hobby: electing liberals. Acorn is spending $16 million this year to register new Democrats and is already boasting it has put 1.3 million new voters on the rolls. The big question is how many of these registrations are real.
The Michigan Secretary of State told the press in September that Acorn had submitted “a sizeable number of duplicate and fraudulent applications.” Earlier this month, Nevada’s Democratic Secretary of State Ross Miller requested a raid on Acorn’s offices, following complaints of false names and fictional addresses (including the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys). Nevada’s Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said he saw rampant fraud in 2,000 to 3,000 applications Acorn submitted weekly.
Officials in Ohio are investigating voter fraud connected with Acorn, and Florida’s Seminole County is withholding Acorn registrations that appear fraudulent. New Mexico, North Carolina and Missouri are looking into hundreds of dubious Acorn registrations. Wisconsin is investigating Acorn employees for, according to an election official, “making people up or registering people that were still in prison.”
Then there’s Lake County, Indiana, which has already found more than 2,100 bogus applications among the 5,000 Acorn dumped right before the deadline. “All the signatures looked exactly the same,” said Ruthann Hoagland, of the county election board. Bridgeport, Connecticut estimates about 20% of Acorn’s registrations were faulty. As of July, the city of Houston had rejected or put on hold about 40% of the 27,000 registration cards submitted by Acorn.
That’s just this year. In 2004, four Acorn employees were indicted in Ohio for submitting false voter registrations. In 2005, two Colorado Acorn workers were found to have submitted false registrations. Four Acorn Missouri employees were indicted in 2006; five were found guilty in Washington state in 2007 for filling out registration forms with names from a phone book.
Which brings us to Mr. Obama, who got his start as a Chicago “community organizer” at Acorn’s side. In 1992 he led voter registration efforts as the director of Project Vote, which included Acorn. This past November, he lauded Acorn’s leaders for being “smack dab in the middle” of that effort. Mr. Obama also served as a lawyer for Acorn in 1995, in a case against Illinois to increase access to the polls.
During his tenure on the board of Chicago’s Woods Fund, that body funneled more than $200,000 to Acorn. More recently, the Obama campaign paid $832,000 to an Acorn affiliate. The campaign initially told the Federal Election Commission this money was for “staging, sound, lighting.” It later admitted the cash was to get out the vote.
The Obama campaign is now distancing itself from Acorn, claiming Mr. Obama never organized with it and has nothing to do with illegal voter registration. Yet it’s disingenuous to channel cash into an operation with a history of fraud and then claim you’re shocked to discover reports of fraud. As with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers, Mr. Obama was happy to associate with Acorn when it suited his purposes. But now that he’s on the brink of the Presidency, he wants to disavow his ties.
The Justice Department needs to treat these fraud reports as something larger than a few local violators. The question is whether Acorn is systematically subverting U.S. election law — on the taxpayer’s dime.
Almost Everyone Would Do Better Under the McCain Health Plan
His tax credit is larger than the current tax subsidy for insurance.
Consider the family of four shown in the chart nearby, assumed to purchase a $14,000 health insurance policy. The straight line reflects what the family would get under the $5,000 McCain tax credit. The lower line shows the value of the current income tax exclusion, which rises and falls with a taxpayer’s tax rate.
What is striking about this picture — and contradicts Mr. Obama’s public comments — is that the McCain tax credit for the purchase of health insurance exceeds the value of the current exclusion for all income levels shown. Indeed, it generally provides more resources to purchase health insurance than the existing exclusion. The total subsidy for health care would rise from about $3.6 trillion over 10 years today to roughly $5 trillion under his proposal.
“Barack Obama’s core belief is that we belong not to ourselves, but to government. We are tools that the government is free to use to bring about what Obama calls “economic justice.” The fruits of our labor belong to government … and government can do with them what it pleases.”
Pleefer when will we ever look at the heart of man and see ‘the content of their character and not the color of their skin’?
Is MLK turning over in his grave to see what this election has turned into. Race riots if Obama loses, race riots if he wins. We are living in a sick nation and we need to be healed. What will that take?
When I have said I am against same sex marriage and have many times given my reasons for this I am called hateful and intolerant.
You have yet to offer any explanation for that position, even when cornered. I’ll ask again: why is someone else’s legal contract any of your business?
Obama, in 2001 Interview, Lamented Failure of Civil Rights Movement to Redistribute Wealth
In a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama said the civil rights movement failed when it became so dependent on the Supreme Court that it never got around to working toward redistributing income.
Racists For Obama?
Politico: Obama Coalition Appears To Include Whites With Negative Views Of African Americans
(The Politico) This story was written by Ben Smith.
New polling and a trickle of stories from the battleground states suggest that Sen. Barack Obama’s coalition includes one unlikely group: white voters with negative views of African Americans.
Race has become the elephant in the room of the 2008 presidential campaign, with Obama’s prospect of becoming the first black president drawing some Americans closer to him while pushing others away. At times, the contest has slipped into a familiar dynamic of allegations of racism and outraged denial – but it’s also challenged some easy assumptions about race, racism and prejudice.
“What you see is it’s perfectly possible to hold a negative view of at least one aspect of African Americans and yet simultaneously prefer Obama,” said Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “Racial feelings are not as cut and dried – not as black and white – as people often say.”
Franklin explored those contradictions in a large, national survey taken in mid-September, when the Illinois Democratic senator’s rival, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), led in many polls and the nation’s economic woes had not yet produced a deep crisis. The poll asked voters whether they agreed with the statement that “African Americans often use race as an excuse to justify wrongdoing.” About a fifth of white voters said they “strongly agreed.” Yet among those who agreed, 23 percent said they’d be supporting Obama.
“This result is reasonable if you believe that race is not as monolithic an effect as we might easily assume,” Franklin said, noting that 22 percent of those who “strongly disagreed” said they’d be supporting McCain.
Anecdotes from across the battlegrounds suggest that there’s a significant minority of prejudiced white voters who will swallow hard and vote for the black man.
“I wouldn’t want a mixed marriage for my daughter, but I’m voting for Obama,” the wife of a retired Virginia coal miner, Sharon Fleming, told the Los Angeles Times recently.
One Obama volunteer told Politico after canvassing the working-class white Philadelphia neighborhood of Fishtown recently, “I was blown away by the outright racism, but these folks are … undecided. They would call him a [racial epithet] and mention how they don’t know what to do because of the economy.”
The notion that there might be “racists for Obama,” as one Democrat called them, comes against the backdrop of a country whose white voters largely accept the notion of a black president.
Racial feelings are not as cut and dried – not as black and white – as people often say.
Political scientist Charles Franklin
“The economy is trumping racism,” said Kurt Schmoke, the dean of Howard University Law School and a former Baltimore mayor. “A lot of people who we might think wouldn’t vote their pocketbook because of race – now they are.”
“If you go to a white neighborhood in the suburbs and ask them, ‘How would you feel about a large black man kicking your door in,’ they would say, ‘That doesn’t sound good to me,’” said Democratic political consultant Paul Begala. “But if you say, ‘Your house is on fire, and the firefighter happens to be black,’ it’s a different situation.
“The house is on fire, and one guy seems like he’s calm and confident and in charge, and that’s the only option,” he said.
That is, in less dramatic terms, more or less the campaign’s official talking point, a version of the longtime Democratic hope that class will – or at least should – matter more than race.
“Voters are less interested in the hot button and are more interested in the cooling economy,” said Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), an Obama ally who is as on-message as his father is off.
But other, more nuanced, questions of race are also in play.
One senior congressional Democrat mused about prejudice among his own supporters. “They’ve all got one black friend,” he said, “and they won’t stop talking about their black friend.”
“That’s Obama,” he said.
And some argue that elements of Obama’s story and persona make him specifically acceptable to voters who hold broadly negative views of African Americans.
“Not all whites associate the generic African American with Obama,” said Ron Walters, a longtime student of race and politics and aide to the senior Jesse Jackson’s presidential campaigns. “They give him credit for having half a Caucasian ancestry, and give him credit for his education, and give him credit for his obvious ability to take complex subjects and parse them.”
The geography of racial conflict and tolerance has been a strong overlay of the electoral map. Obama has run better than past Democrats in prosperous states with little history of tension, such as Colorado and Iowa, and worse in working-class states in the Appalachian belt. His campaign has been structured around this dynamic and may actually have overestimated the number of white Democrats in the region unwilling to vote for him because of his race. Obama had ignored West Virginia, for instance, until a spate of positive polls prompted him to start advertising there this week.
Obama has also ignored Southern states with a history of deep racial division, from Arkansas to Missisissippi, in favor of those that have seen an influx of new voters from the north – Virginia, North Carolina and Florida.
Until this fall, both campaigns viewed Michigan – a heavily Democratic state, but one with a history of tension between Detroit and its white suburbs – as Obama’s Achilles’ heel. In 2006, the state was deeply divided by a referendum to ban affirmative action. The measure was opposed by most African-American voters as an assault on hard-won gains, but it won broad support among whites and passed by a double-digit margin.
But earlier this month, McCain gave up the state for lost as economic concerns appear to have trumped racial ones.
“Obama’s personality – his speech, his look – he provides [white voters] with a non-threatening way to move forward on this issue, and that’s a very positive development,” said David Waymire, who led the unsuccessful opposition to the anti-affirmative action initiative. “He is not Kwame Kilpatrick,” he said, referring to the Detroit mayor who resigned last month after pleading guilty in a sex and misconduct scandal.
For black observers of American politics in particular, Obama’s ability to win over voters who harbor negative views of African Americans at large is a complex, but hopeful, sign.
“I didn’t think the election itself is necessarily going to transport a lot of people, but I’ve been changing my view on that a bit lately,” said Walters. “I’ve been in personal circumstances where I said to myself, ‘I wonder if this person sees me differently because a black person is about to be the president of the United States?’”
I could have been an Obama fan. Used to have some admiration for a young man who came this far. No longer. This man is dangerous. Socialism is destructive. Spreading the wealth is just wrong.
———–
McCain was agin the 39.6% to 36% tax cut, but now he’s fer it.
And he’s attacking Obama for ending a temporary tax cut that he (McCain) was agin earlier.
New McCain Rips Old McCain’s Argument That Bush Tax Cuts Benefit The ‘Wealthy’ http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/17/mccain-wealthy-taxes/
“Now that he has to court the hardline anti-tax factions of the conservative movement, McCain is changing his story on tax policy. In 2000, 2001, and 2003, McCain was one of the people “interested” in talking about “who the, quote, ‘wealthy’ are in America” when he argued against Bush’s tax cuts that “mostly benefit the wealthy“:
“There’s one big difference between me and the others – I won’t take every last dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy.” [McCain campaign commercial, January 2000]
“I am disappointed that the Senate Finance Committee preferred instead to cut the top tax rate of 39.6% to 36%, thereby granting generous tax relief to the wealthiest individuals of our country at the expense of lower- and middle-income American taxpayers.” [McCain Senate floor statement, May 21, 2001]
“But when you look at the percentage of the tax cuts that – as the previous tax cuts – that go to the wealthiest Americans, you will find that the bulk of it, again, goes to wealthiest Americans.” [NBC’s “Today,” Jan. 7, 2003]
McCain now appears more interested in protecting the “wealthy” than he does in straight talk.”
Rage I don’t have time to go into it now because I have gone into it ad nauseum over and over again. No gay or lesbian person has been denied anything that a straight person has been given. When the definition of marriage is opened up to include other alliances then where do we draw the line. Who will determine that only straight gay people have the right to marriage. Will we redefine marriage so that it has no definition.
Now you don’t have to agree with my reasons as you say you don’t. I don’t have to agree with you on same sex marriage, on abortion, on other social issues that have no business in the public eye. We do however have to vote on issues that will affect everyones lifes. The economy, justice appointments, freedoms we currently have that might go away such as right to bear arms, freedom of speech, etc.. We have plenty of things we can agree to disagree on that we can do something about. I just happen to feel these are more important than same sex marriage. My choice. My opinion.
BTW more that 70% of voters also agree with me which is why you are still arguing this point. The election was held. Your side lost. Unless you lived in CA and the judges overturned the will of the people.
Obama, McCain should lead us beyond whispers of riots
Dawn Turner Trice
October 27, 2008
If Sen. Barack Obama wins the presidential election, he will have a major party in Chicago’s Grant Park with thousands upon thousands of celebrants. You can imagine that the police presence will be breathtakingly tight.
But police departments around the country are gearing up in case Obama doesn’t win. The thinking is that because of the historic nature of his candidacy, there may be riots if supporters feel the election was stolen.
DETROIT — A 37-year-old man who had been laid off from his job at a plant in Saginaw was shot in Detroit by a robber who made off with about $1,700 — the sum of the victim’s final paycheck from his job.
WDIV-TV and the Detroit Free Press report Brad Mannie said he stopped Friday night at a store with his 12-year-old son. After they got back into their vehicle, a robber shot Mannie in the hip and took his wallet.
Earlier that day, the Inkster man had been laid off from his production and maintenance job at Stress-Con Industries Inc.
Despite the ordeal, Mannie says he’s just happy to be alive.
“I’ll ask again: why is someone else’s legal contract any of your business?”
I’ll take a stab at this one, even though I would be in favor of a civil union for gays.
As an official tightwad, if two males/females were allowed to form a legal contract – that contract may entitle them to the benefits normally allowed for a married couple. For instance healthcare insurance at work. This would cost my employer more money. That is money that would not be available for ME. At the federal level, that might include the UnEarned Income Tax Credit, or Social Security entitlements based upon a spouse. Again, this would decrease the money available for others, which would increase costs for everyone. Again me.
Selfish? Maybe. But it is my money, at least until you justify taking it using your federal bible.
Obama, in 2001 Interview, Lamented Failure of Civil Rights Movement to Redistribute Wealth
In a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama said the civil rights movement failed when it became so dependent on the Supreme Court that it never got around to working toward redistributing income.
No gay or lesbian person has been denied anything that a straight person has been given.
Anyone with common sense knows that’s 100% false.
When the definition of marriage is opened up to include other alliances then where do we draw the line.
With human beings, maybe? But people like you obviously view gay people as less than human.
Who will determine that only straight gay people have the right to marriage. Will we redefine marriage so that it has no definition.
Did that gibberish make sense even to you?
Look it’s simple: if you’re bothered by the religious implications of the “M” word being applied to gay people, take it out of government. Civil unions for all. Problem solved.
BTW more that 70% of voters also agree with me which is why you are still arguing this point. The election was held. Your side lost. Unless you lived in CA and the judges overturned the will of the people.
I live in Arizona where a similar amendment was defeated two years ago. Unfortunately, the fanatics are trying again this year. Sigh. . .
Sol there is a case to be made for this and I have said before that maybe the gov should get out of the ‘blessing the union’ business. I would be fine with letting marriage be a religious ceremony.
I would be fine with not giving survivor benefits to a spouse if the gov gets their paws out of my pocket and allows me to keep my own money and put it away for my spouse to survive on if I am gone.
What right here would same sex marriages be denied. Legally you can do anything you want to assign survivors, beneficiaries, legal rights, tenants in common, and on and on and on… The strawman argument that same sex marriage is the be all to end all is just that an argument with no substance. It is an ‘in your face you bigoted, narrow minded, hatefilled, intolerant, right wingnut’.
The people voted. They, by a large majority don’t want it. Why is it so important to you that we create another class of victims. Those like farmie who are so innocent and helpless you know. Matthew Shepherd was a victim of animals dressed up to look like human beings. They aren’t representative of the human race thank God.
“Sol there is a case to be made for this and I have said before that maybe the gov should get out of the ‘blessing the union’ business. I would be fine with letting marriage be a religious ceremony.”
What the HUH?? The Government has NEVER been in the “blessing the union” business. The CHURCH “blesses the union” for which the Government gives License.
Churches do NOT issue marriage licenses… If you dont know that, that shows you to be out of touch….
BTW, heterosexual marriage, as defined by the LAW, alread IS a “civil” union… since the LAW doesnt define it as “religious”
To even suggest that gay people have an equal status under the law with everybody else, is totally ridiculous… or just plain STUPID….
I think the government should stay out of personal business. If you are into same sex relationships, you should be afforded all the trappings of opposite sex relationships.
How is it constitutional for the government to give or take based on marriage? Be it same or opposite sex? Marriage should not be governed at the federal level.
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 12:49 pm | Permalink
No gay or lesbian person has been denied anything that a straight person has been given.
Anyone with common sense knows that’s 100% false.
“Rage if you are a man have you been denied the right to marry the woman of your choice or if a woman the man of your choice. Show me where this is any different in the gay world.”
When the definition of marriage is opened up to include other alliances then where do we draw the line.
With human beings, maybe? But people like you obviously view gay people as less than human.
“Rage don’t use the tired liberal drivel of telling me I don’t view gays as human. You don’t know me and I don’t know you but I know I don’t look down on any person – well maybe Chas and BJ because they are such twits and stupid and lazy to boot – but I have never reduced gays so low as to compare them to these two losers”.
Who will determine that only straight gay people have the right to marriage. Will we redefine marriage so that it has no definition.
Did that gibberish make sense even to you?
“Obviously it did or I wouldn’t have said it. You have no logical retort so bring in the putdowns. I am allowed to disagree with you”.
Look it’s simple: if you’re bothered by the religious implications of the “M” word being applied to gay people, take it out of government. Civil unions for all. Problem solved.
“My reasons have nothihng to do with religion. That is the reason you gave. I am against it because in civilized societies a breakdown in family structure has always preceeded the fall of that democracy. You have the religious hangup”.
BTW more that 70% of voters also agree with me which is why you are still arguing this point. The election was held. Your side lost. Unless you lived in CA and the judges overturned the will of the people.
I live in Arizona where a similar amendment was defeated two years ago. Unfortunately, the fanatics are trying again this year. Sigh
“Isn’t this country we live in great. When is an election ever final?”.
Sol that is exactly what I said only I used a few more words. How is giving away more going to even things up. Do you think it is equality or benefits the gay community wants.
When you really take the time to look at this movement I think you will get an idea of what is really at stake here.
We could argue this all day and I don’t have time for that. We’ll just say we agree that we disagree on this one. Just as I disagree with many here on abortion and won’t argue that one either.
“I think the government should stay out of personal business.”
And that is the real answer. But the government tells me what kind of light bulbs I can buy Sol!
They tell me how much pressure my shower head can have! They tell me how much water my toilet should flush with!
All the above affect my standing as president of the ugly club (smell counts for 30% of the vote).
So: Is marriage/civil union a GOOD place to start staying OUT of our personal lives?
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:30 pm | Permalink
I am against it because in civilized societies a breakdown in family structure has always preceeded the fall of that democracy.
And how exactly is the family structure protected by punishing gay families? You’re not making any sense.
=======================
How are gay ‘families’ punished?
Steven why do you see this as JRs prediction. This woman is indeed a maverick. She has always been a fighter frequently on the edge. She calls them as she sees them and right now she is fed up with the way the press has been allowed to define her with no opposition from her own handlers. I would be ‘mad as hell and wouldn’t take it anymore’ too.
Win or lose she isn’t going away. She is the face of the future conservative movement.
BTW while talking about our VP candidate where is yours? Have they been able to get his foot out of his mouth yet? For that matter where is the candidate of the people. Why is he dodging press conferences. I guess he and Joe, the senator are hoping to slide in under the catchers mitt, SAFE.
* Right to many of ex- or late spouse’s benefits, including:
o Social Security pension
o veteran’s pensions, indemnity compensation for service-connected deaths, medical care, and nursing home care, right to burial in veterans’ cemeteries, educational assistance, and housing
o survivor benefits for federal employees
o survivor benefits for spouses of longshoremen, harbor workers, railroad workers
o additional benefits to spouses of coal miners who die of black lung disease
o $100,000 to spouse of any public safety officer killed in the line of duty
o continuation of employer-sponsored health benefits
o renewal and termination rights to spouse’s copyrights on death of spouse
o continued water rights of spouse in some circumstances
o payment of wages and workers compensation benefits after worker death
o making, revoking, and objecting to post-mortem anatomical gifts
* Right to benefits while married:
o employment assistance and transitional services for spouses of members being separated from military service; continued commissary privileges
o per diem payment to spouse for federal civil service employees when relocating
o Indian Health Service care for spouses of Native Americans (in some circumstances)
o sponsor husband/wife for immigration benefits
* Larger benefits under some programs if married, including:
o veteran’s disability
o Supplemental Security Income
o disability payments for federal employees
o medicaid
o property tax exemption for homes of totally disabled veterans
o income tax deductions, credits, rates exemption, and estimates
* Joint and family-related rights:
o joint filing of bankruptcy permitted
o joint parenting rights, such as access to children’s school records
o family visitation rights for the spouse and non-biological children, such as to visit a spouse in a hospital or prison
o next-of-kin status for emergency medical decisions or filing wrongful death claims
o custodial rights to children, shared property, child support, and alimony after divorce
o domestic violence intervention
o access to “family only” services, such as reduced rate memberships to clubs & organizations or residency in certain neighborhoods
* Preferential hiring for spouses of veterans in government jobs
* Tax-free transfer of property between spouses (including on death) and exemption from “due-on-sale” clauses.
* Special consideration to spouses of citizens and resident aliens
* Spouse’s flower sales count towards meeting the eligibility for Fresh Cut Flowers and Fresh Cut Greens Promotion and Information Act
* Threats against spouses of various federal employees is a federal crime
* Right to continue living on land purchased from spouse by National Park Service when easement granted to spouse
* Court notice of probate proceedings
* Domestic violence protection orders
* Existing homestead lease continuation of rights
* Regulation of condominium sales to owner-occupants exemption
* Funeral and bereavement leave
* Joint adoption and foster care
* Joint tax filing
* Insurance licenses, coverage, eligibility, and benefits organization of mutual benefits society
* Legal status with stepchildren
* Making spousal medical decisions
* Spousal non-resident tuition deferential waiver
* Permission to make funeral arrangements for a deceased spouse, including burial or cremation
* Right of survivorship of custodial trust
* Right to change surname upon marriage
* Right to enter into prenuptial agreement
* Right to inheritance of property
* Spousal privilege in court cases (the marital confidences privilege and the spousal testimonial privilege)
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
How are gay ‘families’ punished?
Rights and benefits
* Right to many of ex- or late spouse’s benefits, including:
o Social Security pension
o veteran’s pensions, indemnity compensation for service-connected deaths, medical care, and nursing home care, right to burial in veterans’ cemeteries, educational assistance, and housing
o survivor benefits for federal employees
o survivor benefits for spouses of longshoremen, harbor workers, railroad workers
o additional benefits to spouses of coal miners who die of black lung disease
o $100,000 to spouse of any public safety officer killed in the line of duty
o continuation of employer-sponsored health benefits
o renewal and termination rights to spouse’s copyrights on death of spouse
o continued water rights of spouse in some circumstances
o payment of wages and workers compensation benefits after worker death
o making, revoking, and objecting to post-mortem anatomical gifts
* Right to benefits while married:
o employment assistance and transitional services for spouses of members being separated from military service; continued commissary privileges
o per diem payment to spouse for federal civil service employees when relocating
o Indian Health Service care for spouses of Native Americans (in some circumstances)
o sponsor husband/wife for immigration benefits
* Larger benefits under some programs if married, including:
o veteran’s disability
o Supplemental Security Income
o disability payments for federal employees
o medicaid
o property tax exemption for homes of totally disabled veterans
o income tax deductions, credits, rates exemption, and estimates
* Joint and family-related rights:
o joint filing of bankruptcy permitted
o joint parenting rights, such as access to children’s school records
o family visitation rights for the spouse and non-biological children, such as to visit a spouse in a hospital or prison
o next-of-kin status for emergency medical decisions or filing wrongful death claims
o custodial rights to children, shared property, child support, and alimony after divorce
o domestic violence intervention
o access to “family only” services, such as reduced rate memberships to clubs & organizations or residency in certain neighborhoods
* Preferential hiring for spouses of veterans in government jobs
* Tax-free transfer of property between spouses (including on death) and exemption from “due-on-sale” clauses.
* Special consideration to spouses of citizens and resident aliens
* Spouse’s flower sales count towards meeting the eligibility for Fresh Cut Flowers and Fresh Cut Greens Promotion and Information Act
* Threats against spouses of various federal employees is a federal crime
* Right to continue living on land purchased from spouse by National Park Service when easement granted to spouse
* Court notice of probate proceedings
* Domestic violence protection orders
* Existing homestead lease continuation of rights
* Regulation of condominium sales to owner-occupants exemption
* Funeral and bereavement leave
* Joint adoption and foster care
* Joint tax filing
* Insurance licenses, coverage, eligibility, and benefits organization of mutual benefits society
* Legal status with stepchildren
* Making spousal medical decisions
* Spousal non-resident tuition deferential waiver
* Permission to make funeral arrangements for a deceased spouse, including burial or cremation
* Right of survivorship of custodial trust
* Right to change surname upon marriage
* Right to enter into prenuptial agreement
* Right to inheritance of property
* Spousal privilege in court cases (the marital confidences privilege and the spousal testimonial privilege)
————————-
95 percents of those are benefits, not rights.
“She is the face of the future conservative movement.”
The poster is referring to Sarah Palin.
Oh PLEASE let her wish come true!
You con fools are too stupid to get it. Obama isn’t winning. McCain is losing largely because of Sarah Palin. The very things that so endear her to you turn most Americans away.
I would get Government out of the marriage business completely. If 2 atheists want to get married, it’s none of my business or none of Government’s business.
Civil Unions are nothing more then contracts between 2 individuals. None of Government’s business. Marriages have been re-defined by the lawyers and judges to be contracts also. Again, None of the Government’s business.
So some people get a legal contract signed (pre-nup) to alter the marriage contract – an attempt to prevent the Government from interfering with their lives.
Government has grown in power and scope to a degree which is light-years beyond what anyone might have imagined in 1782. Clearly those who wrote the US Constitution were very careful with their language to PREVENT Government from gaining too much power, and thus taking away Freedom from the People.
Those who want a big Nanny Government are getting their way. How? Big Government giving away handouts to 40% of the population to buy their votes, controlling the propaganda taught in Public Schools, allows Government to pass more and more Socialist and Controlling laws.
The Socialists willingly give up many Freedoms, in exchange for promises that the Government will take care of them.
And in the short-run, the Socialists are winning. In the long-run, the Socialist machine will erode away the financial base and strength of this country, until it can no longer sustain itself. People will simply stop working. And when that happens, your beloved Gravy Train will finally crash. The Greatest Depression will hit. And after many years of hard suffering by all, the cycle starts all over again.
Rage what you have listed is a complete list of LEGAL reasons same sex unions should be honored. You haven’t given me one reason why marriage should be changed to include same sex marriages.
You of course don’t get it. Legal unions and marriages are two very seperate things.
okobserver
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:57 pm | Permalink
Rage what you have listed is a complete list of LEGAL reasons same sex unions should be honored. You haven’t given me one reason why marriage should be changed to include same sex marriages.
—————————————————-
Why are you so afraid?
Military stationed outside of the State of Virginia being denied the right to vote
Military Ballots Still a Battleground in Virginia
by Connie Hair
10/27/2008
Military ballots are still being rejected in Fairfax County, Va., by registrar Rokey Suleman on the basis that the Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot, or FWAB, should have a witness address accompanying the signature. Federal law enabling military balloting by mail does not require the address, and the federal ballot form lacks a space for it.
The state of Virginia did not properly instruct Virginia soldiers to provide this witness information. Note the instructions given to Virginia service members, “Block 7: Sign and date in the presence of a witness. The witness must sign and date the form.” Nothing is said about an address requirement for the witness and the FWAB form offers only a signature block for the witness. By last Thursday, out of 260 ballots, only five had the witness address meeting Suleman’s requirement.
Having left several voicemail messages at the registrar’s office last week, Suleman returned my calls on Friday afternoon. He told me that his board met back in September and he told them that there was a problem but it was not remedied. When asked why Fairfax is the only county not counting these ballots, Suleman told me, “The other county boards are breaking the law. I’m not putting myself in jeopardy. The board of elections could come in and remove me if I allowed these votes.”
With elections less than two weeks away, I asked if there was a way to remedy this situation in Fairfax County before the election, Suleman said, “A judge would have to legislate from the bench to fix this before the elections.”
Democrat operatives have worked in the past to discount military ballots, as soldiers tend to vote overwhelmingly for a Republican as their Commander-in-Chief. In the aftermath of the 2000 election in Florida, as well as in Pennsylvania in 2004, concerted efforts were made to reject military absentee ballots, and national outrage erupted over leaks of Democrat memoranda instructing their legal teams on the ground during the process to disallow military ballots.
These same concerns are being raised about Suleman in this battleground state. When he led a voter registration drive earlier this year in the county jails, information came to light that Suleman founded the Trumball, Ohio, Young Democrats and ran for office there as a Democrat earlier this year. Suleman says his office is non-partisan, yet some are asking why he would go out of his way to register inmates to vote prior to a possible felony conviction, yet reject military ballots on a hyper-technicality.
The National Defense Committee is a grassroots group of retired military whose Military Ballot Protection Program is set up to protect not only a soldier’s rights but to insure their votes are counted. I spoke with Capt. Sam Wright, a retired Naval JAG officer who serves as director of the program. Wright contacted the Department of Justice, asking in his letter for their review of Fairfax County’s procedures. During a long conversation full of military ballot horror stories, Wright discussed his group’s involvement in the issue with Suleman. “There has been some narrowing of the circumstance to disallow the ballots,” Wright said. “Some of these votes will now be counted.”
Suleman’s prior position had been that all of the federal ballots would be rejected unless the witness address was included. Now he says if a soldier first applied for a state ballot, did not receive the state ballot, then used the federal write-in ballot as a stop-gap, he will count the vote with or without the witness address. If the soldier used this federal write-in ballot as his sole means for voting, Suleman will not count the ballot if there is no witness address.
It has yet to be determined how many soldiers this narrow Fairfax County decision will disenfranchise. The rest of the Virginia counties have accepted responsibility for not providing proper instructions to the soldiers and will be counting all of these ballots.
Discrimination usually brings race to our minds, but takes many forms. Here today we’ve been discussing sexual orientation and proving that discrimination is alive and well.
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
How are gay ‘families’ punished?
Rights and benefits
—–
Rage I finally got through this long list of suppressed right you listed. Hogwash!! Most of these aren’t even right I as a opposite sex spouse have. I have no right to VA benefits even though my spouse is a veteran. I have no right or duties for my stepchildren unless they have been legally adopted by me. I have no rights to national park land eventhough my sponse did. This would pass to our children if he is on the rolls of one of the indian tribes. I could go on but I don’t have all day.
Most if not all of these could be addressed by legal paperwork today. Are you to cheap to do it right. My husband and I have taken care of all of this legally and we are opposite sex.
Admit that the real reason this is an issue is because you want your ‘marriage’ recognized by society. Well be that as it may laws aren’t revised for people feelings.
————-
BJ if you weren’t such a poor pathetic person I would try to have a conversation with you. Your brain cells are missing. I haven’t heard logic come out of your mouth for months. How is that union thingie working for you. Did Hawker signing put money in your pocket? Didn’t think so. Do you honestly think those union workers know or care who you are as they drive off in their late model cars to a comfortable home and eat a good meal before sitting down in front of their big screen tvs to watch monday nite football. You are so far out in left field that they built the fence in front of you. How is the view from there?
BJ still waiting for that socialism train to come pick you up.
Freebird1971, why do you think it is about fear? I mean I don’t let my dog sh*t in my house. Not because I fear my dog, but because it is repulsive and insults me.
My point is this, I don’t think it has anything to do with fear.
You of course don’t get it. Legal unions and marriages are two very seperate things.
No, you don’t get it. These amendments affect the legal status of marriage, period. If you’re suggesting there’s any other issue, that you’re really talking about using government for social engineering.
If a gay couple gets married at a Unitarian church, the state should recognize that union. If two atheists get married at the Justice of the Peace, same thing. Likewise, if two gay atheists–you get the idea.
Near as I can tell, the only other “issue” is the reality of people like you accepting gay people getting married. I guess you’re afraid it’ll catch like a disease or something. Little Johnny hears that Heather has two mommies, and is off to a bathhouse!
If that’s not it, well, sorry, you’re making me guess–you still haven’t articulated a coherent reason for your position.
I merely mention that I sure hope that such as you and Sarah Palin are the future of the Republican party. With any luck, that party will be out of power for the rest of my life.
Admit that the real reason this is an issue is because you want your ‘marriage’ recognized by society. Well be that as it may laws aren’t revised for people feelings.
It’s called “equal protection of the laws.” Would you be okay with a law that banned Republicans (and only Republicans) from voting?
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
Admit that the real reason this is an issue is because you want your ‘marriage’ recognized by society. Well be that as it may laws aren’t revised for people feelings.
It’s called “equal protection of the laws.” Would you be okay with a law that banned Republicans (and only Republicans) from voting?
It’s that simple.
==========================
Hypothetical question for you Rage.
You state that ‘marriage recognized by a society’ is the standard used today in determining a legitimate marriage.
Let’s say that Congressman Barney Frank gets married to his boyfriend and takes him on a trip with to Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia does not recognize gay marriage and think gay activity is a violation of their Muslim and State laws.
Do the Saudis have the right to ban the Franks from their country or perhaps put them on trial for violations of their codified law?
I merely mention that I sure hope that such as you and Sarah Palin are the future of the Republican party. With any luck, that party will be out of power for the rest of my life.
After the election of 1932, the Democrats kept the White House for 20 years, and the Congress for 14 years.
It is all about “equal protection of the laws”. And, as I’ve posted more times than I care to recall, to me the problem is one of using the name of a religious sacrament for a legal contractual relationship. Had the legal contract of “marriage” been named, e.g., “contract of civil union” from the beginning, I think societally we would be beyond this discussion; at least, I would hope we would.
“And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution – at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [it] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.”
Rage I have given you my reasons and opinions. You can choose to read them, ignore them, discount them, call them fear mongering, intolerance or any other name you wish to – it doesn’t change the fact that you and I have a basic disagreement on gay marriage. If the Obamanation becomes reality and the house and senate go left then we will probably see this definition change. I’m not sure though because a large number of people on both sides of the aisle agree on this one. We will have to wait and see. You however can’t use this ploy to discount the legal protection that every couple needs whether gay or straight.
Do the Saudis have the right to ban the Franks from their country or perhaps put them on trial for violations of their codified law?
Since Frank has diplomatic immunity the answer would be no.
A repressive regime like Saudi Arabia has a right, consistent with national sovereignty, to its own laws. We have a right to take those laws into consideration when dealing with them. Of course, other considerations–most prominently oil–come into play.
All more the more reason we need to become energy independent.
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink
I hope humans evolve to the point where the practice of treating others with human dignity is commonplace.
———————
I doubt evolution has much to do with it. A couple that has a five o’clock shadow, stems and berries and both leaving the seat up has different values and consequences in an established society.
Discrimination usually brings race to our minds, but takes many forms. Here today we’ve been discussing sexual orientation and proving that discrimination is alive and well.
Linda why is your definition of discrimination more salient that mine? Do you have some divine appointment that gave you the grand vision that Oprah had when she called Obama ‘The One’? Where was the left when this happened? Oh yes they were in Alaska trying to find out out if Palins BIL should have been fired for tasing his step son and threatening his father in law with a lead bullet between his teeth.
I am honest enough to say I don’t agree with you.I am not dishonest enough to say because we disagree you are hateful and intolerant.
BJ we do agree that we won’t talk. I have read more than one book and you are just too limited in your ability to converse. That wasn’t very nice was it? I will take it back because it sounded much to much like a leftwingnut radical.
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink
Do the Saudis have the right to ban the Franks from their country or perhaps put them on trial for violations of their codified law?
Since Frank has diplomatic immunity the answer would be no.
A repressive regime like Saudi Arabia has a right, consistent with national sovereignty, to its own laws. We have a right to take those laws into consideration when dealing with them. Of course, other considerations–most prominently oil–come into play.
All more the more reason we need to become energy independent.
=============================
So, is the right of gay marriage an inherent right or is it a societal right. You avoided answering the question to my satisfaction.
Isn’t it your party that says we shouldn’t interfere with other countries and their sovereignty?
And, if gay marriage is not an inherent right, but based on societal moral standards, then what is the objection for establishing parameters for marriage?
Should marriage be done away with completely and substituted with common law bonding?
How does one countries marriage “laws” translates across international borders with societies that have different moral standards?
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink
I hope humans evolve to the point where the practice of treating others with human dignity is commonplace
—————
Linda maybe you have got something from what was said today. After all it was your statement about intolerance and hate that started this discussion.
Rags- It’s called “equal protection of the laws.”
——————————
Is it “equal protection of the laws” if…
-A blind guy wants to be an airline pilot?
-How about a 5′2 90 lb girl that wants to be a nfl line backer?
-How about a 6′7 guy that wants to play volleyball for the girls team?
-How about letting a girl with an IQ of 80 into MENSA?
“Meanwhile, I watched with disbelief as the nation’s leading newspapers, many of whom I’d written for in the past, slowly let opinion pieces creep into the news section, and from there onto the front page. Personal opinions and comments that, had they appeared in my stories in 1979, would have gotten my butt kicked by the nearest copy editor, were now standard operating procedure at the New York Times, the Washington Post, and soon after in almost every small town paper in the U.S.
But what really shattered my faith — and I know the day and place where it happened — was the war in Lebanon three summers ago. The hotel I was staying at in Windhoek, Namibia, only carried CNN, a network I’d already learned to approach with skepticism. But this was CNN International, which is even worse.
I sat there, first with my jaw hanging down, then actually shouting at the TV, as one field reporter after another reported the carnage of the Israeli attacks on Beirut, with almost no corresponding coverage of the Hezbollah missiles raining down on northern Israel. The reporting was so utterly and shamelessly biased that I sat there for hours watching, assuming that eventually CNNi would get around to telling the rest of the story … but it never happened.” ….
….”But nothing, nothing I’ve seen has matched the media bias on display in the current presidential campaign.
Republicans are justifiably foaming at the mouth over the sheer one-sidedness of the press coverage of the two candidates and their running mates. But in the last few days, even Democrats, who have been gloating over the pass — no, make that shameless support — they’ve gotten from the press, are starting to get uncomfortable as they realize that no one wins in the long run when we don’t have a free and fair press.
I was one of the first people in the traditional media to call for the firing of Dan Rather — not because of his phony story, but because he refused to admit his mistake — but, bless him, even Gunga Dan thinks the media is one-sided in this election.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not one of those people who think the media has been too hard on, say, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin, by rushing reportorial SWAT teams to her home state of Alaska to rifle through her garbage. This is the big leagues, and if she wants to suit up and take the field, then Gov. Palin better be ready to play.”…..
…..”If the current polls are correct, we are about to elect as president of the United States a man who is essentially a cipher, who has left almost no paper trail, seems to have few friends (that at least will talk) and has entire years missing out of his biography.
That isn’t Sen. Obama’s fault: His job is to put his best face forward. No, it is the traditional media’s fault, for it alone (unlike the alternative media) has had the resources to cover this story properly, and has systematically refused to do so.
Why, for example to quote the lawyer for Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., haven’t we seen an interview with Sen. Obama’s grad school drug dealer — when we know all about Mrs. McCain’s addiction? Are Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko that hard to interview? All those phony voter registrations that hard to scrutinize? And why are Sen. Biden’s endless gaffes almost always covered up, or rationalized, by the traditional media?”
#
biased1
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:38 pm | Permalink
Regular- So, is the right of gay marriage an inherent right or is it a societal right?
————————————
It is not a “right” at all.
======================
I agree somewhat, but marriage is more than a privilege as it implies status under a society’s laws.
The ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’ appears to be the standard our founders based their constitutional rights on for a large portion of the bill of rights.
‘Pursuit of happiness’ is a very gray area. What constitutes happiness?
biased, with the possible exception of your first example, there is nothing there which would call the equal protection argument into play. Even your first example doesn’t raise an equal protection issue as such.
A better example would be whether automatically denying a 5′2″ 90 pound female from a position as a firefighter is a violation of equal protection. Notice the use of the term “automatically” and the insertion of a governmental function within the example.
And, if gay marriage is not an inherent right, but based on societal moral standards, then what is the objection for establishing parameters for marriage?
You’re framing the issue incorrectly. There is no such thing as “gay marriage.” There is only marriage.
The issues is whether consenting adults should be allowed to participate in marriage (a legal contract) regardless of sex.
Now: Is marriage an important contract? Many would say it’s critically important.
But even if it wasn’t, gay marriages bans would still run afoul of equal protection principles and basic societal fairness. Government regulations on contracts have to have, at the very least, a rational basis. Such bans have no rational basis–that’s why the courts keep overturning these statutes, and why the religious-right activists keep pursuing amendments. You can put any unfair thing you want in a Constitution–it can’t be overturned by a court.
There are indeed moral issues.
(1)Should government apply the religion-derived standards of some to all people?
(2) Should government discriminate a class of people based on inherent characteristics (in the case, sex and sexual orientation)?
(3) Should goverment grant legal status to sacraments performed in some churches, but not in others?
A better example would be whether automatically denying a 5?2? 90 pound female from a position as a firefighter is a violation of equal protection.
——————————————-
So she doesn’t have a “right” to be a firefighter?
biased, if the person so described can meet the physical demands of the position, yes, she has the right to apply; but, again, she may not be automatically excluded from the position merely due to physical size. Nor is the “right” to be a firefighter automatic, either, whether for our hypothetical female or a male standing 6′7″ weighing 250 pounds. The “right” is really IMO the right to apply for the job without automatic exclusion or inclusion based upon gender or physical size.
avtolle
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:53 pm | Permalink
biased, if the person so described can meet the physical demands of the position, yes, she has the right to apply;
————————————-
So if she is physically unable to perform the duties of the position, she has no “right” to the position?
Chas surprised that they let you and BJ out from under your rocks on the same day. I am not required to justify my opinion with a legal reason. What is the problem with the left? The left can have opinions all day long and that is ok. If I give an opinion I have to justify it legally. Why?? Who are you the blog police?
————————
BJ just for clarification you won’t defeat me. Even if Obama wins and that isn’t a given yet, my life will go on, I will survive. Not so sure about the future of our great nation or the future of my kids and grandkids. Will the incentive we gave them to work hard and acomplish good things be undermined by the JRs of the world with their hands out and the nanny state rushing to fill them up. That is what we should be worrying about.
Excellent piece upthread outlander. Only fools would sit by and watch what is happening here and think it is ok. Obama will be vetted but unfortunately it might be while he is the commander in chief destroying our country. The news media will lament the fact that no one saw what was coming and the circle goes on and on and on.
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:59 pm | Permalink
Being a firefighter is not a right. Being able to apply for the job without automatically being rejected is a right.
———————————-
is it “fair” to reject her just because she doesn’t meet the standards or criteria for being a firefighter?
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:46 pm | Permalink
So, Okie — WHEN have you ever stated a LEGAL reason to oppose same sex marriage??
All I have ever seen you post is a bunch of gay bashing diatribe…. mixed in with a few religious undertones
—————
And Chass when you use big words like diatribe you should really know what they mean. I will wait patiently while you review my posts today and tell me where I have bashed anyone other than you and JR today. I don’t bash gays. That is unless you and Jr are gay and I didn’t know it. Sorry if that is the case let me know and I will quit bashing you.
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:03 pm | Permalink
Would it be fair to reject chas as your CEO for lack of skill?
_________________________________________
No skill — no job… simple…
BUT — the right to APPLY for the job?? That could be discriminatory…. depending on the particular job….
Employing women in combat oriented jobs within the military is an interesting conundrum. From what I can read, hear, etc., the number of positions being closed to women due to the relationship of the same to combat is diminishing. It is my personal opinion that so long as the physical requirements for the position may be met, there is no reason based in law or the Constitution for excluding females. This, once again, is an example of how societal mores shape official policy in the U.S. and other countries.
It is disturbing to many, I believe, to contemplate putting females into harm’s way as a part of a combat operation. While continuation of the civilization is dependent upon having both males and females of appropriate age available to propogate, biologically, at least, the loss of a female is a larger loss than the loss of a male. It is that realization, I believe, that has shaped the concept in may societies and civilizations of combat troops being male, as the death of one or many males is, from a purely biological perspective, less harmful to the species than the loss of one or more females.
Just my thoughts. From a strictly “legal” perspective, there is little to justify exclusion of females from combat based solely upon their gender.
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:02 pm | Permalink
It is fair to reject her if she cannot fulfill the requirements of the position. IMO.
—————————————-
But her neighbor is a firefighter, her cousin is a firefighter, firefighters get to go to the ball free, they have their own lake and cabin for summertime use, and she really WANTS to be a firefighter.
Couldn’t you just lower the standards?
Couldn’t you just change the criteria?
Couldn’t you just change the qualifications?
BlueJay
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:04 pm | Permalink
Alaska Senator Ted Stevens GUILTY!
————-
BJ your obvious elation over this verdict puts you in good company. Palin shares your view and so do I. He was corrupt and should pay the ultimate price whatever that is. Of course if he were Cold Cash Jefferson and from LA he would be re-elected..
Okie — as I said upthread you have STILL not posted any LEGAL reason to oppose same sex marriage… All you seem to know how to do is to attack me with a bunch of phony hyperbole, and vindictive ad hominems….
IF you cant be subjected to the THEME of the item…. then why not just shut up…
I think a very lucrative business model might be one which made authentic looking custom made marriage licenses. These can be framed and admired by all who would see them and used to legitmize every possible conceivable union by consenting adults.
By purchasing such a piece a paper, a gay couple and any other possible combination of parties who want to be married can satisfy their desires without having to have a popular majority (or sympathetic judge) to rule that their particular combination is in fact a marriage.
Whew! That was easy.
After all, why does what billions of people think matter when you have found love! If you are truly devoted to another party, no law is needed to legitmize what it is that you choose to call marriage.
Just get your piece of paper and call it a marriage and enjoy a lifetime of “licensed” matrimony to your one(s) and only!
Ah, but we don’t know what the attitude of the residents of Louisiana would be if “Cold Cash” Jefferson was convicted, as that has yet to happen. Right now, it appears that the good folks of Louisiana are relying upon the presumption of innocence (as hard as that presumption may be to maintain, given the reported circumstances).
I had thought about the POW side of things more. Remember – Jessica? Captured and rescued in Iraq? Also, the protective nature of most American males. Would having females on the battlefield change the dynamic of how injuries are handled while under operations?
You have strayed from the original topic. If an individual, for whatever reason, cannot perform to the job title’s expectations, that individual should not be considered for the position. Clear enough?
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:09 pm | Permalink
Okie — as I said upthread you have STILL not posted any LEGAL reason to oppose same sex marriage… All you seem to know how to do is to attack me with a bunch of phony hyperbole, and vindictive ad hominems….
IF you cant be subjected to the THEME of the item…. then why not just shut up…
—————–
Chass I know you are enomoured with your own arrogance but you need to realize that neither I nor anyone else on this blog has to meet your ’standards’ in order to post here. I have stated my reasons and you can take them or let them be but you can’t tell me ’shup up’ because I don’t reach you definition of right and wrong. You seem to be the one hung up on the ‘legal’ thing. Maybe you should get help for that. BTW have you seen the movie Sybil?
I wish to point out that if Sen. Stevens is reelected by the people of Alaska, his convictions will not bar him from serving as Senator. It would be up to the Senate to vote to exclude him (by a 2/3 vote).
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:15 pm | Permalink
Biased,
You have strayed from the original topic. If an individual, for whatever reason, cannot perform to the job title’s expectations, that individual should not be considered for the position. Clear enough?
———————————————
So you are discriminating against her size? or ability?
Is that “equal protection?”
equal ability = equal protection?
equal size = equal protection?
equal qualifications = equal protection?
is that what you are saying?
#
BlueJay
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:07 pm | Permalink
HEH
The voters of Alaska don’t have much choice!
Stevens is going to jail!
His name must remain on the ballot!
ANOTHER pick up in the Senate for the good guy Dems!
——————-
Doesn’t the Governor of Alaska pick another Senator if he/she cannot complete his term? :D
Each count in the indictment carries a possible 5-year penalty. At Stevens’ age, that’s a life sentence.
Re-election is the least of his worries now. But you what would be really ironic? If he somehow won anyway (I doubt it), the governor would have to appoint a temporary successor when he went to prison.
BJ I know it is a challenge because you have read a book already this year but you would do well to actually know what you are talking about with respect to Alaska and roads, expecially the one to Kethchikan.
I won’t bore you with the details but you might want to check that out. The road had nothing to do with Stevens and everything to do with being able to get around in Alaska.
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:23 pm | Permalink
Each count in the indictment carries a possible 5-year penalty. At Stevens’ age, that’s a life sentence.
Re-election is the least of his worries now. But you what would be really ironic? If he somehow won anyway (I doubt it), the governor would have to appoint a temporary successor when he went to prison.
Guess who the governor is.
———————-
Todd Palin, United States Senator and Champion Snow Machine competitor. :D
Would Gov. Palin (should the situation hypothesized by Rage come about) pull a “Fred Hall” by resigning, then once the lieutenant governor was sworn in as governor, as a part of the deal be appointed by the new governor as Senator?
BTW, I’m not familiar with federal sentencing guidelines, but opine that Sen. Stevens will serve little time as the result of his convictions under the same. Remember, the convictions are for making false statements on the required disclosure forms, not for, e.g., bribery.
Looks like it. Didn;t read thru it all, but I don;t think I took part. That’s okay. We’ve had the same discussion about gay marriage time after time.
Really, I don;t care. Give gay/lesbians the right to marry. Give Poligamists the right to marry. Doesn’t hurt me if either one was made legal. And that should be the basis behind legislation prohibiting acts. In general, the deciding factors should be: Is is detrimental to the interest of the state and to it’s citizenry, and does it have enough public support. Should be all three. I am sure someone will come up with an exception. That’s okay, speaking in generalities here.
#
avtolle
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:26 pm | Permalink
Would Gov. Palin (should the situation hypothesized by Rage come about) pull a “Fred Hall” by resigning, then once the lieutenant governor was sworn in as governor, as a part of the deal be appointed by the new governor as Senator?
——————–
Wouldn’t be any stranger than a dead Senator being re-elected and his wife appointed to serve his term.
I’m still shaking my head and smiling about the twists and turns and possibilities. Truth is often stranger than fiction! Would anyone have been able to write the entire script of this election season!?
Your argument is to bend the rules. That if an individual cannot perform to the job title’s requirements, they should still be able to hold the job. That is equal outcome; a decidedly liberal mindset.
I advocate for all to be able to apply for the position and the best selected for the position. That is equal opportunity; a decidedly conservative mindset.
littlejane- In general, the deciding factors should be: Is is detrimental to the interest of the state and to it’s citizenry, and does it have enough public support.
———————————-
Then I guess you are ok without gay marriage.
True?
I mean, it doesn’t hurt you if they DON”T get married does it?
It DOESN’T hurt the citizenry if they don’t.
It DOESN’t hurt the state if they don’t.
I’m ok without it.
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm | Permalink
Your argument is to bend the rules. That if an individual cannot perform to the job title’s requirements, they should still be able to hold the job. That is equal outcome; a decidedly liberal mindset.
I advocate for all to be able to apply for the position and the best selected for the position. That is equal opportunity; a decidedly conservative mindset.
Again, where is your disconnect?
——————————————
The disconnect is yours I guess.
Can you dicriminate against size?
Does a 6′2 210 lb man have a right to be a fireman over a 5′2 90 lb woman?
What if he was 65 years old?
THEN could you discriminate?
My point being, we “discriminate ALL the time, there IS no “equal protection” given when one is an apple and one is an orange.
Would you agree?
biased1
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:36 pm | Permalink
Rags- It’s called “equal protection of the laws.”
——————————
Is it “equal protection of the laws” if…
-A blind guy wants to be an airline pilot?
-How about a 5?2 90 lb girl that wants to be a nfl line backer?
-How about a 6?7 guy that wants to play volleyball for the girls team?
-How about letting a girl with an IQ of 80 into MENSA?
===================================================================
In the interest of Equal Protection, Providing the General Welfare, the Fairness Doctrine, and Spreading the Wealth Around, the following rules will now be enforced:
1. The NFL will be expanded from 32 Teams and 1,600 players, to 320,000 Teams and 16,000,000 players.
2. Those smaller, slower, older, younger, and weaker players who have been excluded from playing in the past, will now be guaranteed a position (and 20 minutes of playing time per game) on one of the teams.
3. Exhorbitant High Salaries paid to current NFL players will be spread out EQUALLY to all 16 million players. (Currently all the money and all the playing time goes to just the top 0.01% of the players) The current average salary of $1.5 million will be reduced to $150.
4. TV broadcasts of all 320,000 teams will be FAIR and each team will have 1 game broadcast every 13 years. (Not counting playoffs, as all of the 96,000 playoff games will be televised.)
A young, physically fit, athletic woman would be far better suited to be a Fire Fighter or combat soldier, or stevedore than I.
………………………
I have no doubts there. however, decidedly off the point.
………………………
The job requirements have nothing to do with whether you sit or stand when you pee.
………………………
The point was, is it FAIR, if she WANTS to be a firefighter to not LET her be a firefighter?
Even if she can’t meet the requirements.
Are having the requirements fair?
From KDP website:
“But don’t worry, Stevens wasn’t keeping all that money to himself. His PAC, Northern Lights, has donated almost $20,000 to Pat Roberts’ campaign. I guess that’s what friends are for…
No wonder Stevens and Roberts are such good friends- they’ve got a lot in common. Both accept shady money from Big Oil and both have been in Washington for entirely too long.
I think the word for jobs that require strength is accommodation.
I remember in one of the classes I took that the Air Force required (sexual harassment and etc), the subject came up about physical requirements for various jobs.
One of the attendees was a bomb loader. In his job it is required that 100 pounds be lifted to shoulder height or higher. He stated that this factor didn’t allow females in his career field.
Come to find out, that the truth of the matter is that two people attend the loading of a bomb usually and the bomb rack/lifter is elevated to such a height that only a few inches is needed to maneuver the bomb into place.
Turns out the 100 pound lifting requirement was a job description requirement held over from Army Air Force regulations back in the 1940s. :)
So the worker was accommodated by technology in this instance and I’m sure in other jobs they could be accommodated to do physically demanding jobs.
Para Rescue is one job in the Air Force that I’m unsure females are allowed to do. I guess hanging upside down on a rope from a helicopter lifting an injured Airman does require quite a bit of strength which a female may not possess.
MAX- Para Rescue is one job in the Air Force that I’m unsure females are allowed to do. I guess hanging upside down on a rope from a helicopter lifting an injured Airman does require quite a bit of strength which a female may not possess.
——————————-
I never intended for this to be male/female equality, more of just one person/one person equality.
And so far, everyone seems to agree (without saying so) it is ok to discriminate.
Suppose there was a job listed in the Want Ads: LEFT handed individual needed for assembly work. Job cannot be accomplished by any who are RIGHT handed….
SO…. A RiGHT handed person applies for the job…
1) Do you still maintain the RIGHT handed person be given the employment, in spite of the clearly stated Job Description??
2) Should the RIGHT handed person be automatically disqualified from APPLYING for the Job???
I’m sure “okobserver” will chime in here and lambaste you for name-calling.
Or not.
Then “biased1″ goes into full-”Nathaniel” with —
“The point was, is it FAIR, if she WANTS to be a firefighter to not LET her be a firefighter?
Even if she can’t meet the requirements.
Are having the requirements fair?”
As with so many CON arguments (see “MaxGrobnik’s” NFL/blind airline pilot above), you’re desperate to grasp at reductio ad absurum tactics.
I have no idea how much a length of fire hose weighs, but it certainly makes sense to expect a Fire Fighter to be able to lift it. I just checked the want ads and phrases such as “Must be able to lift 50 lbs to shoulder level,” aren’t uncommon for, say, a beverage truck delivery driver.
Sure, having requirements are fair… if the requirements are fair.
There’s nothing about hauling a roll of firehose or carrying a typical American out of a burning house or unloading a case of beer from a truck that has anything intrinsically relative to gender or race or religion or sexual preference.
You CONs’ desperate efforts at straw man arguments (”liberals believe….”) are suffering from shallow thinking and deep b.s.
“Not only to liberals believe all American should be forced to get abortions (regardless of gender)…..”
I was qualified Engineering Officer of the Watch at A1W, the prototype for the Enterprise #3 Enigine room. Probably one of the most demanding, nerve wracking jobs in the Navy.
While there, Westinghouse tried to get several civilian women engineers qualified on that watchstation to no avail. They couldn’t handle the stress.
There are differences between the sexes other than physical.
OK Hank… I dont disagree with you totally… but let’s make that an honest statement all the way >>> There is a LOT of stress in that particular assignment…
I am pretty certain that there are also a good number of men, who couldnt hand that kind of stress…. Right??
“If a military draft was required in the future, would all you equal rights supporters have the daughters of America thrown into combat?
I would not.”
And the question is why not?
I am not familiar with all the physical requirements for flying, say, a B-2 Bomber. But I suspect a 90-pound, 5′2″ pilot could probably handle the mission. I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5′2″ pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
And, of course, “if a military draft were required in the future…” I’d want the best people available to defend my sorry ass.
Gender, race, religion, sexual preference wouldn’t really fit into my equation when compared with each individual’s capability to fit the mission.
Republican Colo. Sec. of State giving out bad info.!
“But Coffman’s office also admitted to a mistake on its part.
The office inadvertently advised about 4,000 voters whose registration applications were incomplete that they had until Oct. 6 to fix the problem.
In fact, those voters have until Election Day to complete the applications, Coffman’s office conceded, saying it planned to mail letters with the correct information to those 4,000 voters.
I am pretty certain that there are also a good number of men, who couldnt hand that kind of stress…. Right??
______________________________________________
We had a lot of men that couldn’t qualify for one reason or another. The stress involved was the biggest factor in a lot of them not making it.
“But I suspect a 90-pound, 5?2? pilot could probably handle the mission.”
Would not bet on this one.
Once knew a man who wanted to be a pilot in the Navy. He did get selected but there was only one aircraft that had a seat which would fit his body. He was very tall.
$1 trillion spent on Iraq: What else could have been with that much money:
Examples:
$1 trillion could pave the entire U.S. interstate highway system with gold — 23.5-karat gold leaf. It could buy every person on the planet an iPod. It could give every high school student in the United States a free college education. It could pay off every American’s credit card. It could buy a Buick for every senior citizen still driving in the United States.
Ted Stevens, the grand-daddy of Alaskan politics, has a wary relationship with the new Republican VP pick — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
When Palin was running for governor in 2006, she ousted long time Alaska fixture Frank Murkowski in a hard fought primary. Stevens and Murkowski are long time friends and Palin was able to defeat the sitting governor by running on ethics and clean government reformist platform.
Stevens ultimately came to endorse Palin, but it was late in the game. He endorsed her less than three weeks before the general election, although he did cut a television advertisement for her.
In July of last year, Palin shocked and angered Stevens by publicly criticizing him for his role in the VECO scandal and called for him to speak out about it.
“I think I join others in wanting to know of the senator’s innocence,” Palin said. “Right now, we’re not hearing anything.”
When Stevens was indicted last month for month on corruption charges, Palin said the indictment “rocks the foundation of the state” and added that she shares with others “dismay” and concern.
Stevens is running for re-election to the Senate this year, and he is in a tough race. He survived his primary last week, despite the fact that Palin backed his opponent.
YOU may want to force women into combat through the Draft, but I do not.
Why? It’s the wrong thing to do. There are still differences between the sexes, and the finer sex should be free to VOLUNTEER for combat and if she can meet the physical/mental qualifications, fine.
Forcing women into Combat isn’t right Monkey. Why do you think that it is right?
DavidB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:39 pm | Permalink
$1 trillion spent on Iraq: What else could have been with that much money
=====================================================
That’s the Lib mantra.
That Iraq money could’ve been given to ME!
I saw some Obama fans protesting the other day. They were chanting about the war, and how that money should have been used to pay for their college tuition!!!
Greedy b*stards!
They don’t care about deficits. They don’t care about Government spending as long as they get their tin cups filled.
Guess what Libs, if there wasn’t an Iraq war, that money would not have gone to you or anyone else!
Why?
There was no money. It was all borrowed. But you don’t care about borrowing money, unless it isn’t spent on yourselves.
Can you not get any more greedy slime on you? You are all drippin with it.
Maybe Monkey and Chas like those propaganda pictures and stories coming out of combat after an American woman soldier is captured.
You know what they do to the women prisoners, things that are not done to the men prisoners.
Women in combat are treated much differently if captured. It’s a tougher situation for them, then the men.
Therefore, the women should NOT be drafted and forced into combat positions. If a woman volunteeers and is qualified, fine that’s her choice. But don’t force women into a situation that men are not forced into.
You Libs keep regurgitating the same mantra about how that Iraq war money could have better been spent on YOURSELVES. (Y’all couldn’t care less about the lives lost or the budget deficit.)
Thus I’ll keep responding with the same response.
Consider it my Phony End-of Day Blessing to you Libs.
Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women into COMBAT positions??? You flame every day on this Blog about one thing or another… NOW there may be some who will MAKE you back up your lunacy…
So, Max — SHOW us all where either Monkey or I said to draft women into Combat…. Or dont you realize how MANY jobs there are in the military for both men AND women to do that have nothing to do with direct combat duty???
My guess is that youre just flaming…. because you WANT to!!
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
MAX — Wake up you friggin redneck!!!
Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women into COMBAT positions??? You flame every day on this Blog about one thing or another… NOW there may be some who will MAKE you back up your lunacy…
So, Max — SHOW us all where either Monkey or I said to draft women into Combat…. Or dont you realize how MANY jobs there are in the military for both men AND women to do that have nothing to do with direct combat duty???
My guess is that youre just flaming…. because you WANT to!!
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
Chas-”Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women”
====
Chas-”Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!”
——————–
#
Hud
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:35 pm | Permalink
“But I suspect a 90-pound, 5?2? pilot could probably handle the mission.”
Would not bet on this one.
Once knew a man who wanted to be a pilot in the Navy. He did get selected but there was only one aircraft that had a seat which would fit his body. He was very tall.
————————————-
Yeah, that happened to me…wasn’t my standing height, but my sitting height.
It turns out I have the torso of someone who is six foot six. So when the canopy was closed on the trainer, my helmet hit the inside of the canopy and it just wasn’t gonna work. :D
“YOU may want to force women into combat through the Draft, but I do not.
Why? It’s the wrong thing to do. There are still differences between the sexes, and the finer sex should be free to VOLUNTEER for combat and if she can meet the physical/mental qualifications, fine.”
First of all, you base all of this on the hypothetical that the United States would need to rely on a draft.
And, for no other reason than your patronizing used of the 1940s term “the finer sex” gets a free ride at democracy even if she meets the physical/mental qualifications? And why?
Shouldn’t someone in the “less-finer sex” get the same option? (Even if he’s not the grandson of a United States Senator and the son of a congressman?)
“Forcing women into Combat isn’t right Monkey. Why do you think that it is right?”
Personally, I kinda think forcing people into Combat isn’t all that good idea unless a people’s very survival depends on it. Israel thinks its very survival depends on it so women are required to take military or other national service training. It happens all over the world.
(And if you think prisoners of war don’t get raped — regardless of gender — you probably don’t want to read John McCain’s book.)
TO SEE THE FULL CONTEXT:
=================================================
MaxGrobnik
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:02 pm | Permalink
There’s still a difference between Men and Women that many recognize even today.
If a military draft was required in the future, would all you equal rights supporters have the daughters of America thrown into combat?
I would not.
=================================================
Monkeyhawk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:27 pm | Permalink
“MaxGrobnik” channels the 1940s –
“If a military draft was required in the future, would all you equal rights supporters have the daughters of America thrown into combat?
I would not.”
And the question is why not?
I am not familiar with all the physical requirements for flying, say, a B-2 Bomber. But I suspect a 90-pound, 5?2? pilot could probably handle the mission. I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5?2? pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
And, of course, “if a military draft were required in the future…” I’d want the best people available to defend my sorry ass.
Gender, race, religion, sexual preference wouldn’t really fit into my equation when compared with each individual’s capability to fit the mission.
================================================================================================
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
=======================================================================================
(NOTE: REMEMBER HOTLIPS WAS IN COMBAT!)
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:34 pm | Permalink
Remember — MANY women served in WW II, AND in Korea… Not drafted, but served… many in high ranking Officer positiions…
Hey, Hotlips Hoolihan was a Major!! Outranked all of the surgeons except Winchester!!
=============================================================================
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them
Chas
—————-
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
MAX — Wake up you friggin redneck!!!
Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women into COMBAT positions??? You flame every day on this Blog about one thing or another… NOW there may be some who will MAKE you back up your lunacy…
——————
Busted by your own words you luny. You really are delusional!!
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:07 pm | Permalink
Yep looks like Max’s Bot Poster is puking out re-runs…. so Max, cuts and runs!!
LOL
==================================================================
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:34 pm | Permalink
Remember — MANY women served in WW II, AND in Korea… Not drafted, but served… many in high ranking Officer positiions…
Hey, Hotlips Hoolihan was a Major!! Outranked all of the surgeons except Winchester!!
—————————–
No, Hotlips was in a combat zone, but engaged as a Staff, non-combatant position. All medical personnel are non-combatants. Their only authorization to carry a firearm or use weapons against the enemy is to protect themselves or their patients. Offensive aggression is a violation of the Geneva convention and the UCMJ.
1. Whether Hank really believes that there is only ONE COPY of a video of Barack Obama toasting “terrorists” which has been safely hidden away by one of the nation’s leading newspapers
OR
2. That he actually gives a damn about Jews given his repeated Jew-baiting on this WEBlog?
#
MaxGrobnik
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:39 pm | Permalink
Say Regular,
As long as we are talking as if Mash was real life, remember the episode where Hotlips and Hawkeye were caught behind enemy lines in a combat zone?
Would that not be a combat situation?
—————————————-
Yeah, they (Hawkeye and Hotlips) can defend themselves, but they can’t launch an offensive strike against the enemy (i.e. set out land mines, mortar launchers, etc.)
The RepubliCONs have become the party of the labored hypothesis.
It’s much easier for them to believe that Obama was secretly born in Kenya that the birth announcement that appeared in a Honolulu paper in August 1961 was “faked” than to believe the birth certificate that says “legal document” is an actual legal document just like a judge in open court ruled.
It’s easier for Hank to believe that the LA Times is hiding a damaging video of Obama than to believe that anyone who gave the Times the video would have kept a back-up that would have been posted to YOUTUBE by now.
It’s easier for them to believe that a “6′4″ black man” took the time to carve a B for Barack into a girl’s face while robbing her than to believe that a McCain operative had simply staged the attack for sympathy.
And having proven that she’s a liar and a cheat, what’s their excuse?
She’s a Democrat who did it to make Republicans look bad.
The bottom line: During the past 60 years, Democrats have presided over much less unemployment and much more robust income growth [than Republican administrations].
Alliance Defense Fund attorneys and allied attorneys filed a lawsuit Thursday against the city of Westminster, MD on behalf of pro-life organization Defend Life. Police insisted that participants in Defend Life’s “Face the Truth” 2008 tour needed permits to peacefully share their pro-life message along a public street. Police told them that they needed permits from the city and the Maryland State Highway Administration, as well as permission from the owner of a nearby shopping center. Subsequently, a police captain told Defend Life that its permit requests would be denied and refused to provide an explanation.
In reality, the only authority pro-lifers need to publicize their message unimpeded on public property is a copy of the U.S. Constitution.
- – -
Not all the economic news is bad. Sarasota County, FL has cut the money it sends to a local Planned Parenthood abortion mill. Officials, citing poor economic conditions and the need to better balance the city budget, removed the second $12,500 of the original $25,000 allocated for Planned Parenthood.
Cut all taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood.
- – -
Pregnant bank teller Niasha Delain, 25, of Queens, NY was found brutally murdered on Saturday, the day she was due to give birth. She and her unborn baby were declared dead at the murder scene.
Homicide is the leading cause of death of pregnant women.
- – -
“Each child comes with the message that God is not yet discouraged of man.”
. . . Sir Rabindranath Tagore, Indian Nobel Prize-winning poet
Monkeyhawk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:05 pm | Permalink
“HLP” struts –
“While there, Westinghouse tried to get several civilian women engineers qualified on that watchstation to no avail. They couldn’t handle the stress.”
_________________________________________________
Wasn’t bragging, Monkeyman. Just a fact. You want bragging?
I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5?2? pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
USAF (or at least ANG) would not allow that height. I think the shortest a pilot can be is 5 feet 9 inches or 5 feet 10 inches. Close to that anyway. Then again, the “rules” may have changed in 30 or so years.
I see HUD and Regular answered the question I thought of on “too tall”.
I had really hoped someone would watch that YouTube video, “A Class Divided.” We aren’t third graders and we should know better, but we haven’t learned the lessons. Here it is again, in case anyone would like to see how cruel human nature can be.
Chas, try hard to learn the art of not responding. There is NO need of a rebuttal when you are being criticized. It is only someone’s opinion of you, not who you are. It just seems to turn into a feeding frenzy when you acknowledge it.
#
Predestined
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:32 pm | Permalink
I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5?2? pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
USAF (or at least ANG) would not allow that height. I think the shortest a pilot can be is 5 feet 9 inches or 5 feet 10 inches. Close to that anyway. Then again, the “rules” may have changed in 30 or so years.
I see HUD and Regular answered the question I thought of on “too tall”.
=========================
To tell you the truth, I don’t know anymore the exact requirements for height. Six foot seven rings a bell (they can fly cargo/bombers.) Minimum height I think is 5′7″, although I could be wrong.
A lot of the best pilots for jet fighters are ’spark plug’ bodies – range from 5′8 to 5′11 and heavier than average.
The reason is that they can get their eye level blood pressure up quickly when they do they straining maneuver while at high G anti-combat maneuvers.
The slender, marathon runner has a longer vertical column of blood to push up if they are taller and more prone to loss of consciousness (blacking out) in high G turns.
#
Predestined
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:32 pm | Permalink
Seriously, if you legalize Gay/Lesbian marriages (and I cannot see why not), you must also consider legalizing polygamy. THere is no reason not to.
You might want to take that up with the IRS.
————————————
Besides the perpetual grin on my face with multiple wives, imagine all the tax deductions. :D
Obama’s Education Groups Funded Controversial Organizations in the ’90s, Tax Returns Show
Barack Obama’s boards gave tens of thousands to ACORN and more than $1 million to racially charged organizations, a study of tax returns shows.
By Maxim Lott
FOXNews.com
Monday, October 27, 2008
The Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Fund of Chicago funded numerous controversial groups while Barack Obama served on their boards between 1995 and 2002, an analysis of their tax returns shows.
In 2001, when Obama was a part-time director of The Woods Fund of Chicago, it gave $75,000 to ACORN, the voter registration group now under investigation for voter fraud in 12 states.
The Woods Fund also gave $6,000 to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ, which Obama attended. The reason for the donation to the church is unclear — it is simply listed as “for special purposes” in the group’s IRS tax form.
It gave a further $60,000 to the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University, which was founded and run by Bernardine Dohrn, the wife of domestic terrorist William Ayers and, with her husband, a former member of the 1960s radical group the Weather Underground.
Other controversial donations that year included $50,000 to the Small Schools Network — which was founded by Ayers and run by Michael Klonsky, a friend of Ayers’ and the former chairman of the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist), an offshoot of the 1960s radical group Students for a Democratic Society — and $40,000 to the Arab American Action Network, which critics have accused of being anti-Semitic.
The Woods Fund did not respond to questions about the funding.
When Obama co-chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which calls itself “a public-private partnership improving education for 1.5 million urban and rural public school students,” it gave to some of the same groups — partnering with ACORN to manage funding for schools and giving over $1 million to the Small Schools Network.
It also gave nearly $1 million to a group called the South Shore African Village Collaborative, whose goals, according to Annenberg’s archived Web site, are “to develop more collegial relationships between teachers and principals. Professional development topics include school leadership, team building, parent and community involvement, developing thematic units, instructional strategies, strategic planning, and distance learning and teleconferencing.”
But the group mentions other goals in its grant application to the Annenberg Challenge:
“Our children need to understand the historical context of our struggles for liberation from those forces that seek to destroy us,” one page of the application reads.
Stanley Kurtz, a Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, found the collaborative’s original application when going through Annenberg’s archives.
Asked to comment, Yvonne Williams-Kinnison, executive director of the collaborative’s parent group, the Coalition for Improved Education in South Shore said, “I don’t want to put more fuel on the fire. You can call us back after the election…. I don’t want to compromise the position.”
Late Afrocentrist scholars Jacob Carruthers and Asa Hilliard were both invited to give SSAVC teachers a training session, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge noted in a report, adding that the “consciousness raising session … received rave reviews, and has prepared the way for the curriculum readiness survey session.”
But Carruthers has been a controversial figure because of inflammatory statements he made in writing.
“The submission to Western civilization and its most outstanding offspring, American civilization, is, in reality, surrender to white supremacy,” Carruthers wrote in his 1999 book, “Intellectual Warfare.” “Some of us have chosen to reject the culture of our oppressors and recover our disrupted ancestral culture.”
In the book, he compared the process of blacks assimilating into American culture with rape.
“We may not be able to get our virginity back after the rape, but we do not have to marry the rapist,” Carruthers said.
Hilliard has come under fire for advocating what many consider an extreme Afrocentric curriculum.
He selected the articles for the “African-American Baseline Essays” published in 1987 and first used in the Portland, Ore., school district. The essays have been criticized for claiming, among other things, that ancient Egyptians were the first to discover manned flight and the theory of evolution.
An Obama spokesman called investigation of these ties “pathetic.”
“This is another pathetic attempt by FOX News to distract voters from the economic challenges facing this nation by patching together tenuous links to smear Barack Obama,” Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com.
“The Annenberg Challenge was a bipartisan organization dedicated to improving the performance of students and teachers in Chicago Public Schools that was funded by a Republican philanthropist who was friends with President Reagan and launched by Republican Gov. Jim Edgar.”
But Kurtz says those founders of the Annenberg Challenge would not have known the details about to whom their Chicago office — one of 18 around the country — was giving money.
“If you read Ayers’ proposal to Annenberg, it doesn’t sound radical. But if you actually read Ayers’ education writings, they are very radical indeed,” Kurtz said. “Ayers, like so many other savvy professors, knows enough not to state his actual views frankly when applying for money. But you can find the truth in his writings.”
The controversial donations make up only a small portion of the overall amount doled out by the Annenberg and Woods funds. The Woods Fund gave over $3.5 million to 115 different groups in 2001, and the Annenberg Chellenge dispensed nearly $11 million to 63 groups at its height in 1999.
Most of the groups are mainstream and well respected, ranging from the Jazz Institute of Chicago to the Successful Schools Project.
But Kurtz says that this should not obscure what he describes as controversial donations.
“If John McCain had given to white supremacist groups and people said, ‘Hey, the majority of funding didn’t go to supremacist groups’ — that wouldn’t even cut the ice,” Kurtz said.
“I feel certain [Obama] knew about these radical groups,” Kurtz said. “We know that he read the applications because he made statements about the quality of proposals.”
The law banning polygamy was passed in 1862, the same year the first federal/national income tax was created. Coincidence? Your guess is as good as mine.
Linda I watched this video. It was sad to think how easily we can turn people into discriminators, Christian bashers, people intoleratnt of those around them. Do you think we do that on this blog?
Did you by chance look at the signs that were painted in my sons front yard? This is hate also. This was distruction of personal property. Hundred of dollars of property damage.
The saddest part for my son is that his next door neighbors are in a biracial marriage. She is black and it didn’t matter. To haters they don’t have to be taught. Neither sides has a monolopy on love or hate. We have spent the day on a discussion that at the end of the day is boiling down to who hates who more?
Interesting discussion above regarding women being assigned to combat roles.
Can’t speak for any civilians who have never served, but as someone who has spent some time in fox hole but more time digging the damned things, we had a saying in my unit about women serving with us, similar to what is known as the the NIMBY affect.
NIMFH
But noone in the grunt companies I served with could say a complete sentence without swearing.
So it would more rightly be:
I think the people who painted that hate on that home are sick. A lot like you described the woman who had the black eyes and the backwards “B” on her cheek. What I find disconcerting is that sick people need to be put into a group we oppose so we may hate them more. Why would either the people who painted the hate or the woman who claimed something that didn’t happen need to become examples of a political persuasion?
#
Predestined
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:56 pm | Permalink
imagine all the tax deductions. :D
And that’s exactly why.
The law banning polygamy was passed in 1862, the same year the first federal/national income tax was created. Coincidence? Your guess is as good as mine.
————————–
You didn’t address the grinning part. :)
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
#
mxyzptlk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?
============================
Nope, they got the skinny on an Al Qaeda leader and took him out.
How can I, the average American, know the truth of this situation? Who can be believed? I have been disappointed often, put my trust in words that turned out to be untrustworthy. It can’t be what both sides have painted it?
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:26 pm | Permalink
mxyzptlk and Regular,
How can I, the average American, know the truth of this situation? Who can be believed? I have been disappointed often, put my trust in words that turned out to be untrustworthy. It can’t be what both sides have painted it?
How am I to know? Will there ever be trust again?
=======================
Well, hard to explain…best analogy is to serve in a position where life and death is involved. Doesn’t have to be in the military, police or fire – it could be a nurse or Doctor who make decisions to save lives.
Trust, especially with a team of individuals, highly trained and skilled to save lives is a very high level of trust.
Doesn’t matter of the skin color, gay or straight, young or old or hairstyle. :)
There are thousands of examples of trust in occupations and also many famous cases of people learning to trust each other in survival situations.
Like myself and Capn America…we fight like cats and dogs, but if it were in a combat situation, no enemy is going to get to him and I will die defending him or you for the matter of fact.
Getting in the doldrums with politics and religion discussion can get you down. We all know what’s basically right and wrong. The methodology, path and implementation is what we argue about when there is no personal risk or perhaps boredom takes over.
Yes a little over the top. Especially that part about CapnAmerica. I don’t think you’d find him anywhere close to a combat zone. I think I heard he went to Canada in his day.
HERE IT IS FOLKS, ANOTHER OBAMA “REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH” STATEMENT.
From a Radio Show in 2001:
Barack Obama, in 2001:
You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil-rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be okay, but the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.
And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution — at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.
And that hasn’t shifted, and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil-rights movement was because the civil-rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.
You know, I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way. [snip] You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues, you know, in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time. You know, the court is just not very good at it, and politically, it’s just very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard.
So I think that, although you can craft theoretical justifications for it, legally, you know, I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts.”
indainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:50 pm | Permalink
I don’t know about the theme song, but I do know it was a beeeeuuuutiful day in kakeland!
——————
Ya, I remember that. Back in the day when Joyland was the big deal in town. :D
When you approached Joyland from the parking lot there were hills between the sidewalks leading to the entrance. They were HUGE hills when I was a girl. We used to lay down at the top and roll down those hills, get up and run to the top to repeat that roll down that steep hill! We could usually get in three or four rolls down before the parents began urging us to quit so we could get to the fun. I guess parents didn’t know we were already having fun! It’s no wonder I got sick on that cotton candy. I probably was sick before I got on the roller coaster. ;-)
Are you old enough and of Wichita long enough to remember Kiddie Land? The roller coaster there was small but mighty! At one point in that park’s history they had a trampoline park that was my favorite! Long before a back yard trampoline was heard of. Kids today have much in their daily lives that I was lucky if I experienced once every year or so. Now I’m sounding like a crabby old complainer and I didn’t mean to. It’s a different time.
Introduction: The LA Times is holding a video that shows Barack Obama celebrating with a group of Palestinians who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gives a toast to a former PLO operative at this celebration. If the American public saw this side of Barack Obama he would never be elected president.
‘If Obama’s a socialist, so is McCain‘ http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/385183_teepenonline28.html
In their rush to make Obama out as a socialist readying tumbrels for the rich, conservatives have sometimes explicitly but for the most part implicitly reverted to the old country-club grumble that the graduated income tax is nothing more than a radical scheme to coddle the undeserving poor with the money of the deserving rich.
Some radicalism. The income tax, with progressive rates no less, was introduced in 1862 to pay for the Civil War. It become permanent with the adoption of the Constitution’s enabling 16th amendment in 1913, after the Supreme Court had demurred in the meantime.
The income tax is the way we been doing our civic business off and on for nearly 150 years and fulltime for nearly 100. If Obama is a socialist for proposing to reassert its pre-Bush progressivity, then unless McCain means to repeal the income tax he is a socialist, too. He’s just squabbling with Obama, not about some grand difference of economic philosophy, but only about how much the wealthy should pay.
Stevens was convicted of seven counts of lying about $250,000 in home improvements and other gifts from oil contractor Bill Allen.
“I will carefully monitor this situation and take any appropriate action as needed,” Palin said. “In the meantime, I ask the people of Alaska to join me in respecting the workings of our judicial system.”
Stevens has not said what he plans to do and Palin’s reluctance to call on him to step down may reflect just how powerful the Alaska senator remains. He is still popular and could win re-election.”
By Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 10, 2008
CHICAGO — It was a celebration of Palestinian culture — a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.
A special tribute came from Khalidi’s friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi’s wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.
And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor’s going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.
Their belief is not drawn from Obama’s speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.
At Khalidi’s 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.”
One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 8:01 pm | Permalink
When you approached Joyland from the parking lot there were hills between the sidewalks leading to the entrance. They were HUGE hills when I was a girl. We used to lay down at the top and roll down those hills, get up and run to the top to repeat that roll down that steep hill! We could usually get in three or four rolls down before the parents began urging us to quit so we could get to the fun. I guess parents didn’t know we were already having fun! It’s no wonder I got sick on that cotton candy. I probably was sick before I got on the roller coaster. ;-)
Are you old enough and of Wichita long enough to remember Kiddie Land? The roller coaster there was small but mighty! At one point in that park’s history they had a trampoline park that was my favorite! Long before a back yard trampoline was heard of. Kids today have much in their daily lives that I was lucky if I experienced once every year or so. Now I’m sounding like a crabby old complainer and I didn’t mean to. It’s a different time.
—————
I remember kiddieland being talked about, but my grandparents always took us to Joyland, so never went tere.
When I was very young, 3-4 years old, the music from the carousel scared my tiny little tummy and I wouldn’t get on it. :D
It was those clown faces, snarling horses and that deep “thump thump.”
Calling McCain a Socialist with Zero Foundation in Fact.
Claiming anyone who supports the income tax makes them a Socialist is ridiculous.
The ba*tardization of the Income Tax into a Welfare Handout – That is, Giving Money To People who Pay ZERO Tax and calling it a Tax Refund is pure Socialism.
Obama will give a tax cut to 95% of Americans, but 40% of Americans pay ZERO income tax.
I never got old enough to be UNafraid of the ferris wheel. Seemed to always be lucky enough to ride with someone brave who wanted to rock. And I remember the sound and the clown playing the organ. That clown was a bit scary — had a kind of sneer on his face…
Thanks, Regular. I was grumpy and down about the divisiveness. A walk down memory lane was “just the ticket” for what ailed me. ;-)
‘Obama Camp Pushes Back On Interpretation Of Radio Remarks’ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/27/obama-camp-pushes-back-on_n_138157.html
“Obama spokesman Bill Burton had to shrug and point out the obvious: “In the interview, Obama went into extensive detail to explain why the courts should not get into that business of ‘redistributing’ wealth. Obama’s point — and what he called a tragedy — was that legal victories in the Civil Rights led too many people to rely on the courts to change society for the better.” ”
‘Obama advisor pushes back on ‘redistribution’ ‘ http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Obama_advisor_pushes_back_on_redistribution.html?showall
“What the critics are missing is that the term ‘redistribution’ didn’t mean in the Constitutional context equalized wealth or anything like that. It meant some positive rights, most prominently the right to education, and also the right to a lawyer…What he’s saying – this is the irony of it – he’s basically taking the side of the conservatives then and now against the liberals.”
My favorite Alaskan blogger admitted she understood Ted Stevens might still win reelection to his Senate seat, but she is predicting the Democratic challenger will see victory and she wants to have a talk with him. I laughed and thought how great it would be to have this same talk with every politician who will celebrate victory next week.
———-
“I chatted with Mark Begich the other day and asked him how he was doing. He said he was hanging in there, but that these last few days felt like a lifetime. The next time I see him, I’m going to ask him how he is doing. Then I’m going to grab his tie, and pull him forehead-to-forehead. Then I’m going to look him square in the eyes from two inches away and say, “Don’t. Screw. Up.” The Democrats have a golden opportunity to be the white knights, and restore a modicum of respect to Alaskan politics. But power corrupts unless we are on our guard….however many years, or decades we hold elected office.
So Mr. Begich, be wise, be careful, and treat the Senate seat with care.”
“And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor’s going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.
Their belief is not drawn from Obama’s speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.”
So what is the issue? The fact that he’s willing to listen? I don’t get why that’s a bad idea. Don’t you think the Palestinians deserve a voice also?
I think what depresses me most about this election is all those who claim to be Christian who think nothing of spreading gossip and falsehoods about a good man who has the potential to be not only a good leader, but a great one. They claim to be Christian, but are so filled with hatred and intolerance, especially towards anyone who disagrees with their point of view. They have very little, if any, compassion for their fellow man and go against nearly every value that Jesus taught. They are so arrogant that they refuse to listen to or consider anything that doesn’t validate their narrow, rigid opinions and will believe any lie meant to tear someone down, no matter how ridiculous it is. I hate their false and venomous attacks on good people…and all in the name of Christian and family values. I’m SO sick of it and will be glad when this election is over so I won’t be surrounded by it so much.
I believe the Christian religion has really been damaged by those who use it to manipulate others and as a weapon to justify hatred, intolerance, and anger. It’s been hijacked and turned into something different than what Jesus meant it to be.
To the gun nuts it’s just collateral damage, Linda…no big deal.
Kids drown in swimming pools and die in car accidents all the time…the only thing that’s important to them is that guns be as available as possible with no restrictions. Just ask Nathan if you don’t believe me.
What I LOVED about Kiddieland is that the actually had motor powered cars that you could REALLY drive!
As a child, I never left Joyland without throwing one heck of a tantrum.
Isn’t that strange? I don’t remember the cars you could drive. Maybe my folks never let me know about those? I was afraid to throw a tantrum — I might never have had an opportunity to go back if I was less than appreciative. My Dad believed fear was a good motivator.
Wow, you’ve scored a daily double tonight! Get to bad mouth Christians and anyone that believes in the Second Amendment in the same night!
There is so much wrong with the premise in your Christian bashing tirade I don’t know where to start. Your premise is wrong. It gets worse from there on.
As far as your ‘gun nuts’ comments, again your premise is not just wrong, your entire comment is a vicious unsubstantiated lie from beginning to end.
KAKE – TV Ch. 10 had “Bugler’s Holiday” for their News at 10 theme song for many years… along with the face of Greg Gamer as the lead news man on the set… John Froom did the weather.
What channel did Cecil Carrier work for? He died this morning. His father and my grandfather were cousins. I guess that made he and I some kind of cousins however many times removed? I never understood the the whole first, second, third and then the once, twice removed stuff.
I BARELY remember when that swimming pool at Jland had water and people in it.
It is a shame what is happening to Joyland. As much (and more recently) as Cowton, Joyland is a part of community history. I’d like to see the city buy Joyland and quit wasting money on Cowtown.
Interesting that the HUGE headline on this commentary assumes from the BEGINNING that the vandalism is done by Obama supporters…
How very dense… The police say they have NO CLUES…. but yet, this Blogger has ALL the answers…
Sort of reminds me of McCain… says he KNOWS where Bin Laden is, and KNOWS how to get him… Soooo why is he witholding vital information from Bush and the Military??? A grandstaning tactic???
I’m not bad mouthing Christians, Hank…just the fake ones who think nothing about assasinating someone’s character and spreading lies.
Tell me what is false about my statement regarding guns.
Do you really give a rip about 8 yr olds shooting themselves accidently?
McClean ALSO did the weather on KAKE Radio in the morning… same comment… Note that I said John Froom did the weather on the News at 10… I was mostly in school at Noon….
Remember Captain Bill and The Old Cobbler?
How about Deputy Dusty (do you remember his dog’s name?)and Cowboy Frank? My favorite was Freddie Fudd and of course, Major Astro.
Khalidi, despite the ‘exotic’-sounding name, was born and raised in New York and is a respected scholar. His mom is Lebanese. He is not and never has been a PLO operative.
He is a critic of harsh Israeli policies, but not an anti-semite. (It was Sarah Palin who quoted and anti-semite “Jew-hater” in her convention speech!)
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:14 pm | Permalink
What channel did Cecil Carrier work for? He died this morning. His father and my grandfather were cousins. I guess that made he and I some kind of cousins however many times removed? I never understood the the whole first, second, third and then the once, twice removed stuff.
————————–
“removed” describes different generations.
Your mom’s or dad’s cousins would be your first cousins once removed. Your grandmother or grandfather’s cousins would be twice removed.
So Cecil Carrier would be your first cousin twice removed.
Second cousins (third, fourth, etc.) describe the Great Grandparents of which you have in common with someone else in your family that is not of your Grandparents lineage.
So, for instance, your Great Grandmother’s grandson was named steven III and he carries the same name as your Grandmother’s maiden name, but they are only related by bloodline and not to your grandfather.
Steven III would be your second cousin via your Great grandmother.
Regular, that was a great explanation! I have genealogists in my family (thank goodness for those who love to do that investigating so the rest of us can just sit back and enjoy the fruits of their labors!) and they have never explained it that well! Thanks.
“It is absolutely terrible the things OBama said about jews. Israel, is still held firm in God’s hands despite Obama’s promise to cut off funding.
It is typical for some minorities to bad mouth and hate others. Maybe Barack sees jews as a form of competition to his race?
Whatever his reasons, Obama did NOT do right by jewish Americans in his hate of them and lack of support.”
Mary, if I did know William I have forgotten that I did. sigh Sometimes we knew the style but not the name. Sometimes I have just forgotten what I once knew. sigh
I wish we could somehow get the old tapes of that show…I never missed it on Saturdays, even though I was a young child. I have thought about contacting the station and asking if there is a way to get them…they must have them stored somewhere.
Not much of a point, Mary. If you disagree with the quote, and reasonable people can agree to disagree, then let’s have a discussion on the merits of the quote. . .without using it as an opportunity to bash Christians.
The quote is an opinion, based on facts. Has nothing to do with Christians and the 8th Commandment. (Or, more correctly, I would assume with the 9th Commandment)
I could defend Christianity with you in a separate discussion, if you like. It would take a while, I suppose. Of course, we’d have to start with the basics, since you deny the existence God.
Two polls out Thursday show Barack Obama restoring his lead among Jewish voters to their historic Democratic levels, even in the crucial swing state of Florida where the candidate has come under much criticism from the Jewish community.
A Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday found Floridian Jews back Obama over Republican rival John McCain by a rate of 77 percent to 20%. And a Gallup survey found that nationwide, Jews prefer Obama by 74% to McCain’s 22%
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:52 pm | Permalink
Now, Mary, I know you are a few years younger than me, but surely not so many that while I was dancing away you could have been a “young child?”
===================
“bites tongue and winks”
:D :D :D :D :D :D
I deny the existance of God? How so?
Why are self proclaimed Christians the first to spread lies and falsehoods? You revel in it.
Maybe you should check your “facts” before you post it for the world to see…
The 9th commandment? When did I say someone was coveting someone’s wife? LOL!
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:57 pm | Permalink
I deny the existance of God? How so?
________________________________________________
Haven’t you proclaimed a disbelieve in God in the past? If not, I apologize.
________________________________________________
Why are self proclaimed Christians the first to spread lies and falsehoods?
________________________________________________
Name one lie I’ve ever posted about your chosen one. You need to bring more to the discussion other than ‘Christians are hypocrites’. It’s wearing thin.
________________________________________________
You revel in it.
________________________________________________
You’ve got some serious problems with Christians. “You revel in it” is a vicious lie. You owe me an apology.
VIII.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor!
To all good Christians on this blog…food for thought the next time you decide to post lies about someone in an effort to discredit them.
Let’s see if you can walk the walk.
I have no problem with Chritians, Hank…just hypocrites who claim to be Christian.
I respect the Christian religion way too much to ignore the charlatans who tarnish it.
But if they didn’t tell lies about Obama what would they have to say on a political blog? They have nothing positive to say about their candidate of choice. All I’ve seen is criticisms of Obama and attacking the messenger when any criticism of McCain or Palin is posted.
I would like to consider KFG someone I could be a friend to.
—Freebird1971
“kfg is a fine person in her own right. She reminds me of some of the Texas gals I knew; rougher than a freshly cut pine log; saltier than a brine pickle and more stubborn than an unfed mule in a wheat pasture.
She’s opinionated and makes some generalized attacks on just about everyone she disagrees with.”
—-Regular
Ah no, she is an obnoxious, rude, crude, foul minded, foul mouthed lesbian chicken farmer who couldn’t hold a job she didn’t inherit or steal.
And Freebird1971, yours is a suspect comment since guano farmer is so out outspokenly lesbian.
#
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:08 pm | Permalink
I would say your posts this morning was a lie. Did you really check out the facts before you posted the trash about Obama being a “jew basher”.
______________________________________
That’s merely your opinion about someone else’s opinion.
Why do you use it to bash my faith?
I don’t think it was a lie. Therefore, I broke no Commandments. Furthermore, I am a Christian but I don’t ever flaunt it on this BLOG. Most times when my faith is challenged I ignore it.
If I think someone has legitimate questions about my faith I offer to take them to lunch (and pay for it) and discuss anything about what and why I believe. No one has ever taken me up on it.
You constantly call any Christian a hypocrite for merely disagreeing with you. You dear, are in danger of breaking the Commandment on ‘bearing false witness against your neighbor’.
Let’s see…Obama is a socialist, he’s a communist, he’s a Muslim, he’s not an American citizen, he refuses to salute the flag, he attended a school for terrorists in training, he hangs out with terrorists, he’s an arab, he hates jews, blah, blah, blah……how can people be so dumb to buy into this BS??
What you posted this morning was an all out lie…not an “opinion”. It was propaganda, pure and simple.
I don’t care if a Christian disagrees with me about anything…what I hate is when someone jusitifys doing wrong and then claims to be a good Christian.
If you want to post lies…then go ahead..just don’t expect me to believe you follow the values that Jesus taught.
I’m disappointed that you buy into the lies of the right wing pundits.
A very good commentary by Thomas Sowell. It’s an opinion piece that contains many un-refuted facts. I agree with it and I do so without violating any of the Catholic Ten Commandments.
_____________________________________________
Obama and “The Left”
by Thomas Sowell
Although Senator Barack Obama has been allied with a succession of far left individuals over the years, that is only half the story. There are, after all, some honest and decent people on the left. But these have not been the ones that Obama has been allied with– allied, not merely “associated” with.
ACORN is not just an organization on the left. In addition to the voter frauds that ACORN has been involved in over the years, it is an organization with a history of thuggery, including going to bankers’ homes to harass them and their families, in order to force banks to lend to people with low credit ratings.
Nor was Barack Obama’s relationship with ACORN just a matter of once being their attorney long ago. More recently, he has directed hundreds of thousands of dollars their way. Money talks– and what it says is more important than a politician’s rhetoric in an election year.
Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger are not just people with left-wing opinions. They are reckless demagogues preaching hatred of the lowest sort– and both are recipients of money from Obama.
Bill Ayers is not just “an education professor” who has some left-wing views. He is a confessed and unrepentant terrorist, who more recently has put his message of resentment into the schools– an effort using money from a foundation that Obama headed.
Nor has the help all been one way. During the last debate between John McCain and Barack Obama, Senator McCain mentioned that Senator Obama’s political campaign began in Bill Ayers’ home. Obama immediately denied it and McCain had no real follow-up.
It was not this year’s political campaign that Obama began in Bill Ayers’ home but an earlier campaign for the Illinois state legislature. Barack Obama can match Bill Clinton in slickness at parsing words to evade accusations.
That is one way to get to the White House. But slickness with words is not going to help a president deal with either domestic economic crises or the looming dangers of a nuclear Iran.
People who think that talking points on this or that problem constitute “the real issues” that we should be talking about, instead of Obama’s track record, ignore a very fundamental fact about representative government.
Representative government exists, in the first place, because we the voters cannot possibly have all the information necessary to make rational decisions on all the things that the government does. We cannot rule through polls or referendums. We must trust someone to represent us, especially as President of the United States.
Once we recognize this basic fact of representative government, then the question of how trustworthy a candidate is becomes a more urgent question than any of the so-called “real issues.”
A candidate who spends two decades promoting polarization and then runs as a healer and uniter, rather than a divider, forfeits all trust by that fact alone.
If Ronald Reagan had attempted to run for President of the United States as a liberal, the media would have been all over him. His support for Barry Goldwater would have been in the headlines and in editorial denunciations across the country.
No way would he have been able to get away with using soothing words to suggest that he and Barry Goldwater were like ships that passed in the night.
If Barack Obama had run as what he has always been, rather than as what he has never been, then we could simply cast our votes based on whether or not we agree with what he has always stood for.
Some people take solace from the fact that Senator Obama has verbally shifted position on some issues, like drilling for oil or gun control, since this is supposed to show that he is “pragmatic” rather than ideological.
But political zig-zags show no such moderation as some seem to assume. Lenin zig-zagged and so did Hitler. Zig-zags may show no more than that someone is playing the public for fools.
Some people who see the fraud in what Obama is saying are amazed that others do not. But Obama knows what con men have long known, that their job is not to convince skeptics but to enable the gullible to continue to believe what they want to believe. He does that very well.
Regular
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:23 pm | Permalink
#
mxyzptlk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?
============================
Nope, they got the skinny on an Al Qaeda leader and took him out.
++++++++++
The story I heard on the BBC was that children and adolescents were killed in this attack. The BBC interviewed a professor from the O.U. middle eastern studies program who asserted that Bush adminstration was doing this because it knew it could. Syria is trying to curry favor with the incoming administration, so the Bush folk thought we could get by with this attack without risking retaliation. Man, I hope that dude was wrong because if he is right, I have a lower evaluation of the 43rd presidency than I even thought possible…
I take that back…what I mean to say is that you “repeat” lies when you post the desperate rantings of right wing political pundits without checking out the facts.
By “repeating” lies…you break the 8th commandment (the CATHOLIC 8th commandment, that is.)
“Unrefuted facts”? More like unsupported assertions, Hank.
Nor is Thomas Sowell a particularly credible source (but look!: he’s black!). Creators Syndicate tends to publish hacks who care little about the factual merits of their statements.
#
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:29 pm | Permalink
What do you think, Hank? Is it OK to be Christian and then tell lies in an attempt to ruin them?
__________________________________________
Are you calling me a hypocrite, Mary? Are you calling me a liar? What lies have I told?
ADDRESS: The Hoover Institution
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305
(650) 723-3303
PERSONAL: U.S. Citizen, born June 30, 1930
EDUCATION:
Ph.D. in Economics, University of Chicago, 1968
A.M. in Economics, Columbia University, 1959
A.B. in Economics, magna cum laude, Harvard College, 1958
EXPERIENCE:
Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, September 1980 – present
Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., July 1974 – June 1980
Visiting Professor of Economics, Amherst College, September- December 1977
Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, April- August 1977
Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, July 1976 – March 1977
Project Director, The Urban Institute, August 1972 – July 1974
Associate Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., September 1970 – June 1972
Associate Professor of Economics, Brandeis University, September 1969 – June 1970
Assistant Professor of Economics, Cornell University, September 1965 – June 1969
Economic Analyst, American Telephone & TelegraphCo., June 1964 – August 1965
Lecturer in Economics, Howard University, September 1963 – June 1964
Instructor in Economics, Douglass College, Rutgers University, September 1962 – June 1963
Labor Economist, U.S. Department of Labor, June 1961 – August 1962
PRINCIPAL PUBLICATIONS:
On Classical Economics (Yale University Press, 2006)
Black Rednecks and White Liberals (Encounter Books, 2005)
The Quest for Cosmic Justice (Free Press,1999)
Conquests and Cultures (Basic Books, 1998)
Migrations and Cultures (Basic Books, 1996)
The Vision of the Anointed (Basic Books, 1995)
Race and Culture: A World View ( Basic Books,1994 )
A Conflict of Visions (William Morrow, 1987)
Ethnic America (Basic Books, 1981)
Knowledge and Decisions (Basic Books, 1980)
Say’s Law: An Historical Analysis (Princeton University Press, 1972)
____________________________________________
Thomas Sowell is a highly respected professor, commentator and author. Calling him a hack is an indicator of your incredible ignorance.
Thomas Sowell is a highly respected professor, commentator and author. Calling him a hack is an indicator of your incredible ignorance.
Wrong. I would take his peer-reviewed papers seriously. But his syndicated columns are nothing more than political puffery. That silly column you posted is a perfect example. There is no intellectual substance to it. One cardinal rule of an intellectual argument is that you do not rely on mere assertions to make your point.
And using his curriculum vitae as proof of his credibility when analyzing Barack Obama is like using William Shockley’s CV to validate his view on race, or James Watson’s CV to validate the sexist comments he made in the 60s.
After the interview of Palin by Katie Couric, the cons lost all reason to smile. It’s been all downhill since.
A week out, and comes word that Virginia VIRGINIA is slipping from McCain. With operations in Georgia now and even South Carolina slipping, the DNC is DEEP into traditional Republican territory.
Considerations of personal future (all they really care about) now come into play for Republican cadidates and operatives.
We will not see McCain and Palin together again.
Ted Stevens? Senior Republican in the Senate and tomorrow no con will know him.
Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnel and con icon Elizabeth Dole? No one wants to hitch their wagon to a falling star.
The already fractured right wing is about to descend into Balkan’s like internacine war.
From time to time in this forum, I have asked CONs and Republic Party advocates to tell me why they are voting for John S (for Senile) McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term).
Even after the first frost, the crickets tend to keep chirping in their silence.
Nobody seems to have a reason to vote for the old man; they only can conjure up reasons to vote against Barack Obama.
I’m tempted to channel Rush Limbaugh with something like a shouted: “THE ONLY REASON IS RACE!” But I’m bigger than Limbaugh, albeit probably 140 pounds lighter on the scales.
So it’s late night and the World Series is suspended. And I have no idea which of you night owls might see this, read this, decide to respond. But I think I have one single over-riding reason to vote for Barack Obama for President of the United States next Tuesday.
Specific issues and nuances thereof? I’ve been around the block a few times and I know, even with an all Democratic federal government, every policy is gonna go through the political sausage maker and no ones “plan” is likely to end up as policy. There will be debates, compromises, negotiations, give-and-take and who knows what kind of spurious issues that will shape the policies of the future. Maybe they’ll work. Maybe they won’t.
But all the CONs’ rants about why they’re voting against Barack Obama (yeah, I’m thinking about you, “Franklin”) in a complete vacuum of any reason to vote for McPalin prompt me to declare.
This is why I’m voting FOR Barack Obama –
Politics, probably since the Clinton/Gingrich wars of the 90s has come to concentrate on our differences even though we have so many more commonalities.
In El Dorado, back on that blustery winder day, I was in the audience when Obama said, “…the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that’s consumed Washington. To end the political strategy that’s been all about division, and instead make it about addition. To build a coalition for change that stretches through red states and blue states.”
Okay, so that probably sounds a bit esoteric for you CONs, but it is the foundation for my voting for Barack Obama.
But… for about the hundredth time… just why would you CONs vote for McCain?
StevenEDavis
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:31 pm | Permalink
Regular
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:23 pm | Permalink
#
mxyzptlk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?
============================
Nope, they got the skinny on an Al Qaeda leader and took him out.
++++++++++
The story I heard on the BBC was that children and adolescents were killed in this attack. The BBC interviewed a professor from the O.U. middle eastern studies program who asserted that Bush adminstration was doing this because it knew it could. Syria is trying to curry favor with the incoming administration, so the Bush folk thought we could get by with this attack without risking retaliation. Man, I hope that dude was wrong because if he is right, I have a lower evaluation of the 43rd presidency than I even thought possible
==============================
So you believe incomplete news sources and Al Qaeda more than Bush?
That’s nice…Al Qaeda has been selling “the U.S. is killing babies and children for years.”
First, get a clue…Al Qaeda in Iraq or its border areas don’t bring their families with them.
Secondly, they have photos of the Al Qaeda leader that is dead (photo ID confirmed)
This is why the military doesn’t like Leftist progressives, they always side with the enemy.
Linda,
I remember Kiddieland. Wasn’t it where the Harry street mall is now? I know that was the Meadowlark/Twin drive-in (right?), but Kiddieland before that?
Help! The memory is going…going…
Oh, and that sneering clown? Tell me I’m weird, but that was one of my favorite things at Joyland. He’s been stolen. Did you know that? His name is/was Louie, named for one of my great-uncles. That was a world famous Wurlitzer organ. (No jokes, guys. Not tonight.)
I guess that made he and I some kind of cousins however many times removed?
Your third cousin, Linda. At least that’s the way I learned it. And I have tons of third, fourth, fifth, sixth… Guess where they all live? ::grin:: Or make that a :P
Regular probably gave the answer and I’m wrong, but, hey, I tried!
Back to a blast from the past…
Henry Harvey’s daughter was in one of my junior high classes at Allison. They lived across the street from my piano teacher, who was the wife of the Pres. of Friends U at the time. Dumb, dumb trivia, I know.
Anybody remember KARD Gang Club? It featured the old Our Gang Club movies. A kid was picked out of the audience to spin the bicycle wheels (or they looked like them anyway) hanging on the wall, although I don’t remember what they were for, and to spin the card cage & draw a card for a prize for a kid watching at home.
Kitty Clover chips to collect to bid on prizes? Anybody ever go to that? And Hyde Park milk that featured (or sponsored?) Hopalong Cassidy?
Major Astro always reminds me of Rodney and the Host.
Hi-Fi Hop (KTVH channel 12). Yeah, I was there once (not a regular like Linda ;) )when I was like 11? That was so cool! NOT
(I’ll go back and check out that cousins thing before hitting the pillow.)
1st cousin twice removed=3rd cousin. I never did learn those “removed” thingies.
“Politics, probably since the Clinton/Gingrich wars of the 90s has come to concentrate on our differences even though we have so many more commonalities.”
I have absolutely nothing in common with any rotten con.
Maybe it is my con beginnings that makes me know. Negotiation is surrender with those people.
First, the “instructor” who allowed that 8 year old to shoot a fully automatic weapon as he did was negligent.
He was an idiot. Period.
Not that letting an 8 year old shoot a gun is wrong, but the simple fact is that a fully automatic weapon is not something to allow an 8 year old to just shoot.
I teach people how to shoot fully automatic weapons.
When we allow Marines to shoot on full auto, I stand right behind them and hold their shoulder with my wieght and have my other hand ready to reach over to grab the weapon (just in case)
If you have never fired a fully automatic weapon you are not prepared for the recoil of one. Even Marines are not. Let alone an 8 year old kid.
That instructor should have probably not allowed the 8 year old to shoot and at the very least should have been helping the 8 year old hold the gun.
The anti-gun idiots quoted in the article have no clue about what they are talking about.
Even the father is an idiot. He said he thought that the micro uzi would be easier for his kid to handle. If anything it was much worse. I doubt it had a stock to help with the recoil and is so small that you can hardly grip it to prevent recoil.
So here you have an 8 year old that doesn’t know how to handle an uzi let alone a fully auto one.
As he pulled the trigger each shot pushed the weapon up and back in his hands until it was pointed towards his head.
Tragic.
Avoidable.
Preventable.
Something tells me that this “instructor” was just some red neck hill billy who should be ashamed of himself and probably is.
The Monkey is a liar again….as he placed in quotes something I never said.
“Lezzie-carpet-munching-chicken-dung-pig,”
That must be something he is thinking.
Did anyone expect better of him? Not really.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.
541 Comments
Back when Alan Greenspan was peddling his bad economics there was one Congressman who pointed out to him that his policies were going to ruin the country. That Congressman, then a representative, now a Senator is the only Democratic Socialist in Congress, Senator Bernie Sanders.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=304526
That was back when the national debt was only $4 trillion. Naturally the other hundreds of capitalist Congresspeople just went along and bought Greenspan’s snake oil. It just proves that the true liberals (not liberals in the sense the neo-cons use, anyone left of Cheney) know more about economic policy.
Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
He out and out calls for ‘administrative legislative redistribution of wealth’!!!
He said and elaborated on it.
He is a socialist/communist in pure form.
MSM Refuse to Release the Video Of Barack Obama Attending Jew-Bash & Toasting a Former PLO Operative…
Introduction: The LA Times is holding a video that shows Barack Obama celebrating with a group of Palestinians who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gives a toast to a former PLO operative at this celebration. If the American public saw this side of Barack Obama he would never be elected president. But, the media refuses to release this video.
LA Times writer Peter Wallsten wrote about Barack Obama’s close association with former Palestinian operative Rashid Khalidi back in April. Wallsten discussed a dinner held back in 2003 in honor of Khalidi, a critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights. Barack Obama has denied his close association with Khalidi, too.
According to Wallsten the evening not surprisingly turned into a classic Jew-bash:
“During the dinner a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.” One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”
Barack Obama also praised the former PLO operative during the event. And, Obama confessed that his family often shared dinner with the Khalidis:
His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases… It’s for that reason that I’m hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid’s dinner table,” but around “this entire world.” …The event was videotaped, and a copy of the tape was obtained by The Times.
Khalidi and the Obamas were great friends in Chicago and often shared meals together. By the way, Khalidi was also best friends with Bill Ayers.
On Wednesday I talked with Peter Wallsten from the Los Angeles Times about the article on Obama and Khalidi:
Wallsten was one of the few mainstream media reporters to report on this radical Obama associate. Wallston said that the article was written after he watched video taken at the Khalidi going away party. When I asked him about the video he said that as far as he was concerned he was through with the story.
I asked him if he was planning on releasing this video of Obama toasting the radical Khalidi at this Jew-bash. He told me he was not releasing the video. He also would not comment on his source for the video. Wallston also said he did not know if Khalidi’s good friend Bill Ayers was at the event or not.
So, there you have it. The LA Times has video of Obama toasting a former PLO operative at a Jew-bash but will not release the video. This is outrageous.
Obviously, this video would do great damage to Obama who struggles with Jewish voters due to his circle of close anti-Semitic friends. Maybe this is the reason it is not being released?
More here:
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/10/confirmed-msm-holds-video-of-barack.html
AYERS: RADICAL LOON WHEN OBAMA WAS ONLY 47
October 22, 2008
The media are acting as if they completely and fully vetted Obama during the Democratic primaries and that’s why they are entitled to send teams of researchers into Alaska to analyze Sarah Palin’s every expense report.
In fact, the mainstream media did no vetting. They seem to have all agreed, “OK, none of us will get into this business with Jeremiah Wright, ‘Tony’ Rezko, Saul Alinsky, Bill Ayers and everyone’s impression of an angry Michelle Obama on ‘The Jerry Springer Show.’”
During one of the Democratic primary debates, Hillary Clinton was hissed for mentioning Syrian national Rezko, and during another, ABC moderator George Stephanopoulos nearly lost his career for asking Obama one question about William Ayers.
In the past week, TV anchors have taken to claiming that Obama “refuted” John McCain’s statement that Obama launched his political career at the home of former Weather Underground leader Ayers.
No, Obama “denied” it; he didn’t “refute” it. If “denying” something is the same as “refuting” it, then maybe the establishment media can quit harping on Palin’s qualifications to be president, since she too “refuted” that by denying it.
Back before the media realized it needed to lie about Obama launching his political career at Ayers’ house, the Los Angeles Times provided an eyewitness account from a liberal who attended the event.
“When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the living room of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. They were launching him — introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread.”
The Times has now stripped this item from its Web page, but the great blogger Patterico has preserved it for posterity on his Web page.
Obama’s glib remark that “Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago; 40 years ago when I was 8 years old he engaged in despicable acts with a domestic group. I have roundly denounced those attacks” — doesn’t answer anything.
First of all, the fact that Ayers is a professor of education proves only one thing: He is dumber than any person without an education degree.
Ayers is such an imbecile, we ought to be amazed that he’s teaching at a university — even when you consider that it’s an ed school — except all former violent radicals end up teaching. Roughly 80 percent of former Weathermen are full college professors — 99 percent if you don’t include the ones killed in shoot-outs with the police or in prison — i.e., not yet pardoned by a Democratic president.
Any other profession would have banned a person like Ayers. Universities not only accept former domestic terrorists, but also move them to the front of the line. In addition to Ayers, among those once on the FBI’s most-wanted list who ended up in cushy college teaching positions are Bernardine Dohrn (Northwestern University), Mark Rudd (a junior college in New Mexico) and Angela Davis (History of Consciousness Department, University of California at Santa Cruz).
While others were hard at work on Ph.D.s, Susan Rosenberg was conspiring to kill cops and blow up buildings, and was assembling massive caches of explosives. This put her on the fast track for a teaching position at Hamilton College!
Despite having absolutely no qualifications to teach, having earned only a master’s degree in “writing” through a correspondence course, Rosenberg was offered a position at Hamilton within a few years of President Clinton pardoning her in 2001, releasing her from a 58-year prison sentence for participating in the murder of cops and possessing more than 700 pounds of explosives.
But Obama thinks it’s a selling point to say that Ayers is a college professor.
Hundreds of college professors have signed a letter vouching for Ayers, which would be like Lester Maddox producing a letter from George Wallace assuring us that Maddox is a respected member of the community. No, really, I’ve got the letter right here!
The media keep citing the fact that the money Obama and Ayers distributed to idiotic left-wing causes came — as The New York Times put it — “from Walter H. Annenberg, the billionaire publisher and philanthropist and President Richard M. Nixon’s ambassador to the United Kingdom.”
Great Republican though he was, Walter Annenberg died in 2002. The money came from the Annenberg Foundation, which, like all foundations, distributes money to projects that its founder would despise. John Kerry ran for president on the late John Heinz’s money. That didn’t mean Republican Heinz was endorsing Kerry.
As John O’Sullivan says, any foundation that is not explicitly right-wing will become a radical left-wing organization within a few years. It could be the Association of University Women, the American Association of Retired People, the American Rose Growers, the Foundation for the Study of Railroad Engineers or the Choral Society of Newport Beach.
Left-wing radicals swarm to free foundation money, where they can give gigantic grants to one another and they will never have to do a day’s work. That’s exactly what Obama and Ayers did with Annenberg’s money.
None of the Annenberg money went to schoolchildren. It went to Ayers’ left-wing crank friends to write moronic papers that we hope no one ever reads.
Instead of teaching students reading and writing, Ayers thinks they should be taught to rebel against America’s “imperialist” social structure. In 2006, Ayers was in Venezuela praising communist dictator Hugo Chavez, saying, “We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution.”
He has backed a line of schoolbooks such as one titled “Teaching Science for Social Justice.”
Forget about Ayers’ domestic terrorism when Obama “was 8 years old.” Does he agree with Ayers’ idiot ideas right now?
COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
I see that our resident “tin foil hat wearing kool aid drinkers” have “reared their heads” over Wichita this AM.
Pathetic losers.
Give it up, guys….Obama’s not the bogey man you so desperatly want to convince everyone he is. BTW, Good Christians shouldn’t spread falsehoods about others…that’s breaking the 8th comandment
Maybe you should practice what you preach.
They claim to be Christians but their actions are the opposite. Hate and lies are the works of Satan. Those are the works they emulate.
ANN COULTER…now THERE’S a reliable source for the facts….nitwits!
mxyzptlk, You make a great point.
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:53 am | Permalink
Give it up, guys….Obama’s not the bogey man you so desperatly want to convince everyone he is. . . . .
________________________________________________
Good morning Mary!
You’re right! Obama is worse than we think!
________________________________________________
BTW, Good Christians shouldn’t spread falsehoods about others…that’s breaking the 8th comandment
Maybe you should practice what you preach.
________________________________________________
Desperation is the inability to make a political point without denigrating a person’s religion.
You don’t have a problem with Obama’s history of associations with crooks, liars and terrorists?
Can you respond without calling me a hypocrite? If not, you might reevaluate your position.
Ann Coulter, there’s a figure that any politician would want to embrace.
The fact of the matter is, Coulter is a professional troll whose mission in life appears to get outraged responses from “liberals” and over the top ugly amens from nutjob righties, and posting a column of hers is just second hand trolling by proxy.
Re: Ann Coulter
DNFTT
“Desperation is the inability to make a political point without denigrating a person’s religion.
You don’t have a problem with Obama’s history of associations with crooks, liars and terrorists?”
But they are Hypocrites HLP….they are hypocrites that’s what they do!
Typical lib garbage. HLP lists a documented, reasoned statement…and gets accused of being a pathetic, tin foil wearing hat koolaid drinker (whatever the hell that is supposed to be). Did mxz ever refute/discuss even ONE of the points raised? Of course not, the lib means of ‘debate’ is to ignore the arguments raised and make personal insults instead.
yada yada yada. No substance just insults. Sorta like 3rd grade arguing “you are a poopy head” instead of addressing the issues.
Talk about pathetic..and juvenile.
Obama and the dems will take your money any way they can get it. Just think what will happen if he gets elected. Hello Nanny government, goodbye freedom.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10272008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/dubious_donations_135428.htm
Losers.
Sore losers at that.
If you know enough about Republic Party politics to enjoy the lowest price of gasoline in the nation… and also know enough to tank up on Election Day because the price will skyrocket on November 5th…welcome to Wichita.
“losers” Boy…that REALLY refutes every statement made above, doesn’t it?
You ever going to grow up and pretend to discuss things like an adult? Or will you just sit back and throw out your juvenile insults to everyone who dares to disagree with you?
From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.
1. “Chicago-my home town,is an excellent example of how obama & company run things here.First of all its all democrats in office here and we lead the nation in many interesting stats.#1 we pay the highest taxes,sales,property, fuel,& food).#1 in murder rate 436+(my condolences to the Hudson family)#1 in pension deficit 40 billion in the hole.our schools are the bottom 2% and our transit system is also in bankruptcy. Look up these facts yourselves people-is this the kind of change you want?”
2. “I am originally from the Netherlands. Socialism has held Europe back, Europe has been doing worse than the US economically for decades. Europeans are sick of socialism, they’re voting it out, trying to get away from it. Unfortunately the unelected European Union bureaucracy is replacing the sovereignty of the nationstates. Socialism kills democracy. It happened in Europe, now it’s happening in the US.”
I am SO enjoying watch the despicable cons flop and flail. And I’ve the feeling the show is just starting!
Heheheh. Ya know when they refuse to identify the “another blog site” it must be from wingnuttia?
Let’s see, townhall? freeperville? malkin? Gotta be one of ‘em if he’s too ashamed to post what it is!
mxyzptlk Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:57 am
“They claim to be Christians but their actions are the opposite. Hate and lies are the works of Satan. Those are the works they emulate.”
No one, Christian or otherwise needs take the verbal attacks that are dished out here continually by the DimLibs.
I have on several occasions, just yesterday and the day before, tried to tone down and be courteous but the DimLibs continue to pour it on.
So take the log out of your own eye, hypocrite.
Again, guano farmer is too stupid and incompetent to read previous posts and the link with comment provided.
So for the mentally challenged here it is again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
Good Christians shouldn’t spread falsehoods about others…that’s breaking the 8th comandment
Maybe you should practice what you preach.
———————————————————-
Hey Mary, when is it that telling the truth about the other candidate is considered spreading falsehoods just because it doesn’t square up with the lies you been told and choose to believe.
Barack Obama even says he’s a socialist, what do you think “spreading the wealth around” means? btw – you won’t be on the receiving end of the wealth, you will most likely be on the giving end. And if you don’t work and collect disability or welfare, you will still be giving because you will just get less so others can receive it also. WAKE UP!!!!
Heheheheheh. Well, since I’m so stupid, why dont you just humor me bigotbox and post a link for this
“From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.”
Just so we can check it out.
Unless, of course, it is indeed from one of the aforementioned wingnut sites.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1021/p09s01-coop.html
Why the economy fares much better under Democrats
On job and income growth, the record couldn’t be clearer.
By Larry M. Bartels
PRINCETON, N.J. – John McCain is a maverick and Barack Obama is a postpartisan problem-solver. But you wouldn’t know it by looking at their economic plans. Both candidates’ proposals faithfully reflect the traditional economic priorities of their respective parties. That makes the track records of past Democratic and Republican administrations a very useful benchmark for assessing how the economy might perform under a President McCain or a President Obama. The bottom line: During the past 60 years, Democrats have presided over much less unemployment and much more robust income growth.
The $52.5 billion plan Senator McCain announced last week includes $36 billion in tax breaks for senior citizens withdrawing funds from retirement accounts and $10 billion for a reduction in the capital gains tax. Those are perks for investors, most of whom are relatively affluent. (McCain is also proposing a two-year suspension of taxes on unemployment benefits, but that’s a fraction of the plan’s cost.) He also favors broader tax cuts for businesses and wants to extend President Bush’s massive tax cuts indefinitely, even for people earning more than $250,000 per year.
McCain’s proposals reflect the traditional Republican emphasis on cutting taxes for businesses and wealthy people in hopes of stimulating investment – “trickle down” economics, as it came to be called during Ronald Reagan’s administration. But will proposals of this sort really “stop and reverse the rise of unemployment” and “create millions of new jobs” as McCain has claimed? The historical record suggests not.
President Bush’s multitrillion-dollar tax cuts, which were strongly tilted toward the rich, could not prevent (and may even have contributed to) significant job losses. On the other hand, when Bill Clinton raised taxes on affluent people to balance the federal budget (while significantly expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit for working poor people), unemployment declined substantially. Under Clinton’s watch, 22 million jobs were created.
Prefer a broader historical comparison? In the past three decades, since the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries oil price shocks of the mid-1970s and the Republican turn toward “supply side” economics, the average unemployment rate under Republican presidents has been 6.7 percent – substantially higher than the 5.5 percent average under Democratic presidents. (The official unemployment rate takes no account of people who have given up looking for work or taken substantial pay cuts to stay in the labor force.) Over an even broader time period, since the late 1940s, unemployment has averaged 4.8 percent under Democratic presidents but 6.3 percent – almost one-third higher – under Republican presidents.
Lower unemployment under Democratic presidents has contributed substantially to the real incomes of middle-class and working poor families. Job losses hurt everyone – not just those without work. In fact, every percentage point of unemployment has the effect of reducing middle-class income growth by about $300 per family per year. And the effects are long term, unlike the temporary boost in income from a stimulus check. Compounded over an eight-year period, a persistent one-point difference in unemployment is worth about $10,000 to a middle-class family. The dollar values are smaller for working poor families, but in relative terms their incomes are even more sensitive to unemployment. In contrast, income growth for affluent people is much more sensitive to inflation, which has been a perennial target of Republican economic policies.
Although McCain portrays Senator Obama as a “job killing” tax-and-spend liberal, the new $60 billion plan Obama unveiled last week also has a tax break as its centerpiece – a tax break specifically tailored to create jobs by offering employers a $3,000 tax credit for each new hire over the next two years. Obama’s proposal would also extend unemployment benefits by 13 weeks for those who remain jobless, as well as match McCain’s in suspending taxes on unemployment benefits.
Obama’s new proposal complements $115 billion in economic stimulus measures he had already announced, including $65 billion in direct rebates to taxpayers and $50 billion to help states jump-start spending on infrastructure projects. All of this is squarely in the tradition of Democratic presidents since John F. Kennedy, who have relied on public spending and tax breaks for working people to stimulate consumption and employment during economic downturns.
These and other policies have produced not only lower unemployment under Democratic presidents but also more economic output and income growth. In fact, over the past 60 years, the real incomes of middle-income families have grown about twice as fast under Democratic presidents as they have under Republican presidents. The partisan difference is even greater for working poor families, whose real incomes have grown six times as fast under Democratic presidents as they have under Republican presidents.
Of course, past performance is no guarantee of what will happen when the next president takes office. However, given the striking fidelity of both presidential candidates to their parties’ traditional economic priorities, the profound impact of partisan politics on the economic fortunes of American families over more than half a century ought to weigh heavily in the minds of voters.
“Obama is a Marxist Muslim Arab Jesus Black White Terrorist Technocrat Racist Do-Gooder Liberal FDR Stalin Hilter Commie Fascist Gay Womanizing Naive Cynical Insider Noob Boring Radical Unaccomplished Elite Slick Gaffe-Prone Pedophile Pedophile-Seducing Liberation Theology Atheist Etc. & Anti-Etc. with a bunch of scary friends from – wait for it! – the Nineteen Hundred And Sixties.”
Nothing about that CONspeak sounds desperate, does it?
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_05/006282.php
The results are simple: Democratic presidents have consistently higher economic growth and consistently lower unemployment than Republican presidents. If you add in a time lag, you get the same result. If you eliminate the best and worst presidents, you get the same result. If you take a look at other economic indicators, you get the same result. There’s just no way around it: Democratic administrations are better for the economy than Republican administrations.
Skeptics offer two arguments: first, that presidents don’t control the economy; second, that there are too few data points to draw any firm conclusions. Neither argument is convincing. It’s true that presidents don’t control the economy, but they do influence it — as everyone tacitly acknowledges by fighting like crazed banshees over every facet of fiscal policy ever offered up by a president.
The second argument doesn’t hold water either. The dataset that delivers these results now covers more than 50 years, 10 administrations, and half a dozen different measures. That’s a fair amount of data, and the results are awesomely consistent: Democrats do better no matter what you measure, how you measure it, or how you fiddle with the data.
But it turns out there’s more to this. Via Brendan Nyhan, I recently read a paper by Princeton’s Larry Bartels that adds some fascinating details to this picture.
________________________________________
The first thing Bartels did was break down economic performance by income class. The unsurprising result is shown in the chart on the right.
Under Democratic presidents, every income class did well but the poorest did best. The bottom 20% had average pretax income growth of 2.63% per year while the top 5% showed pretax income growth of 2.11% per year.
Republicans were polar opposites. Not only was their overall performance worse than Democrats, but it was wildly tilted toward the well off. The bottom 20% saw pretax income growth of only .6% per year while the top 5% enjoyed pretax income growth of 2.09% per year. (What’s more, the trendline is pretty clear: if the chart were extended to show the really rich — the top 1% and the top .1% — the Republican growth numbers for them would be higher than the Democratic numbers.)
In other words, Republican presidents produce poor economic performance because they’re obsessed with helping the well off. Their focus is on the wealthiest 5%, and the numbers show it. At least 95% of the country does better under Democrats.
________________________________________
But this raises an interesting question: if 95% of the country does better under Democrats, and if economic performance is the most important factor in most presidential elections, then how do Republicans ever get elected? The most common hypothesis — spelled out in detail in last year’s What’s The Matter With Kansas? — is that cultural issues often override economic considerations. But Bartels proposes a surprising alternative explanation illustrated in the two charts below. The top chart shows income growth during non-election years, and it displays the usual characteristics: under Democrats, income growth is strong overall and the poor do a bit better than the well off. Under Republicans, income growth is weak overall and is tilted heavily in favor of the already prosperous.
But now look at the bottom chart. It shows economic performance during election years and it’s a mirror image of the top chart: Republicans produce better overall performance, and they produce especially stupendous performance for the well off. Democrats not only produce poor overall performance, they produce disastrous performance for the well off, who actually have negative income growth.
In other words, voters aren’t necessarily ignoring economic issues in favor of cultural issues. Rather, Republicans produce great economic growth for all income classes in election years, and that’s all that voters remember. They really are voting their pocketbooks.
Bartels doesn’t essay an explanation for this. Do Republican presidents deliberately try to time economic growth spurts — and are Democratic presidents too lame to do the same? Is it just luck? Or is the difference somehow inherent in the different ways that Democrats and Republicans approach the economy (with Democrats typically focusing on employment and Republicans on inflation)? At this point, your guess is as good as anyone’s.
Bottom line: if you’re well off, vote for Republicans. But if you make less than $150,000 a year, Republicans are your friends only one year in four. Caveat emptor.
I used to think bigotbox was getting close to going over the edge of sanity.
Seems he’s already gone over, but I fear he has not hit bottom. Reminds me of Wylie Coyote. All the air flailing wont stop the fall.
I bet bigotbox melts down further after the election. His wife is getting afraid.
Like anybody cares one wit about what you say Boxlock. Your reputation of hate and lies is too well know for anyone to listen to you.
Squirm baby squirm ’cause the Obamaman is coming for you!
“He out and out calls for ‘administrative legislative redistribution of wealth’!!!”
‘Bout damn time!
“Obamaman is coming for you” — mxyzptlk
Make that Olberobamaman.
I love the smell of Republican desperation in the morning!
He done gwanna eat you chilrens.
sorry: You = yo
The leaches are foaming at their orifices.
The leaches are foaming at their orifices.
(That means you, BlueJay)
This guy is about a stupid as bigotbox.
In fact, I think this is being posted from the Department of Too Stupid to LIVE!
http://www.kansas.com/news/updates/story/574636.html
I think Freud would say he didnt REALLY want the job?
Why the McCainiacs – and especially their fellow traevllers in the media – perpetrated the Ashley Todd hoax:
The aftermath of Ashley Todd’s story
By Jay Bookman | Friday, October 24, 2008, 04:50 PM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
McCain volunteer Ashley Todd has now confessed that she made up the story about being attacked by a large black man who carved the letter “B” into her cheek.
The young lady has issues, and I hope she gets the help she needs. End of story.
But let’s talk in a little more depth about the eagerness and even glee with which some in the right-wing blogosphere jumped on that story and immediately claimed it as proof of their worst nightmares coming true. So much of that story was unbelievable from the very beginning, yet certain people wanted to believe it so badly that they ignored all the warning signs and launched into full battle cry.
Andy McCarthy at the National Review’s Corner responded with a post so embarrassing he has now taken it down so nobody can see it.
Dan Riehl at riehlworldview.com posted under the headline “Thugs for change,” claiming that “Obama’s run his campaign just like a street thug out of Chicago. Now we get to see what some of his worst supporters are like.”
Noel Sheppard at newsbusters.org chastized AP for daring to be skeptical of the initial report. Most of all, he wanted to know why the AP didn’t report that the alleged perp was black. How dare they exclude a detail that had no bearing whatsoever on the alleged crime!!
Josh Painter at redstate.com blamed the attack on Barack Obama, suggesting an “Obama thugocracy” was coming: When Obama “urged his supporters to get in their face, did it not occur to him that some of his more deranged followers might take him literally?” Painter asked.
He was echoed by fellow redstater Erick Erickson, who wrote: “Hey! The dude was just doing what The One asked him to. Full pardon on January 21st.”
At Atlas Shugs, they posted the woman’s photo and called it “the new face of the Republican Party.”
“Shame on those that doubted this poor girl,” the post read. “Always ready to jump on the side of the leftists and thugs. ugh. Americans, I implore you to get off your asses and save this country from the radical left coup on the White House, Senate and House…. Perhaps the Obots misunderstood Obama urging his followers to Get In Their Face and GET IN THEIR FACES!” They got the advanced course of Camp Obama to cut up their faces.”
But perhaps the most interesting response came from John Moody, executive vice president at Fox News:
“If Ms. Todd’s allegations are proven accurate, some voters may revisit their support for Senator Obama, not because they are racists (with due respect to Rep. John Murtha), but because they suddenly feel they do not know enough about the Democratic nominee,” Moody wrote. “If the incident turns out to be a hoax, Senator McCain’s quest for the presidency is over, forever linked to race-baiting.”
Now, that is utter nonsense on two counts. First, while the incident did indeed turn out to be a hoax, it has in no way linked McCain to racebaiting and will have no impact whatsoever on the outcome of this race.
But Moody’s claim that Obama supporters might have revisited their position if the story were true is more intriguing, and more revealing as well. Moody claims that under those circumstances, people might suddenly feel they know less about Obama and thus change their vote. But what is the logical trail between those two thoughts? Such an attack would tell people absolutely nothing about Obama.
The real explanation lies in the answer that Moody rejects: racism. A lot of white Americans voting for Obama have had to overcome various degrees of racism to get themselves to that point. That doesn’t make them bad people; to the contrary, they’re thinking things through, and that’s great.
However, for many of those people, an attack of the sort described by Ashley Todd would heighten those internal, emotional obstacles to voting for Obama. That’s precisely why some on the right — with notable exceptions such as Michelle Malkin, a person I do not ordinarily respect much — were so quick to try to make it a huge deal.
They ought to be ashamed.
http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/ajc/bookman/entries/2008/10/24/the_aftermath_of_ashley_todds.html
90% of Blacks are voting for Obama=Racism
John McCain’s Pennsylvania communications director told reporters in the state an incendiary version of the hoax story about the attack on a McCain volunteer well before the facts of the case were known or established — and even told reporters outright that the “B” carved into the victim’s cheek stood for “Barack,” according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.
John Verrilli, the news director for KDKA in Pittsburgh, told TPM Election Central that McCain’s Pennsylvania campaign communications director gave one of his reporters a detailed version of the attack that included a claim that the alleged attacker said, “You’re with the McCain campaign? I’m going to teach you a lesson.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/24/ashley-todd-story-pushed_n_137710.html
Has Hannity retracted yet?
90% of Stupid People vote Republic Party.
CONservative = Dumb
ksfarmgrrl Posted October 27, 2008 at 8:09 am
“Heheheheheh. Well, since I’m so stupid, why dont you just humor me bigotbox and post a link for this
“From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.”
Just so we can check it out.
Unless, of course, it is indeed from one of the aforementioned wingnut sites.”
He guano, do you sound like a hyena all the time, “Heheheheheh”.
I didn’t post a link the first time because there are close to 4500 comments at present to Obama’s call for the redistribution of wealth statement.
You think you can find the ‘two’ I posted.
What an ignoramus you continue to prove yourself to be. Hey, go to town once in a while and see if you can learn to converse at a higher level than the chickens and pigs. Oh wait, are there other pigs on your farm, or just you.
“Like anybody cares one wit about what you say Boxlock. Your reputation of hate and lies is too well know for anyone to listen to you.”
—mxyzptlk
But you do imbecile…..you do!!!
Boxlock believes that if he sees it on a blog or online then its true.
Hey Boxlock…your a stupid and pathetic loser!
It must be true!
Heeeeeee….
So that’s a “yes” on bigotbox posting from the wingnuts sites?
Why else is he ashamed to post the link?
And why does he hate farmers? Chickens?
A farmophobe. Clearly.
Number of whites and blacks and all shades in between voting for obama = WIN!
If these damaging secrets aren’t public knowledge is it because of incompetence on the part of conservatives? If the MSM did no vetting why haven’t the conservatives, like Ann Coulter, taken up the slack? Why are all these “truths” that only a few know about kept secret?
Those who know these secrets are so weak, so unable to get the attention of the public, so utterly stymied by their inabilities to compete with others in the media they can’t write about it, speak about it? They can’t even get a video they know all about exposed! Do they know all about it because they have a copy? Were they present but forgot to do their own video?
That has to be the reason the eeeviil libaruls have been able to take over the MSM, don’t you think? If conservatives were actually capable of competing, thinking, writing, speaking. wouldn’t the free markets not only have encouraged competing ideas but grown them?
In our world of everyone armed with cameras and recording devices, where hardly anything happens without appearing on YouTube, it’s most amazing that these “facts” remain secrets! Too bad about the total incompetence of those conservatives who want these secrets shared.
Heheheh. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
“Oh wait, are there other pigs on your farm, or just you.”
Oh… snap…..
Heheheheheheh.
He must REALLY be hungover from that drunk blogging binge last night. I bet he’s so grumpy because max kicked him out of bed.
While the US spends hundreds of billions on Iraq, they are awash with money:
http://www.kansas.com/wireupdates/story/572054.html
BAGHDAD – Iraq’s government has an unusual money problem as much of the world grapples with a credit crunch – it can’t spend its oil riches fast enough.
Ann Coulter is still alive?
From Josh Marshall’s blog –
” What is it about Alaskan politicians? Palin is given a $150,000 wardrobe, which she wears, but doesn’t own it. Stevens was given furniture, but he doesn’t own it, yet it still sits in his home. Stuff is given to them, but they don’t own it? Steven and Palin must attend the same seminars on electoral ethics, or is this just an Alaska thing?”
“Oh wait, are there other pigs on your farm, or just you.”
The rhetorical scalpel of a 12 year old in action.
Repubs kept whining because Obama couldn’t ‘close the deal’ back in what July? Now that he’s closing the deal their spreading falsehoods and crying like cur pups.
It’s time for real leadership, and repubs see the writing on the wall. LMAO.
Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another. Voting for a man who has similar pigmentation does not racism make.
Obama has a friend who is a critic of Israeli policies, so what? Rashid Khalidi is an anti-Zionist, but criticizing Israel does not a an anti-semite make.
Khalid is a respected scholar. The right wing frighteners wave an Arab name in the air and try to make it sound like a man is a terrorist.
(Born in New York City, Khalidi is the Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University, and director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid_Khalidi
Boxlock’s credibility rates right up there with that girl todd, and fox news, “fear and unbalanced”.
Can I get a lapel flag pin that says: “Marxist Muslim Arab Jesus Black White Terrorist Technocrat Racist Do-Gooder Liberal FDR Stalin Hilter Commie Fascist Gay Womanizing Naive Cynical Insider Noob Boring Radical Unaccomplished Elite Slick Gaffe-Prone Pedophile Pedophile-Seducing Liberation Theology Atheist Etc. & Anti-Etc. with a bunch of scary friends from the 60s?”
I like it (except the Nazi pedophile part)!!!
BlueJay sings
Oh what a beautiful morning
Oh what a beautiful day
I’ve got a beautiful feeling
the right wing is going away.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
“Boxlock” whines –
“I have on several occasions, just yesterday and the day before, tried to tone down and be courteous….”
Yeah, all those references to a lezzie-chicken-guano farmer really showed the milk of human kindness.
I didn’t think it was possilbe but the rw has gone over the edge. Didn’t think it was possible because I thought they’d gove over a long time ago.
Commie/Socialist, take your pick:
Barack Obama’s campaign killed all interviews with a Florida TV station after Sen. Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee, faced tough and critical questions from a reporter at the Orlando station, the Orlando Sentinel reported .
During a satellite video Thursday, WFTV’s Barbara West quoted Karl Marx and asked Biden how Obama’s comment to “Joe the Plumber,” about spreading the wealth wasn’t being Marxist.
“Are you joking?,” Biden asked.
West replied, “No.”
Click here to watch the interview.
Later in the interview West questioned Biden about his comments that if Obama wins the election next month, he would be tested early on as president and wanted to know if Biden was implying America was no longer the world’s leading power.
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
The Obama camp then killed a WFTV interview with Biden’s wife Jill, according to an Orlando Sentinel blog.
“This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best for the duration of the remaining days until the election,” wrote Laura K. McGinnis, Central Florida communications director for the Obama campaign, according to the Sentinel.
(Control of the press is paramount. I am shocked the democrats let these honest questions slip through.)
Box,
Why are you afraid of KFG? Just to ease your mind,homosexuality is not communicable.
CLEVELAND – Republican John McCain says he’s breaking with President Bush’s economic policies and would put a tight lid on government spending.
____________________________
But but but Palin says that every Special Needs child can go to private schools and the government will pay!!!
Pandering to those parents is wicked.
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
Big brother has to know.
Big brother has to control.
“Pandering to those parents is wicked.”
I’m going to give 95% of Americans a tax break.
Obama
Pandering to the 95% is wicked.
“Click here to watch the interview.”
SWING and a miss.
Why are you afraid of KFG?
Maybe he is afraid of obesity.
DavidB, you forgot “latte swilling” and “well educated”. But other than that, I think you have it pretty well covered!
You’d need to be my size though to wear the button!
With all those small donations from millions of citizens, Obama’s going to be bought and paid for!
Swing and miss?
BlueJay, do you need written instructions on how to find a video on the internet?
“Pandering to the 95% is wicked.”
Uh, no that is called being a representative of the constituency in a representative democracy.
amway,
So are you box’s mouthpiece now?
Monkeyhawk, where did you find this?
“I have on several occasions, just yesterday and the day before, tried to tone down and be courteous….”
I scroll over bigotbox a lot so I must have missed it.
And yeah, that’s what passes for the “compassionate” part of “compassionate conservatives”.
But he does provide hours of amusement, no?
And Freebird? You didnt know you can catch the gay? You must not go to church much…
“So that’s a “yes” on bigotbox posting from the wingnuts sites?
Why else is he ashamed to post the link?”
Hey chicken guano kfg, You-tube is not a wingnut site, do you bother to read or just shoot off you filthy mouth. Go wipe the chicken guano out of it.
I did post the link, are to to stupid to see that too.
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
Big brother has to know.
Big brother has to control.
“Maybe he is afraid of obesity.”
Heheheheh. Not judging by his wife.
And if Amway is gonna be his mouthpiece today, I bet max is gonna be mad…
Damn,guess I’ll have to be careful,you know wearing a surgical mask and carrying disinfectant.
It really cracks me up to watching people melt down over a gay farmer in western Kansas.I don’t care who you are it’s funny
You tube, didn’t they run the picture of the poor mccain worker that was brutalized by an Obama O.G.?
“Box, Why are you afraid of KFG? Just to ease your mind,homosexuality is not communicable.”
Not afraid of ‘guano’, but who wants trash and perversion around!
““I have on several occasions, just yesterday and the day before, tried to tone down and be courteous….”
I scroll over bigotbox a lot so I must have missed it.”
He said that last night.
Just before he posted that Chas and I were less than negative in value.
I’m confused. Am I supposed to be insulted by someone I have no respect for?
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:56 am | Permalink
“So that’s a “yes” on bigotbox posting from the wingnuts sites?
Why else is he ashamed to post the link?”
Hey chicken guano kfg, You-tube is not a wingnut site, do you bother to read or just shoot off you filthy mouth. Go wipe the chicken guano out of it.
I did post the link, are to to stupid to see that too.
————————————————–
What a compassionate and toned down response.
““From another blog site from people that have seen Obama’s brand of socialism.”
Funny, but when I click on that, it isnt a link. And anyone who reads would think it was from ANOTHER, as in “different” blog site than a previously posted one.
What the hell is so hard about reposting the link?
Unless.. uh… nevermind….
I don’t care that she gay….I couldn’t care less, it’s her promoting the ridiculous concept it is normal and needs protection and equal standing to man/woman marriage relationships.
Which is never will be.
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
“You, you can’t ask me hard questions!” Biden
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:00 am | Permalink
I don’t care that she gay….I couldn’t care less, it’s her promoting the ridiculous concept it is normal and needs protection and equal standing to man/woman marriage relationships.
Which is never will be.
————————————————
Again,what are you afraid of?
The only question that wasn’t answered was when Biden asked West “Who’s writing your silly questions for you?”
Turns out the Anchor Bunny’s questions for Biden were provided to her by her husband who’s a media
manipulater“consultant” for the Republic Party.Her “hard-hitting” interview style with John S (for Senile) McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term) included zingers such as, “Are you going to cut-and-run from Florida or are you still gonna fight for votes here?”
“.I don’t care who you are it’s funny”
Hee hee hee heeeee…. I gotta agree with that.
Except, it’s not funny because religious wingnuts like that are dangerous. They are EXACTLY the kind of people who go out and hang a queer on a fence.
Probably in the name of god.
And I guess he forgets that saying stuff like that makes the baby Jesus cry.
And does anyone STILL wonder why I fear religious folks like that more than terrorists. I love amongst them. Terrorists? Not so much.
“What the hell is so hard about reposting the link?”
I don’t know if you are addressing my post and link but it IS the You Tube link I posted and the comments that follow.
Everybody with half a brain saw that from the first post except you kfg…guano for brains.
Biden to Florida news anchor: ‘Are you joking?’
8:33 AM Mon, Oct 27, 2008
Joe Biden was interviewed last week by Barbara West of WFTV-TV (Channel 9) in Orlando, Fla.
Among the questions:
“Aren’t you embarrassed by the blatant attempts to register phony voters by ACORN, an organization that Barack Obama has been tied to in the past?”
“How is Sen. Obama not being Marxist if he intents to spread the wealth around?”
“Are you forewarning Americans that .. American’s days as a world’s leading power are over?”
Biden didn’t lose it on camera, but he did ask if one of the anchor’s questions was a joke. Later he said, “I don’t know who’s writing your questions.”
After the interview, reported the Orlando Sentinel, the Obama campaign canceled an interview the station had scheduled with Joe Biden’s wife Jill. And it informed the station that no one from the campaign would be granting the station any further interviews.
West told the Sentinel she was just doing her job, asking “tough questions
Dallas Morning News
Freebird – just watch out for her tater salad and fried chicken!
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
“You, you can’t ask me hard questions!” sniffling Biden
MH,
Getting ready for the big blog takeover?
“xcept, it’s not funny because religious wingnuts like that are dangerous. They are EXACTLY the kind of people who go out and hang a queer on a fence.”
Another example of her insanity.
She still has realized she is merely a puppet whose strings I pull to watch her dance.
Oh, so it’s the SAME site, not ANOTHER site?
Bigoted and illiterate. Add crazy and you have a wingnut trifecta.
Go away boy. Ya bother the adults.
bth,
That is a fear,from what I’ve heard,that I could learn to live with
‘hasn’t not has’
“She still has realized she is merely a puppet whose strings I pull to watch her dance.”
Speaking of which…
Your wife is a GREAT dancer. She does a nice horizontal bop.
Is max a good dancer?
Your pastor must be so proud of you.
“Oh, so it’s the SAME site, not ANOTHER site?”
Another blog of comments from THIS ONE Idiot!!
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden asked her.
—–
When I watched the video of this interview over the weekend, I noticed Biden answered each question completely. Even tho the questions were inane, he answered them. He attempted to make the interview worthwhile by pointing how how senseless the questions were, but the questioner either was unable to go off script or unable to recognize reality. I suspect both.
I heard Max and Box met at the center for rehabing closed head injuries
“Your pastor must be so proud of you.”
We speak frequently…he agrees, yours is a very perverted destructive orientation.
“ksfarmgrrl” –
Here’s the latest incarnation of his tormented attempts at simple human decency. It’s from this morning:
#
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 8:03 am | Permalink
mxyzptlk Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:57 am
“They claim to be Christians but their actions are the opposite. Hate and lies are the works of Satan. Those are the works they emulate.”
No one, Christian or otherwise needs take the verbal attacks that are dished out here continually by the DimLibs.
I have on several occasions, just yesterday and the day before, tried to tone down and be courteous but the DimLibs continue to pour it on.
So take the log out of your own eye, hypocrite.
I suspect the “log” he refers to was in his skivvies, not his eye.
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:10 am | Permalink
“Your pastor must be so proud of you.”
We speak frequently…he agrees, yours is a very perverted destructive orientation.
———————————————-
How and what is it destroying?
Freebird1971,
What are you kfg’s little mouth box, pun intended.
You remind me of the bullies sidekick on ‘A Christmas Story’, unable to stand on your own.
Pathetic.
http://www.colby.edu/news_events/feeds/feed-item.cfm?feedname=Goldfarb%20Center%20Lecture%20Series&postid=1566116
The above is a link to an excellent discussion of the “financial crisis” enveloping the world, compliments of “my favorite little college in Maine”. One of the panelists is Robert Diamond, an alum, who heads Barclays PLC; I don’t recall the identity of the other panelists, one of whom is the head of a private equity firm. For the consideration of anyone with the time to listen. It (the podcast) requires QuickTime.
Nope, just curious to see what makes a homophobe tick.
Let’s be gracious to those pathetic RW cry babies, and always offer them cheese with their whine.
“I suspect the “log” he refers to was in his skivvies, not his eye.”
Hmmmm. That’s not what his wife says! It must just be when he thinks about me and mine.
““Your pastor must be so proud of you.”
We speak frequently…he agrees, yours is a very perverted destructive orientation.”
Well, DUH. Fred Phelps is known for that.
Just like terry and joe!
HEH Freebird. I see he’s an equal opportunity meanie. EVERYONE who doesnt agree with him is treated badly.
Is that in the bible somewhere?
I’m neither RW ord LW,I just know studity and irrational fear when I see it
And there is plenty of it on both sides
ksfarmgrrl
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:17 am | Permalink
HEH Freebird. I see he’s an equal opportunity meanie. EVERYONE who doesnt agree with him is treated badly.
———————————————–
Dealing with people like him its simply a case of mind over matter,I don’t mind because they don’t matter.
“Freebird1971″ asks –
“MH,
Getting ready for the big blog takeover?”
What are you talking about?
Boxlock
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink
Freebird1971,
What are you kfg’s little mouth box, pun intended.
—————————————————-
Nope. Just open minded. Even though we have never met and are light years apart, I would like to consider KFG someone I could be a friend to.
Monkeyhawk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:24 am | Permalink
“Freebird1971? asks –
“MH,
Getting ready for the big blog takeover?”
What are you talking about?
———————————————
I thought you were the one that was going to be the Grand Commissar fo the blog,my bad
“Holding resentment is like eating poison and waiting for the other person to keel over.”
~ Unknown
Thought I’d re-post this for Box and kfg…
No point Box…
kfg is a fine person in her own right. She reminds me of some of the Texas gals I knew; rougher than a freshly cut pine log; saltier than a brine pickle and more stubborn than an unfed mule in a wheat pasture.
She’s opinionated and makes some generalized attacks on just about everyone she disagrees with.
I can almost see her small fist in a clinch, thumb up, swiping her nose – sniffing to see who’s gonna throw the first punch.
I’d just let her be if I was you. You aren’t going to changer her.
She’s not the enemy, just different from what we expect.
Of course, that’s what makes life interesting.
I’d still treat her like a lady even though it would probably irritate the hell out of her.
But ‘that is me and that’s all…
Here is an opportunity for someone looking for an unusual breed of dog.
http://wichita.craigslist.org/zip/895053658.html
There are other dogs there in need of a new home as well.
Oh, yeah!
I’d forgotten, “Freebird1971.”
Sort of like how John S (for Senile) McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term) forgot who his close friends and endorsers were yesterday on “Meet the Press.”
I’m gonna have to go back and look for those posts. I’ve forgotten most of my Agenda, other than mandating everyone in the new People’s Republic of WE Blog learn a ballroom dance, preferably an anti-American dance like the tango.
And if you $150,000 worth of clothes I promise not to wear them.
Grand Commissar (elect)
Monkeyhawk
Freebird when you read this blog doesn’t the inability to understand what is happening in this election scare you.
As a nation we have let a ‘wanna be plumber’ ask a question of a political candidate and watched him being hoisted on the fencepost of liberality. His entire life has been aired and now it has been discovered that the ‘facts’ leaked were illegally obtained.
Still we defend this messiah who wants to be prez. He has cut himself off from contact with the press for over a month now, with the exception of the debate. We have watched the MSM put every possible personal detail they can uncover about a woman who is running for the vice prez position but we are screaming ‘they are lies’ at those who print the truth about Obama’s ties to terrorism and organized crime.
As a nation we are going to get the prez we deserve. I firmly believe that. I hope a year from today the libs are as estatic as they are now. I hope BJ has that hand he always has out filled. I hope farmie finally has her deepest desires become reality.
But more than anything else I hope our nation has healed some of the many wounds we have suffered because of this election. We have seen liberities abused and the left didn’t raise their voice. We have seen the press become a tool of the Obama campaign in spreading lies and the left cheered them on.
I could have been an Obama fan. Used to have some admiration for a young man who came this far. No longer. This man is dangerous. Socialism is destructive. Spreading the wealth is just wrong.
Just to save those here who will claim that I ‘lie’. These are my own personal opinions. Therefore I am allowed to post them without a source.
My being scared will not effect the outcme one way or the other.Like my dad used to say “you play the hand that’s dealt you.” No matter who wins I will do the best I can for those I hold near and dear,it’s all I can do and no amount of worry or fear is going to change a thing.
The Moose-Dresser showed up at a campaign appearance in mom jeans and a hair shirt from “Out of the Closet,” a second-hand store in Anchorage. Wait ’til word gets out to the wing-nuts that “Out of the Closet” is a pun and its profits go to help gay causes.
okob – and how about this “fact”:
Ashley Todd McCain Volunteer Attacked and Mutilated in Pittsburgh (picture)
The 20-year-old-woman pictured above was minding her own business last night as she went up to an ATM in College Station, Texas, to get some money. As she was leaving the machine, a scary, dark figured man spooked his way over to her. She panicked and screamed; the guy wanted her money…$60 total.
Considering the potential horror of the situation, all was well as the guy was allegedly content with just stealing her money. That’s until the guy — 60 bucks richer and with no one else in sight– noticed Ashley Todd had a McCain sticker on her car.
Instead of just leaving her unharmed after robbing her, Todd says the black guy took to a fit of rage after seeing her McCain sticker and decided to beat her down. He then decided to mutilate her face in revenge, carving a backwards B on it…apparently to symbolize Barack Obama.
http://actionnooz.com/news/?p=2112
OOPS! These “facts” were all LIES.
Meanwhile, the facts on “Joe” are truth.
It appears to me the success of Democratic administrations and the failures of Republican administrations leave no options for Republicans but waging a culture war. The Republicans can’t achieve peace, economic stability, exemplary education models, affordable health care for all Americans, respect for science, so attempt to legislate morality. Their hate and intolerance is their only hope.
Under Republicans we’re not only safe from gay marriage, but safe from economic stability, safe from reaching the potential of Americans actually. If the work of religion was left to the churches, what would Republicans have to even speak about? If they attempt conversation about the economy, education, science, the environment, health care, diplomacy they show their incompetence.
Ashley Todd:”McCain PAID me to do it”-Republicans ASHAMED?
The McCain CAMPAIGN WORKER Ashley Todd admitted that John McCain Paid her to LIE
To offset all of the people shouting “Kill Him!” at Palin Rally’s when Palin would mention Obama.
Do you think Republicans are ASHAME?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081024130739AAT8rnw
Commie/Socialist, certaintly NOT a strict Constitutionalist. your pick:
radio interview in which Barack Obama discussed the failure of the Supreme Court to rule on redistributing wealth in its civil rights rulings has given fresh ammunition to critics who say the Democratic presidential candidate has a socialist agenda.
The interview — conducted by Chicago Public Radio in 2001, while Obama was an Illinois state senator and a law professor at the University of Chicago — delves into whether the civil rights movement should have gone further than it did, so that when “dispossessed peoples” appealed to the high court on the right to sit at the lunch counter, they should have also appealed for the right to have someone else pay for the meal.
In the interview, Obama said the civil rights movement was victorious in some regards, but failed to create a “redistributive change” in its appeals to the Supreme Court, led at the time by Chief Justice Earl Warren. He suggested that such change should occur at the state legislature level, since the courts did not interpret the U.S. Constitution to permit such change.
“The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical,” Obama said in the interview, a recording of which surfaced on the Internet over the weekend.
“It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.
“And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way — that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted.
“And I think one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was that the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and organizing activities on the ground that are able to bring about the coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still suffer from that,” Obama said.”
It’s not really extraordinary or newsworthy that a young white girl, working away from home, fabricated a story about being attacked and sexually assaulted by a larger black man she invented in a bid to get attention. It is newsworthy that her sketchy story garnered so much outrage and political spin before being almost immediately recanted. What is most newsworthy however is that John McCain’s campaign worked to make it newsworthy in an effort to divide Americans, bait racial conflict, and inflame outrage at great risk to Americans themselves.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/10/25/mccain-palin-push-ashley-todd-into-limelight-oops/
Ben I will give you that she fabricated a lie and spread it. The press figured this out and reported on it. Actually I suspected it when the B was backwards. She has mental issues. Still she broke a law an should be charged.
Now what do you say about the reporter who lied about the taunts he claimed were being yelled at a Palin rally. It was proved to be a blatant lie. No witness could be found who could agree it happened or identify the culprit. How widely has this deception been spread? Where is the outrage from the left that this lie was told to make McCains supporters look rabid?
Ben this election should have been over months ago. The left hasn’t been able to close it because there is a problem with their candidate. I hope ‘we told you so’ isn’t heard from the right this time next year.
“To be useful, those inquiries must be broken into parts. The GOP is in bad shape; conservatism is not.”
The above from here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/26/AR2008102601764.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
While the title of this article looked appealing it is basically a redo of the argument, “if conservatives, were truly conservative, or more conservative, they’d win”.
I believe this is a fundamentally flawed argument and it is a myth that I hope you guys hold on to.
As Ralph Nadar’s father asked and answered, “which type of economy will always survive?” “Capitolism, because socialism will always be used to revive it.” Bank, market bailouts anyone?
I believe and I am sure there are people in disagreement here, the tenets of conservatism under the tenure of G.W. Bush have been shown to be totally unuseful. Now, this is where someone is supposed to post the G.W. Bush is not a conservative and the conservative agenda has never really been tried – talking point… [Thank you, Thomas Frank for that last one]
Love this from the same source as above:
“The massive collapse in confidence in our financial, political, educational and intelligence institutions is among the most important developments of our time; positioning conservatives as the advocates for modern, accountable and responsive institutions would produce a governing blueprint that meets the challenges of this era and begins to win back public confidence.”
Hell yes, when someone robs you and burns your house to the ground, one always looks to the perpetrator of the crime for some help. I swear, you can’t make this stuff up.
All students enrolled in public education should be preassigned a grade of “C” in all their studies.
All students should pass at the same level.
All Americans should be given the same amount of income. All Americans should have the same amount of money to spend.
From each according to his ability, to each and every American according to his need.
okob – perhaps if the McCain campaign and their media sycophants had not pushed the Ashley Todd story as true so much it would not matter as much. Has Hannity retracted?
here’s a New York Times story from September 2003, clearly showing that the first substantive Fannie and Freddie reform from inside government came from the Bush administration. Spurred by worries that Fannie and Freddie were cooking their books and taking too many risks, Treasury Secretary John Snow proposed placing the companies under Treasury oversight with strict controls over risk and capital reserves. The NYT labeled the proposal “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago” and noted:
Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.
So five years ago, there was one of those rare moments in Washington when the branches and personalities of government—in this case, the Bush administration—are less interested in protecting or expanding their turf than in fixing a looming catastrophe. What was Frank’s response to the proposal?
“These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
“Their hate and intolerance is their only hope.”
Linda this is so you and yet you tell us daily how ‘tolerant’ and ‘accepting’ you are. Where is this tolerance. Is it when you accept my faith and don’t call me and others like me names. Is it when you are so intolerant of the right that you can’t even carry on a discussion with me because I disagree with you on several issues. It it when you have secret luncheons and come back with your group think to excoriate the right for the rest of the day.
Please don’t talk to me about tolerance until you practice it. Civil discussions can be had here. I do it with Ben most of the time but you can’t start by calling the other side hateful and intolerant.
“We have seen liberities abused and the left didn’t raise their voice. ”
BS! Thousands of us were opposing the Bush administration’s attacks on our Constitutional Rights from day one.
It is the mocking extremists who use words like “Messiah” to describe Senator Obama, not his supporters. We think he is a top-of-the-line American offering change to the political landscape we all know is desperately needed. You want a ‘maverick’? It’s Sen. Obama. Not the old man.
You criticize the press for looking closely at a woman who could be President if a 72 year old man fall ill? You suggest that maybe the press should NOT look at her life and views? Surely not. (She thinks dinosaurs lived a short time ago and that your wife should be forced bear her rapist’s child…)
As for the smear du jour: “socialist”, keep trying only a few more days to find a lie that will stick.
bth
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:59 am | Permalink
okob – perhaps if the McCain campaign and their media sycophants had not pushed the Ashley Todd story as true so much it would not matter as much. Has Hannity retracted?
————-
Ben it is ironic that from what I wrote acknowledging that the right took this story on its face as true that you would then bring up one newsman, Sean Hannity and ask if he had retracted the story.
Where did you show your outrage that lies were told about McCains and Palins supporters, one of those by Obama in the debate? Outrage can’t be onesided.
You might ask yourself on how many stations did you see the name calling story. Was there an FBI investigation into the B story? You are a smart man Ben but today I think the left has developed a terminal case of myopic vision.
This campaign can’t be about issues. Who said that?
Rick Davis, campaign manager for John McCain’s presidential bid, insisted that the presidential race will be decided more over personalities than issues during an interview with Post editors this morning.
“This election is not about issues,” said Davis. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.”
“one of those by Obama in the debate?”
And what lie did Obama make?
Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
“To be useful, those inquiries must be broken into parts. The GOP is in bad shape; conservatism is not.”
—
I agree with this statement! If (and that is a BIG if) “conservatism” had the same meaning that brought glory to The Grand Old Party. If “social issues” were left in the churches where they belong.
But that would mean they would need to concentrate on issues. Can’t do that! Republican administrations have failed too often to make this election about important issues.
Looks like Biden didn’t like being asked tough questions…
Obama campaign cuts off WFTV after interview with Joe Biden
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2008/10/obama-campaign.html
Ben do you remember the remark he made about the McCain supporters at the Palin rally. He referenced the very incident that was proved to be false the next day.
The lie I remember most is when he said he didn’t announce his candidacy for the state senate in Ayers living room. This was a bold faced lie. It has been proven by what the people around him at that time said. Before Ayers became a liability and it wasn’t a good thing to be connected to him.
Linda I don’t agree with this one man and his opinion. It has to be about issues. We can’t elect a good debater or a handsome man or a good personalty. We have to elect a person with the ability to lead. With a clear cut vision of where this nation has to go.
Is that person running, probably not.
#
bth
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:59 am | Permalink
okob – perhaps if the McCain campaign and their media sycophants had not pushed the Ashley Todd story as true so much it would not matter as much. Has Hannity retracted?
=====================
Yeah, how dare the McCain campaign thought the young lady was telling the truth.
To the fine conservatives on the blog…for you;
“So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, good night,
I hate to go and leave this pretty sight.
So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, adieu,
Adieu, adieu, to yieu and yieu and yieu.
I’m off to the sunny and warm south-land for a week of trade show and meetings. Not much time for the blog….fortunately.
To the DimLibs;
I know you’ll miss me but for once in your miserable lives suck it up and act like adults instead of the spoiled children you are, ha!
Linda you have just posted something I completely agree with. Social issues should be left out of the public forum. They should be left out of our public schools. Left in the churches – not so sure. Shouldn’t a Christian have the right to have their opinion heard in the public square if a atheist, or buddist, or muslim, or you fill in the _____________ gets to voice their opinion.
Why should only Christians be silenced. Why shouldn’t you be tolerant of my position?
In a democratic society we should all have the right to voice our opinions, we should all be free from persecution because of this. On this we can agree.
“okobserver” –
I would trust you’ve been a participant in the forum long enough to know that I refer to everyone by the nym they choose to use.
If you’re really upset about posters calling other posters names, I expect you to severely criticize “Regular” next time he draws out his little “MonkeyHock” epithet. Next time “Boxlock” drags out stuff like his favorite “Lezzie-carpet-munching-chicken-dung-pig,” I’m sure you will summon up your moral outrage and denounce such behavior, right?
Where I sometimes show intolerance for religiosity is when certain practitioners of theology drag the God Card into what should be a discussion of secular policy.
Your creed or dogma or catechism or theology can govern your moral compass and help you achieve a personal philosophy all you want. But in the United States, we’re not supposed to accept “Because I think God thinks so,” as civil law.
As I’ve said many times, I am a Lapsed Agnostic; I’m not sure what it is I don’t believe in. But just about every fundamentalist of any religion seems hell-bent to convince me I’m not one of them. If nothing else, this election season has been about CONs trying to brand Barack Obama as an “Other.” That doesn’t seem like the message Jesus tried to teach, but your
messiahmileage may vary.““The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society,” Barack Obama
Where is any of that in the US Constitution?
Oh boy. . .yet more Fixed News “spin.” I hope Chicago Public Radio posts the real story.
Linda,
That is the truth. Most people who are interviewed have no clue about the issues.
Why are you voting for Obama?
He is black.
He will be the first black President.
He speaks very well.
He wants change, so do I.
Those are the types of generic answers you get when asking people why they support Obama.
Here’s Chicago Public Radio, audio link on page:
http://apps.wbez.org/blog/?p=372
This act (the Federal Reserve Act)
establishes the most gigantic trust on Earth…
When the President signs this act,
the invisible government by the money power,
proven to exist by the Money Trust Investigation,
will be legalized…
The new law will create inflation
whenever the trusts want inflation…”
Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr.
December, 1913
“IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY
WE HAVE IN EFFECT TWO GOVERNMENTS…
We have the duly constituted government…
Then we have an independent,
uncontrolled and uncoordinated government
in the Federal Reserve System,
operating the money powers
reserved to Congress by the Constitution.”
- Congressman Wright Patman,
(former) Chairman of the House Banking Committee
“Those that create and issue the money and credit
direct the policies of government
and hold in their hands
the destiny of the people.”
Reginald McKenna,
(former) president of the Midlands Bank of England.
lol.. a chopped up interview… discussing the Warren Court. Not a lot of Marxism being discussed.
I suppose one could say that raising the minimum wage is a form of “wealth redistribution.” When I get a merit raise, some wealth has been redistributed.
But Governor TWINKIE uses phrases like “your proerty will be collectively owned” Where the F*** does that hogwash come from? Just make it up and run with it Republicans.
After the election, I predict a split in the Republican Party. The moderates (who will probably get some appointments from an Obama Adminstration), and a far-right Radical Extremist splinter group of former Republicans.
This could get ugly…
A Centerpiece of Iraqi Reconstruction:
A huge American-financed wastewater treatment plant in the desert city of Falluja ..was supposed to be the centerpiece of an effort to rebuild Iraq, a country smashed by war and neglect, and bring Western standards of sanitation.
Instead, the project, which has tripled in cost from original plans to $100 million and has fallen about three years behind schedule, has become an example of the failed and often oversold program to rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure with American dollars and skill.
The project was so poorly conceived that there is no reliable electricity to run pumps and purification tanks, and no money left to connect homes to the main sewer lines, which now run uselessly beneath Falluja’s streets, according to a report by federal investigators to be released Monday.
“Heck of a job, George!”
The team who is “fighting for Joe the Plumber”:
The Republicans’ attempt to make the case that Barack Obama is hoity-toity and they’re hoi polloi has fallen under the sheer weight of the stunning numbers:
The McCains own 13 cars, eight homes and access to a corporate jet, and Cindy had her Marie Antoinette moment at the convention. Vanity Fair calculated that her outfit cost $300,000, with three-carat diamond earrings worth $280,000, an Oscar de la Renta dress valued at $3,000, a Chanel white ceramic watch clocking in at $4,500 and a four-strand pearl necklace worth between $11,000 and $25,000. While presenting herself as an I’m-just-like-you hockey mom frugal enough to put the Alaska state plane up for sale on eBay, Palin made her big speech at the convention wearing a $2,500 cream silk Valentino jacket that the McCain staff had gotten her at Saks. – http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26dowd.html?em
GOP Panics As Polls Show Tight Race In AZ
By Reid Wilson
A rash of new polls in Arizona shows a tightening presidential race, a situation that has even some Republican strategists seriously fretting the possibility that John McCain could lose his home state.
Polls taken for both parties now show the Arizona senator leading Democratic nominee Barack Obama by a slim margin and within the margin of error. The surveys come as Obama builds his national lead and Republicans on all levels brace for what may prove to be a second tidal wave election that hands Democrats huge majorities in both chambers of Congress.
More here:
http://www.azcapitoltimes.com/story.cfm?id=9704
“Halloween decoration showing a mannequin dressed as vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hanging by a noose from the roof of a West Hollywood home is drawing giggles from some passers-by and gasps of outrage from others.
The mannequin is dressed in brunet wig, glasses and a red business suit. Another mannequin dressed as John McCain emerges from a flaming chimney.
Chad Michael Morisette, who lives in the house, told CBS 2 News that drivers and bus passengers have been stopping to snap pictures of the macabre scene.
Morisette says the effigy would be out of bounds at any other time of year, but it’s within the spirit of Halloween.
He says “it should be seen as art, and as within the month of October. It’s Halloween, it’s time to be scary it’s time to be spooky.”
(© 2008 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)”
I guess It’s okay if you are a Democrat. Can you imagine the Hue and cry if it was a figure of Obama? In either case? Hanging by a noose, or emerging from a flaming chimney?
I personally think while the above is tastless, it is not really a big deal. But can you imagine if a Republican did this? Outrage across the land!!
guess It’s okay if you are a Democrat. Can you imagine the Hue and cry if it was a figure of Obama? In either case? Hanging by a noose, or emerging from a flaming chimney?
Tasteless, yes. I wouldn’t have done it, and like outrageous things.
But when you compare it to Obama in a noose, you’re forgetting that people who looked like him were regularly and publicly hung for little or no reason at all—and not that long ago. Or the openly racist attacks on Obama we’ve seen on Obama, just this year.
I’m not sure what that says about you.
Tacky? You bet. But I don’t think anyone would mistake a Halloween display as demonstration of violent intent. You’re really grasping for straws. lj.
LJ,
I started reading your post and said “So what? It is their front yard to do with as they please.”
Then you added Obama. You nailed it. Put an Obama effigy swinging from a noose and all hell would break loose. Good call.
AmWay posted >>>>
“All Americans should be given the same amount of income. All Americans should have the same amount of money to spend.
From each according to his ability, to each and every American according to his need.”
__________________________________________
Ummm… The first statement makes NO sense whatever…. The second statement is a DIRECT contradiction of the first….
From each according to his ability…. ABILITY… not equality….
To each according to his need…. NOT EQUALITY…. but NEED…
The inability to see the two statements is fairly good proof that AmWay, and others have NO concept of the socialism that they project so much in their hateful comments….
Must be time for a gret American re-education program in basic history….
Then you added Obama. You nailed it. Put an Obama effigy swinging from a noose and all hell would break loose. Good call.
Ah, yes, more racial awareness. Geez, Sol, haven’t you been to Detroit?
Can you imagine the Hue and cry if it was a figure of Obama? In either case? Hanging by a noose, or emerging from a flaming chimney?
Well maybe tar and feathered would be o.k.. by their book too.
“You have been tried by twelve good men and true, not of your peers but as high above you as heaven is of hell, and they have said you are guilty. Time will pass and seasons will come and go. Spring with its wavin’ green grass and heaps of sweet-smellin’ flowers on every hill and in every dale. Then sultry Summer, with her shimmerin’ heat-waves on the baked horizon. And Fall, with her yeller harvest moon and the hills growin’ brown and golden under a sinkin’ sun. And finally Winter, with its bitin’, whinin’ wind, and all the land will be mantled with snow. But you won’t be here to see any of ‘em; not by a damn sight, because it’s the order of this court that you be took to the nearest tree and hanged by the neck til you’re dead, dead, dead, you olive-colored son of a billy goat.”
Judge Roy Bean
Chas you are all the proof I need to demonstrate the socialist nature of the upcoming incarnation.
But when you compare it to Obama in a noose, you’re forgetting that people who looked like him were regularly and publicly hung for little or no reason at all—and not that long ago. Or the openly racist attacks on Obama we’ve seen on Obama, just this year.
I’m not sure what that says about you.
Tacky? You bet. But I don’t think anyone would mistake a Halloween display as demonstration of violent intent. You’re really grasping for straws. lj.
Okay, I will change my posting. Because of the “racial” component. If it was Biden hanging from a noose, their would be a hue and cry througout the nation. It is only conjecture, but my guess is that it would be true. Not thinking of Obama as a “black man”, but rather a Presidnential candidate was my undoing, I guess. Sorry for the gaffe. Can’t treat people the same because of their race, that’s for sure.
And I understand the significance of what you are saying. Which is why I changed the proposal.
One guy in Hollywood puts up a tacky Halloween display, and you compare that to Republican officials using openly racist images?
News flash: Sol got the first part right. He’s one guy. Barack Obama did not approve his meesage.
Get over it.
Monkey I think you must have misread what I posted. I wasn’t talking about the play on names that I play ocassionally and which some on here do daily, I was talking about the attutitude of hate and intolerance while lambasting the other side for doing what you yourself just did. This from a person that your KFG calls germie daily.
We are no better than those who rail against us if we do this. Just because we say we are tolerant doesn’t make it so. When our actions scream so loudly that you aren’t.
When I have said I am against same sex marriage and have many times given my reasons for this I am called hateful and intolerant. When I have said we need to stop the social engineering that goes on in our schools I am called closed minded and hate filled. What happened to a country where we had elections based on the content of the character of the candidates? Where we discussed issues and the constitutionality of a position.
In short what happened to the political process where civility reigned and we knew that in 4 short years there would be another cast of characters and we would start the process again.
If it was Biden hanging from a noose, their would be a hue and cry througout the nation. It is only conjecture, but my guess is that it would be true.
There will be a little buzz about it–kinda like we’re seeing here–and I would still be yawning. . .
Wall Street Journal on the ACORN fraud and a possible Obama connection.
Of course, the latest tactic by democrats is to put the fear of God into any state which even DARES to investigate the reports of fraud. They call that voter repression.
Obama and Acorn
Community organizers, phony voters, and your tax dollars.Article
At the recent Emmy Awards, historian Laura Linney averred that America’s Founders had been “community organizers” — like Barack Obama. Too bad they aren’t like that any more. Mr. Obama’s kind of organizers work at Acorn, the militant advocacy group that is turning up in reports about voter fraud across the country.
APAcorn — the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — has been around since 1970 and boasts 350,000 members. We’ve written about them for years, but Acorn is now getting more attention as John McCain’s campaign makes an issue of the fraud reports and Acorn’s ties to Mr. Obama. It’s about time someone exposed this shady outfit that uses government dollars to lobby for larger government.
Acorn uses various affiliated groups to agitate for “a living wage,” for “affordable housing,” for “tax justice” and union and environmental goals, as well as against school choice and welfare reform. It was a major contributor to the subprime meltdown by pushing lenders to make home loans on easy terms, conducting “strikes” against banks so they’d lower credit standards.
But the organization’s real genius is getting American taxpayers to foot the bill. According to a 2006 report from the Employment Policies Institute (EPI), Acorn has been on the federal take since 1977. For instance, Acorn’s American Institute for Social Justice claimed $240,000 in tax money between fiscal years 2002 and 2003. Its American Environmental Justice Project received 100% of its revenue from government grants in the same years. EPI estimates the Acorn Housing Corporation alone received some $16 million in federal dollars from 1997-2007. Only recently, Democrats tried and failed to stuff an “affordable housing” provision into the $700 billion bank rescue package that would have let politicians give even more to Acorn.
All this money gives Acorn the ability to pursue its other great hobby: electing liberals. Acorn is spending $16 million this year to register new Democrats and is already boasting it has put 1.3 million new voters on the rolls. The big question is how many of these registrations are real.
The Michigan Secretary of State told the press in September that Acorn had submitted “a sizeable number of duplicate and fraudulent applications.” Earlier this month, Nevada’s Democratic Secretary of State Ross Miller requested a raid on Acorn’s offices, following complaints of false names and fictional addresses (including the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys). Nevada’s Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said he saw rampant fraud in 2,000 to 3,000 applications Acorn submitted weekly.
Officials in Ohio are investigating voter fraud connected with Acorn, and Florida’s Seminole County is withholding Acorn registrations that appear fraudulent. New Mexico, North Carolina and Missouri are looking into hundreds of dubious Acorn registrations. Wisconsin is investigating Acorn employees for, according to an election official, “making people up or registering people that were still in prison.”
Then there’s Lake County, Indiana, which has already found more than 2,100 bogus applications among the 5,000 Acorn dumped right before the deadline. “All the signatures looked exactly the same,” said Ruthann Hoagland, of the county election board. Bridgeport, Connecticut estimates about 20% of Acorn’s registrations were faulty. As of July, the city of Houston had rejected or put on hold about 40% of the 27,000 registration cards submitted by Acorn.
That’s just this year. In 2004, four Acorn employees were indicted in Ohio for submitting false voter registrations. In 2005, two Colorado Acorn workers were found to have submitted false registrations. Four Acorn Missouri employees were indicted in 2006; five were found guilty in Washington state in 2007 for filling out registration forms with names from a phone book.
Which brings us to Mr. Obama, who got his start as a Chicago “community organizer” at Acorn’s side. In 1992 he led voter registration efforts as the director of Project Vote, which included Acorn. This past November, he lauded Acorn’s leaders for being “smack dab in the middle” of that effort. Mr. Obama also served as a lawyer for Acorn in 1995, in a case against Illinois to increase access to the polls.
During his tenure on the board of Chicago’s Woods Fund, that body funneled more than $200,000 to Acorn. More recently, the Obama campaign paid $832,000 to an Acorn affiliate. The campaign initially told the Federal Election Commission this money was for “staging, sound, lighting.” It later admitted the cash was to get out the vote.
The Obama campaign is now distancing itself from Acorn, claiming Mr. Obama never organized with it and has nothing to do with illegal voter registration. Yet it’s disingenuous to channel cash into an operation with a history of fraud and then claim you’re shocked to discover reports of fraud. As with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers, Mr. Obama was happy to associate with Acorn when it suited his purposes. But now that he’s on the brink of the Presidency, he wants to disavow his ties.
The Justice Department needs to treat these fraud reports as something larger than a few local violators. The question is whether Acorn is systematically subverting U.S. election law — on the taxpayer’s dime.
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 12:19 pm | Permalink
If it was Biden hanging from a noose, their would be a hue and cry througout the nation. It is only conjecture, but my guess is that it would be true.
There will be a little buzz about it–kinda like we’re seeing here–and I would still be yawning. . .
——————————
Hanging no…
Perhaps set ablaze and burned in effigy…
You Obamaites gotta admit that if there were an Obama-like effigy swinging from a tree…it’d be “rascist”.
Someone NEEDS to do it now.
Almost Everyone Would Do Better Under the McCain Health Plan
His tax credit is larger than the current tax subsidy for insurance.
Consider the family of four shown in the chart nearby, assumed to purchase a $14,000 health insurance policy. The straight line reflects what the family would get under the $5,000 McCain tax credit. The lower line shows the value of the current income tax exclusion, which rises and falls with a taxpayer’s tax rate.
What is striking about this picture — and contradicts Mr. Obama’s public comments — is that the McCain tax credit for the purchase of health insurance exceeds the value of the current exclusion for all income levels shown. Indeed, it generally provides more resources to purchase health insurance than the existing exclusion. The total subsidy for health care would rise from about $3.6 trillion over 10 years today to roughly $5 trillion under his proposal.
SEE THE GRAPH HERE:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122506862956370705.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Someone NEEDS to do it now.
Really? Why is that?
Boortz
“Barack Obama’s core belief is that we belong not to ourselves, but to government. We are tools that the government is free to use to bring about what Obama calls “economic justice.” The fruits of our labor belong to government … and government can do with them what it pleases.”
http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html
Pleefer when will we ever look at the heart of man and see ‘the content of their character and not the color of their skin’?
Is MLK turning over in his grave to see what this election has turned into. Race riots if Obama loses, race riots if he wins. We are living in a sick nation and we need to be healed. What will that take?
What will that take?
Four years of Obama’s brand of socialism. The GOP realligning back to its roots. Landslide victory in 2012 for a true conservative?
When I have said I am against same sex marriage and have many times given my reasons for this I am called hateful and intolerant.
You have yet to offer any explanation for that position, even when cornered. I’ll ask again: why is someone else’s legal contract any of your business?
Race riots if Obama loses, race riots if he wins.
Huh? Where are you getting that? You really think the white bigots will be that upset?
Check out the PDF at this link. Looks like a Procedure Manual.
Say JR, you were looking for a high paying job to shoot em up:
http://government.zdnet.com/?p=4143
October 27th, 2008
Army voices Twitter fears
Not sure which side JR would be on.
See, Obama is a Socialist:
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/27/radio-interview-obama-laments-lack-supreme-court-ruling-redistributing-wealth/
Obama, in 2001 Interview, Lamented Failure of Civil Rights Movement to Redistribute Wealth
In a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama said the civil rights movement failed when it became so dependent on the Supreme Court that it never got around to working toward redistributing income.
Can we FINALLY get a
“Obama The Socialist, Not Such A Bad Thing”
post from the Eagle?
Racists For Obama?
Politico: Obama Coalition Appears To Include Whites With Negative Views Of African Americans
(The Politico) This story was written by Ben Smith.
New polling and a trickle of stories from the battleground states suggest that Sen. Barack Obama’s coalition includes one unlikely group: white voters with negative views of African Americans.
Race has become the elephant in the room of the 2008 presidential campaign, with Obama’s prospect of becoming the first black president drawing some Americans closer to him while pushing others away. At times, the contest has slipped into a familiar dynamic of allegations of racism and outraged denial – but it’s also challenged some easy assumptions about race, racism and prejudice.
“What you see is it’s perfectly possible to hold a negative view of at least one aspect of African Americans and yet simultaneously prefer Obama,” said Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “Racial feelings are not as cut and dried – not as black and white – as people often say.”
Franklin explored those contradictions in a large, national survey taken in mid-September, when the Illinois Democratic senator’s rival, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), led in many polls and the nation’s economic woes had not yet produced a deep crisis. The poll asked voters whether they agreed with the statement that “African Americans often use race as an excuse to justify wrongdoing.” About a fifth of white voters said they “strongly agreed.” Yet among those who agreed, 23 percent said they’d be supporting Obama.
“This result is reasonable if you believe that race is not as monolithic an effect as we might easily assume,” Franklin said, noting that 22 percent of those who “strongly disagreed” said they’d be supporting McCain.
Anecdotes from across the battlegrounds suggest that there’s a significant minority of prejudiced white voters who will swallow hard and vote for the black man.
“I wouldn’t want a mixed marriage for my daughter, but I’m voting for Obama,” the wife of a retired Virginia coal miner, Sharon Fleming, told the Los Angeles Times recently.
One Obama volunteer told Politico after canvassing the working-class white Philadelphia neighborhood of Fishtown recently, “I was blown away by the outright racism, but these folks are … undecided. They would call him a [racial epithet] and mention how they don’t know what to do because of the economy.”
The notion that there might be “racists for Obama,” as one Democrat called them, comes against the backdrop of a country whose white voters largely accept the notion of a black president.
Racial feelings are not as cut and dried – not as black and white – as people often say.
Political scientist Charles Franklin
“The economy is trumping racism,” said Kurt Schmoke, the dean of Howard University Law School and a former Baltimore mayor. “A lot of people who we might think wouldn’t vote their pocketbook because of race – now they are.”
“If you go to a white neighborhood in the suburbs and ask them, ‘How would you feel about a large black man kicking your door in,’ they would say, ‘That doesn’t sound good to me,’” said Democratic political consultant Paul Begala. “But if you say, ‘Your house is on fire, and the firefighter happens to be black,’ it’s a different situation.
“The house is on fire, and one guy seems like he’s calm and confident and in charge, and that’s the only option,” he said.
That is, in less dramatic terms, more or less the campaign’s official talking point, a version of the longtime Democratic hope that class will – or at least should – matter more than race.
“Voters are less interested in the hot button and are more interested in the cooling economy,” said Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), an Obama ally who is as on-message as his father is off.
But other, more nuanced, questions of race are also in play.
One senior congressional Democrat mused about prejudice among his own supporters. “They’ve all got one black friend,” he said, “and they won’t stop talking about their black friend.”
“That’s Obama,” he said.
And some argue that elements of Obama’s story and persona make him specifically acceptable to voters who hold broadly negative views of African Americans.
“Not all whites associate the generic African American with Obama,” said Ron Walters, a longtime student of race and politics and aide to the senior Jesse Jackson’s presidential campaigns. “They give him credit for having half a Caucasian ancestry, and give him credit for his education, and give him credit for his obvious ability to take complex subjects and parse them.”
The geography of racial conflict and tolerance has been a strong overlay of the electoral map. Obama has run better than past Democrats in prosperous states with little history of tension, such as Colorado and Iowa, and worse in working-class states in the Appalachian belt. His campaign has been structured around this dynamic and may actually have overestimated the number of white Democrats in the region unwilling to vote for him because of his race. Obama had ignored West Virginia, for instance, until a spate of positive polls prompted him to start advertising there this week.
Obama has also ignored Southern states with a history of deep racial division, from Arkansas to Missisissippi, in favor of those that have seen an influx of new voters from the north – Virginia, North Carolina and Florida.
Until this fall, both campaigns viewed Michigan – a heavily Democratic state, but one with a history of tension between Detroit and its white suburbs – as Obama’s Achilles’ heel. In 2006, the state was deeply divided by a referendum to ban affirmative action. The measure was opposed by most African-American voters as an assault on hard-won gains, but it won broad support among whites and passed by a double-digit margin.
But earlier this month, McCain gave up the state for lost as economic concerns appear to have trumped racial ones.
“Obama’s personality – his speech, his look – he provides [white voters] with a non-threatening way to move forward on this issue, and that’s a very positive development,” said David Waymire, who led the unsuccessful opposition to the anti-affirmative action initiative. “He is not Kwame Kilpatrick,” he said, referring to the Detroit mayor who resigned last month after pleading guilty in a sex and misconduct scandal.
For black observers of American politics in particular, Obama’s ability to win over voters who harbor negative views of African Americans at large is a complex, but hopeful, sign.
“I didn’t think the election itself is necessarily going to transport a lot of people, but I’ve been changing my view on that a bit lately,” said Walters. “I’ve been in personal circumstances where I said to myself, ‘I wonder if this person sees me differently because a black person is about to be the president of the United States?’”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/18/politics/politico/main4530664.shtml
Someone needs to do it in order to show the hypocrisy of ALL of this.
Or else there needs to be some hard-hitting marches in the street to object to the Palin thing.
I’m much too tired to argue, it’s been a long weekend with sick kid’s.
You’re a rascist if you want Obama to win and a rascist if you don’t.
okobserver posted October 27, 2008 at 10:39 am
I could have been an Obama fan. Used to have some admiration for a young man who came this far. No longer. This man is dangerous. Socialism is destructive. Spreading the wealth is just wrong.
———–
McCain was agin the 39.6% to 36% tax cut, but now he’s fer it.
And he’s attacking Obama for ending a temporary tax cut that he (McCain) was agin earlier.
New McCain Rips Old McCain’s Argument That Bush Tax Cuts Benefit The ‘Wealthy’
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/17/mccain-wealthy-taxes/
“Now that he has to court the hardline anti-tax factions of the conservative movement, McCain is changing his story on tax policy. In 2000, 2001, and 2003, McCain was one of the people “interested” in talking about “who the, quote, ‘wealthy’ are in America” when he argued against Bush’s tax cuts that “mostly benefit the wealthy“:
“There’s one big difference between me and the others – I won’t take every last dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy.” [McCain campaign commercial, January 2000]
“I am disappointed that the Senate Finance Committee preferred instead to cut the top tax rate of 39.6% to 36%, thereby granting generous tax relief to the wealthiest individuals of our country at the expense of lower- and middle-income American taxpayers.” [McCain Senate floor statement, May 21, 2001]
“But when you look at the percentage of the tax cuts that – as the previous tax cuts – that go to the wealthiest Americans, you will find that the bulk of it, again, goes to wealthiest Americans.” [NBC’s “Today,” Jan. 7, 2003]
McCain now appears more interested in protecting the “wealthy” than he does in straight talk.”
Rage I don’t have time to go into it now because I have gone into it ad nauseum over and over again. No gay or lesbian person has been denied anything that a straight person has been given. When the definition of marriage is opened up to include other alliances then where do we draw the line. Who will determine that only straight gay people have the right to marriage. Will we redefine marriage so that it has no definition.
Now you don’t have to agree with my reasons as you say you don’t. I don’t have to agree with you on same sex marriage, on abortion, on other social issues that have no business in the public eye. We do however have to vote on issues that will affect everyones lifes. The economy, justice appointments, freedoms we currently have that might go away such as right to bear arms, freedom of speech, etc.. We have plenty of things we can agree to disagree on that we can do something about. I just happen to feel these are more important than same sex marriage. My choice. My opinion.
BTW more that 70% of voters also agree with me which is why you are still arguing this point. The election was held. Your side lost. Unless you lived in CA and the judges overturned the will of the people.
How about a McCain the Socialist thread http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oURZEy24fwM
Gosh, why would there be riots if Obama lost?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-trice-27-oct27,0,3834559.column
Obama, McCain should lead us beyond whispers of riots
Dawn Turner Trice
October 27, 2008
If Sen. Barack Obama wins the presidential election, he will have a major party in Chicago’s Grant Park with thousands upon thousands of celebrants. You can imagine that the police presence will be breathtakingly tight.
But police departments around the country are gearing up in case Obama doesn’t win. The thinking is that because of the historic nature of his candidacy, there may be riots if supporters feel the election was stolen.
Ahh, another day in Democrat Controlled Hi-Taxed Michigan.
And you thought YOU were having a Bad Day:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,444191,00.html
Man Shot, Robbed of Final Paycheck on Day He’s Laid Off Monday, October 27, 2008
DETROIT — A 37-year-old man who had been laid off from his job at a plant in Saginaw was shot in Detroit by a robber who made off with about $1,700 — the sum of the victim’s final paycheck from his job.
WDIV-TV and the Detroit Free Press report Brad Mannie said he stopped Friday night at a store with his 12-year-old son. After they got back into their vehicle, a robber shot Mannie in the hip and took his wallet.
Earlier that day, the Inkster man had been laid off from his production and maintenance job at Stress-Con Industries Inc.
Despite the ordeal, Mannie says he’s just happy to be alive.
“I’ll ask again: why is someone else’s legal contract any of your business?”
I’ll take a stab at this one, even though I would be in favor of a civil union for gays.
As an official tightwad, if two males/females were allowed to form a legal contract – that contract may entitle them to the benefits normally allowed for a married couple. For instance healthcare insurance at work. This would cost my employer more money. That is money that would not be available for ME. At the federal level, that might include the UnEarned Income Tax Credit, or Social Security entitlements based upon a spouse. Again, this would decrease the money available for others, which would increase costs for everyone. Again me.
Selfish? Maybe. But it is my money, at least until you justify taking it using your federal bible.
See I told you so, Obama is a Socialist!
SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND!!!
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/27/radio-interview-obama-laments-lack-supreme-court-ruling-redistributing-wealth/
Obama, in 2001 Interview, Lamented Failure of Civil Rights Movement to Redistribute Wealth
In a radio interview in 2001, Barack Obama said the civil rights movement failed when it became so dependent on the Supreme Court that it never got around to working toward redistributing income.
Can we FINALLY get a
“Obama The Socialist, Not Such A Bad Thing”
post from the Eagle?
(AND NOT ONE TIAHRT AMENDMENT THREAD IN THE LAST 3 MONTHS! COME ON BROWNLEE – WHY DON’T YOU BASH THE 2ND AMENDMENT AGAIN JUST BEFORE ELECTION DAY?)
(Chas taught me how to use ALL CAPS!)
ROFLMAO!!!
sNort sNort
Then to be fair, ‘straight’ married folk should not get the benefits either. That would save even more of your money right?
No gay or lesbian person has been denied anything that a straight person has been given.
Anyone with common sense knows that’s 100% false.
When the definition of marriage is opened up to include other alliances then where do we draw the line.
With human beings, maybe? But people like you obviously view gay people as less than human.
Who will determine that only straight gay people have the right to marriage. Will we redefine marriage so that it has no definition.
Did that gibberish make sense even to you?
Look it’s simple: if you’re bothered by the religious implications of the “M” word being applied to gay people, take it out of government. Civil unions for all. Problem solved.
BTW more that 70% of voters also agree with me which is why you are still arguing this point. The election was held. Your side lost. Unless you lived in CA and the judges overturned the will of the people.
I live in Arizona where a similar amendment was defeated two years ago. Unfortunately, the fanatics are trying again this year. Sigh. . .
Pretty feeble defense of Obama, Tom.
Your post was as effective as a toothpick at a lesbian toystore.
Sol there is a case to be made for this and I have said before that maybe the gov should get out of the ‘blessing the union’ business. I would be fine with letting marriage be a religious ceremony.
I would be fine with not giving survivor benefits to a spouse if the gov gets their paws out of my pocket and allows me to keep my own money and put it away for my spouse to survive on if I am gone.
What right here would same sex marriages be denied. Legally you can do anything you want to assign survivors, beneficiaries, legal rights, tenants in common, and on and on and on… The strawman argument that same sex marriage is the be all to end all is just that an argument with no substance. It is an ‘in your face you bigoted, narrow minded, hatefilled, intolerant, right wingnut’.
The people voted. They, by a large majority don’t want it. Why is it so important to you that we create another class of victims. Those like farmie who are so innocent and helpless you know. Matthew Shepherd was a victim of animals dressed up to look like human beings. They aren’t representative of the human race thank God.
Not my job to defend Obama, just pointing out the fact that McCain and Obama are a lot more alike than they are different espiacally on the economy
LOL!!! Gay marriage is more EXPENSIVE than heterosexual marriage? WHAHAHA!!!!!!
Ban all marriage and benefits if you want to save money!! LOL LOL.
Lame and illogical.
“Sol there is a case to be made for this and I have said before that maybe the gov should get out of the ‘blessing the union’ business. I would be fine with letting marriage be a religious ceremony.”
What the HUH?? The Government has NEVER been in the “blessing the union” business. The CHURCH “blesses the union” for which the Government gives License.
Churches do NOT issue marriage licenses… If you dont know that, that shows you to be out of touch….
BTW, heterosexual marriage, as defined by the LAW, alread IS a “civil” union… since the LAW doesnt define it as “religious”
To even suggest that gay people have an equal status under the law with everybody else, is totally ridiculous… or just plain STUPID….
I think the government should stay out of personal business. If you are into same sex relationships, you should be afforded all the trappings of opposite sex relationships.
How is it constitutional for the government to give or take based on marriage? Be it same or opposite sex? Marriage should not be governed at the federal level.
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 12:49 pm | Permalink
No gay or lesbian person has been denied anything that a straight person has been given.
Anyone with common sense knows that’s 100% false.
“Rage if you are a man have you been denied the right to marry the woman of your choice or if a woman the man of your choice. Show me where this is any different in the gay world.”
When the definition of marriage is opened up to include other alliances then where do we draw the line.
With human beings, maybe? But people like you obviously view gay people as less than human.
“Rage don’t use the tired liberal drivel of telling me I don’t view gays as human. You don’t know me and I don’t know you but I know I don’t look down on any person – well maybe Chas and BJ because they are such twits and stupid and lazy to boot – but I have never reduced gays so low as to compare them to these two losers”.
Who will determine that only straight gay people have the right to marriage. Will we redefine marriage so that it has no definition.
Did that gibberish make sense even to you?
“Obviously it did or I wouldn’t have said it. You have no logical retort so bring in the putdowns. I am allowed to disagree with you”.
Look it’s simple: if you’re bothered by the religious implications of the “M” word being applied to gay people, take it out of government. Civil unions for all. Problem solved.
“My reasons have nothihng to do with religion. That is the reason you gave. I am against it because in civilized societies a breakdown in family structure has always preceeded the fall of that democracy. You have the religious hangup”.
BTW more that 70% of voters also agree with me which is why you are still arguing this point. The election was held. Your side lost. Unless you lived in CA and the judges overturned the will of the people.
I live in Arizona where a similar amendment was defeated two years ago. Unfortunately, the fanatics are trying again this year. Sigh
“Isn’t this country we live in great. When is an election ever final?”.
Sol that is exactly what I said only I used a few more words. How is giving away more going to even things up. Do you think it is equality or benefits the gay community wants.
When you really take the time to look at this movement I think you will get an idea of what is really at stake here.
We could argue this all day and I don’t have time for that. We’ll just say we agree that we disagree on this one. Just as I disagree with many here on abortion and won’t argue that one either.
“Then to be fair, ‘straight’ married folk should not get the benefits either. That would save even more of your money right?”
What’s fair? They take my hard earned money and GIVE it to people who didn’t earn it and have the audacity to call it Earned Income Credit.
J R’s predictions becoming true:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14929.html
“I think the government should stay out of personal business.”
And that is the real answer. But the government tells me what kind of light bulbs I can buy Sol!
They tell me how much pressure my shower head can have! They tell me how much water my toilet should flush with!
All the above affect my standing as president of the ugly club (smell counts for 30% of the vote).
So: Is marriage/civil union a GOOD place to start staying OUT of our personal lives?
“How is it constitutional for the government to give or take based on marriage?”
Again I agree. Is marriage in the constitution?
But again: Neither is redistribution of wealth.
But Obama wants to put it there.
I am against it because in civilized societies a breakdown in family structure has always preceeded the fall of that democracy.
And how exactly is the family structure protected by punishing gay families? You’re not making any sense.
So: Is marriage/civil union a GOOD place to start staying OUT of our personal lives?
Sure. Repeal DOMA. Take marraige out of the IRS code. No worries here.
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:30 pm | Permalink
I am against it because in civilized societies a breakdown in family structure has always preceeded the fall of that democracy.
And how exactly is the family structure protected by punishing gay families? You’re not making any sense.
=======================
How are gay ‘families’ punished?
The vast majority of America couldn’t care less about gay marriage or gay anything else.
BUT, if you want to bring this issue up and REDEFINE “marriage”, then why not:
1. 3-way marriages.
2. Marriages among family members should be ok.
3. Marriages of 12 year old’s and 50 year old’s should be ok too.
Who is to say what is Right and what is Wrong.
If there is no RELIGIOUS basis for your beliefs about Marriage, then people can define marriage however they want.
Go Soddom!
Go Gommorah!
Long Live Immorality!
Steven why do you see this as JRs prediction. This woman is indeed a maverick. She has always been a fighter frequently on the edge. She calls them as she sees them and right now she is fed up with the way the press has been allowed to define her with no opposition from her own handlers. I would be ‘mad as hell and wouldn’t take it anymore’ too.
Win or lose she isn’t going away. She is the face of the future conservative movement.
BTW while talking about our VP candidate where is yours? Have they been able to get his foot out of his mouth yet? For that matter where is the candidate of the people. Why is he dodging press conferences. I guess he and Joe, the senator are hoping to slide in under the catchers mitt, SAFE.
How are gay ‘families’ punished?
Rights and benefits
* Right to many of ex- or late spouse’s benefits, including:
o Social Security pension
o veteran’s pensions, indemnity compensation for service-connected deaths, medical care, and nursing home care, right to burial in veterans’ cemeteries, educational assistance, and housing
o survivor benefits for federal employees
o survivor benefits for spouses of longshoremen, harbor workers, railroad workers
o additional benefits to spouses of coal miners who die of black lung disease
o $100,000 to spouse of any public safety officer killed in the line of duty
o continuation of employer-sponsored health benefits
o renewal and termination rights to spouse’s copyrights on death of spouse
o continued water rights of spouse in some circumstances
o payment of wages and workers compensation benefits after worker death
o making, revoking, and objecting to post-mortem anatomical gifts
* Right to benefits while married:
o employment assistance and transitional services for spouses of members being separated from military service; continued commissary privileges
o per diem payment to spouse for federal civil service employees when relocating
o Indian Health Service care for spouses of Native Americans (in some circumstances)
o sponsor husband/wife for immigration benefits
* Larger benefits under some programs if married, including:
o veteran’s disability
o Supplemental Security Income
o disability payments for federal employees
o medicaid
o property tax exemption for homes of totally disabled veterans
o income tax deductions, credits, rates exemption, and estimates
* Joint and family-related rights:
o joint filing of bankruptcy permitted
o joint parenting rights, such as access to children’s school records
o family visitation rights for the spouse and non-biological children, such as to visit a spouse in a hospital or prison
o next-of-kin status for emergency medical decisions or filing wrongful death claims
o custodial rights to children, shared property, child support, and alimony after divorce
o domestic violence intervention
o access to “family only” services, such as reduced rate memberships to clubs & organizations or residency in certain neighborhoods
* Preferential hiring for spouses of veterans in government jobs
* Tax-free transfer of property between spouses (including on death) and exemption from “due-on-sale” clauses.
* Special consideration to spouses of citizens and resident aliens
* Spouse’s flower sales count towards meeting the eligibility for Fresh Cut Flowers and Fresh Cut Greens Promotion and Information Act
* Threats against spouses of various federal employees is a federal crime
* Right to continue living on land purchased from spouse by National Park Service when easement granted to spouse
* Court notice of probate proceedings
* Domestic violence protection orders
* Existing homestead lease continuation of rights
* Regulation of condominium sales to owner-occupants exemption
* Funeral and bereavement leave
* Joint adoption and foster care
* Joint tax filing
* Insurance licenses, coverage, eligibility, and benefits organization of mutual benefits society
* Legal status with stepchildren
* Making spousal medical decisions
* Spousal non-resident tuition deferential waiver
* Permission to make funeral arrangements for a deceased spouse, including burial or cremation
* Right of survivorship of custodial trust
* Right to change surname upon marriage
* Right to enter into prenuptial agreement
* Right to inheritance of property
* Spousal privilege in court cases (the marital confidences privilege and the spousal testimonial privilege)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of_marriages_in_the_United_States
If there is no RELIGIOUS basis for your beliefs about Marriage, then people can define marriage however they want.
Max, do you think atheists should be allowed to get married?
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
How are gay ‘families’ punished?
Rights and benefits
* Right to many of ex- or late spouse’s benefits, including:
o Social Security pension
o veteran’s pensions, indemnity compensation for service-connected deaths, medical care, and nursing home care, right to burial in veterans’ cemeteries, educational assistance, and housing
o survivor benefits for federal employees
o survivor benefits for spouses of longshoremen, harbor workers, railroad workers
o additional benefits to spouses of coal miners who die of black lung disease
o $100,000 to spouse of any public safety officer killed in the line of duty
o continuation of employer-sponsored health benefits
o renewal and termination rights to spouse’s copyrights on death of spouse
o continued water rights of spouse in some circumstances
o payment of wages and workers compensation benefits after worker death
o making, revoking, and objecting to post-mortem anatomical gifts
* Right to benefits while married:
o employment assistance and transitional services for spouses of members being separated from military service; continued commissary privileges
o per diem payment to spouse for federal civil service employees when relocating
o Indian Health Service care for spouses of Native Americans (in some circumstances)
o sponsor husband/wife for immigration benefits
* Larger benefits under some programs if married, including:
o veteran’s disability
o Supplemental Security Income
o disability payments for federal employees
o medicaid
o property tax exemption for homes of totally disabled veterans
o income tax deductions, credits, rates exemption, and estimates
* Joint and family-related rights:
o joint filing of bankruptcy permitted
o joint parenting rights, such as access to children’s school records
o family visitation rights for the spouse and non-biological children, such as to visit a spouse in a hospital or prison
o next-of-kin status for emergency medical decisions or filing wrongful death claims
o custodial rights to children, shared property, child support, and alimony after divorce
o domestic violence intervention
o access to “family only” services, such as reduced rate memberships to clubs & organizations or residency in certain neighborhoods
* Preferential hiring for spouses of veterans in government jobs
* Tax-free transfer of property between spouses (including on death) and exemption from “due-on-sale” clauses.
* Special consideration to spouses of citizens and resident aliens
* Spouse’s flower sales count towards meeting the eligibility for Fresh Cut Flowers and Fresh Cut Greens Promotion and Information Act
* Threats against spouses of various federal employees is a federal crime
* Right to continue living on land purchased from spouse by National Park Service when easement granted to spouse
* Court notice of probate proceedings
* Domestic violence protection orders
* Existing homestead lease continuation of rights
* Regulation of condominium sales to owner-occupants exemption
* Funeral and bereavement leave
* Joint adoption and foster care
* Joint tax filing
* Insurance licenses, coverage, eligibility, and benefits organization of mutual benefits society
* Legal status with stepchildren
* Making spousal medical decisions
* Spousal non-resident tuition deferential waiver
* Permission to make funeral arrangements for a deceased spouse, including burial or cremation
* Right of survivorship of custodial trust
* Right to change surname upon marriage
* Right to enter into prenuptial agreement
* Right to inheritance of property
* Spousal privilege in court cases (the marital confidences privilege and the spousal testimonial privilege)
————————-
95 percents of those are benefits, not rights.
MaxGrobnik
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:33 pm | Permalink
The vast majority of America couldn’t care less about gay marriage or gay anything else.
I suspect you are correct. The votes by 28 states on the issue would support you.
This is like Healthcare, the libs and media MAKE it an issue.
But this particular argument, on gays, there seems to be a tendency on the WEBlog……
okobserver
The article mentions two things – which we all already know about.
They call this a premonition? It’s no big deal.
At least Palin didn’t say McCain would face a national attack six months after he takes office.
“She is the face of the future conservative movement.”
The poster is referring to Sarah Palin.
Oh PLEASE let her wish come true!
You con fools are too stupid to get it. Obama isn’t winning. McCain is losing largely because of Sarah Palin. The very things that so endear her to you turn most Americans away.
Keep on keepin’ on!
Rage,
I would get Government out of the marriage business completely. If 2 atheists want to get married, it’s none of my business or none of Government’s business.
Civil Unions are nothing more then contracts between 2 individuals. None of Government’s business. Marriages have been re-defined by the lawyers and judges to be contracts also. Again, None of the Government’s business.
So some people get a legal contract signed (pre-nup) to alter the marriage contract – an attempt to prevent the Government from interfering with their lives.
Government has grown in power and scope to a degree which is light-years beyond what anyone might have imagined in 1782. Clearly those who wrote the US Constitution were very careful with their language to PREVENT Government from gaining too much power, and thus taking away Freedom from the People.
Those who want a big Nanny Government are getting their way. How? Big Government giving away handouts to 40% of the population to buy their votes, controlling the propaganda taught in Public Schools, allows Government to pass more and more Socialist and Controlling laws.
The Socialists willingly give up many Freedoms, in exchange for promises that the Government will take care of them.
And in the short-run, the Socialists are winning. In the long-run, the Socialist machine will erode away the financial base and strength of this country, until it can no longer sustain itself. People will simply stop working. And when that happens, your beloved Gravy Train will finally crash. The Greatest Depression will hit. And after many years of hard suffering by all, the cycle starts all over again.
Rage what you have listed is a complete list of LEGAL reasons same sex unions should be honored. You haven’t given me one reason why marriage should be changed to include same sex marriages.
You of course don’t get it. Legal unions and marriages are two very seperate things.
okobserver
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:57 pm | Permalink
Rage what you have listed is a complete list of LEGAL reasons same sex unions should be honored. You haven’t given me one reason why marriage should be changed to include same sex marriages.
—————————————————-
Why are you so afraid?
Military stationed outside of the State of Virginia being denied the right to vote
Military Ballots Still a Battleground in Virginia
by Connie Hair
10/27/2008
Military ballots are still being rejected in Fairfax County, Va., by registrar Rokey Suleman on the basis that the Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot, or FWAB, should have a witness address accompanying the signature. Federal law enabling military balloting by mail does not require the address, and the federal ballot form lacks a space for it.
The state of Virginia did not properly instruct Virginia soldiers to provide this witness information. Note the instructions given to Virginia service members, “Block 7: Sign and date in the presence of a witness. The witness must sign and date the form.” Nothing is said about an address requirement for the witness and the FWAB form offers only a signature block for the witness. By last Thursday, out of 260 ballots, only five had the witness address meeting Suleman’s requirement.
Having left several voicemail messages at the registrar’s office last week, Suleman returned my calls on Friday afternoon. He told me that his board met back in September and he told them that there was a problem but it was not remedied. When asked why Fairfax is the only county not counting these ballots, Suleman told me, “The other county boards are breaking the law. I’m not putting myself in jeopardy. The board of elections could come in and remove me if I allowed these votes.”
With elections less than two weeks away, I asked if there was a way to remedy this situation in Fairfax County before the election, Suleman said, “A judge would have to legislate from the bench to fix this before the elections.”
Democrat operatives have worked in the past to discount military ballots, as soldiers tend to vote overwhelmingly for a Republican as their Commander-in-Chief. In the aftermath of the 2000 election in Florida, as well as in Pennsylvania in 2004, concerted efforts were made to reject military absentee ballots, and national outrage erupted over leaks of Democrat memoranda instructing their legal teams on the ground during the process to disallow military ballots.
These same concerns are being raised about Suleman in this battleground state. When he led a voter registration drive earlier this year in the county jails, information came to light that Suleman founded the Trumball, Ohio, Young Democrats and ran for office there as a Democrat earlier this year. Suleman says his office is non-partisan, yet some are asking why he would go out of his way to register inmates to vote prior to a possible felony conviction, yet reject military ballots on a hyper-technicality.
The National Defense Committee is a grassroots group of retired military whose Military Ballot Protection Program is set up to protect not only a soldier’s rights but to insure their votes are counted. I spoke with Capt. Sam Wright, a retired Naval JAG officer who serves as director of the program. Wright contacted the Department of Justice, asking in his letter for their review of Fairfax County’s procedures. During a long conversation full of military ballot horror stories, Wright discussed his group’s involvement in the issue with Suleman. “There has been some narrowing of the circumstance to disallow the ballots,” Wright said. “Some of these votes will now be counted.”
Suleman’s prior position had been that all of the federal ballots would be rejected unless the witness address was included. Now he says if a soldier first applied for a state ballot, did not receive the state ballot, then used the federal write-in ballot as a stop-gap, he will count the vote with or without the witness address. If the soldier used this federal write-in ballot as his sole means for voting, Suleman will not count the ballot if there is no witness address.
It has yet to be determined how many soldiers this narrow Fairfax County decision will disenfranchise. The rest of the Virginia counties have accepted responsibility for not providing proper instructions to the soldiers and will be counting all of these ballots.
Human Events
This YouTube should be required watching for every American. It’s titled “A Class Divided.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8gCJ4K4tnE
Here is a link that tells us about this lesson in discrimination.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/
Discrimination usually brings race to our minds, but takes many forms. Here today we’ve been discussing sexual orientation and proving that discrimination is alive and well.
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
How are gay ‘families’ punished?
Rights and benefits
—–
Rage I finally got through this long list of suppressed right you listed. Hogwash!! Most of these aren’t even right I as a opposite sex spouse have. I have no right to VA benefits even though my spouse is a veteran. I have no right or duties for my stepchildren unless they have been legally adopted by me. I have no rights to national park land eventhough my sponse did. This would pass to our children if he is on the rolls of one of the indian tribes. I could go on but I don’t have all day.
Most if not all of these could be addressed by legal paperwork today. Are you to cheap to do it right. My husband and I have taken care of all of this legally and we are opposite sex.
Admit that the real reason this is an issue is because you want your ‘marriage’ recognized by society. Well be that as it may laws aren’t revised for people feelings.
————-
BJ if you weren’t such a poor pathetic person I would try to have a conversation with you. Your brain cells are missing. I haven’t heard logic come out of your mouth for months. How is that union thingie working for you. Did Hawker signing put money in your pocket? Didn’t think so. Do you honestly think those union workers know or care who you are as they drive off in their late model cars to a comfortable home and eat a good meal before sitting down in front of their big screen tvs to watch monday nite football. You are so far out in left field that they built the fence in front of you. How is the view from there?
BJ still waiting for that socialism train to come pick you up.
Freebird1971, why do you think it is about fear? I mean I don’t let my dog sh*t in my house. Not because I fear my dog, but because it is repulsive and insults me.
My point is this, I don’t think it has anything to do with fear.
You of course don’t get it. Legal unions and marriages are two very seperate things.
No, you don’t get it. These amendments affect the legal status of marriage, period. If you’re suggesting there’s any other issue, that you’re really talking about using government for social engineering.
If a gay couple gets married at a Unitarian church, the state should recognize that union. If two atheists get married at the Justice of the Peace, same thing. Likewise, if two gay atheists–you get the idea.
Near as I can tell, the only other “issue” is the reality of people like you accepting gay people getting married. I guess you’re afraid it’ll catch like a disease or something. Little Johnny hears that Heather has two mommies, and is off to a bathhouse!
If that’s not it, well, sorry, you’re making me guess–you still haven’t articulated a coherent reason for your position.
I do not seek discussion with you okie.
I got standards.
I merely mention that I sure hope that such as you and Sarah Palin are the future of the Republican party. With any luck, that party will be out of power for the rest of my life.
Admit that the real reason this is an issue is because you want your ‘marriage’ recognized by society. Well be that as it may laws aren’t revised for people feelings.
It’s called “equal protection of the laws.” Would you be okay with a law that banned Republicans (and only Republicans) from voting?
It’s that simple.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/it-will-only-ge.html#more
Andrew Sullivan on “Habits of Paranoid Minds.”
It’s like he’s been reading “Franklin’s” posts.
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
Admit that the real reason this is an issue is because you want your ‘marriage’ recognized by society. Well be that as it may laws aren’t revised for people feelings.
It’s called “equal protection of the laws.” Would you be okay with a law that banned Republicans (and only Republicans) from voting?
It’s that simple.
==========================
Hypothetical question for you Rage.
You state that ‘marriage recognized by a society’ is the standard used today in determining a legitimate marriage.
Let’s say that Congressman Barney Frank gets married to his boyfriend and takes him on a trip with to Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia does not recognize gay marriage and think gay activity is a violation of their Muslim and State laws.
Do the Saudis have the right to ban the Franks from their country or perhaps put them on trial for violations of their codified law?
I merely mention that I sure hope that such as you and Sarah Palin are the future of the Republican party. With any luck, that party will be out of power for the rest of my life.
After the election of 1932, the Democrats kept the White House for 20 years, and the Congress for 14 years.
No wonder the conservatives are so upset!
It is all about “equal protection of the laws”. And, as I’ve posted more times than I care to recall, to me the problem is one of using the name of a religious sacrament for a legal contractual relationship. Had the legal contract of “marriage” been named, e.g., “contract of civil union” from the beginning, I think societally we would be beyond this discussion; at least, I would hope we would.
BHO
“And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution – at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [it] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.”
Rage I have given you my reasons and opinions. You can choose to read them, ignore them, discount them, call them fear mongering, intolerance or any other name you wish to – it doesn’t change the fact that you and I have a basic disagreement on gay marriage. If the Obamanation becomes reality and the house and senate go left then we will probably see this definition change. I’m not sure though because a large number of people on both sides of the aisle agree on this one. We will have to wait and see. You however can’t use this ploy to discount the legal protection that every couple needs whether gay or straight.
I hope humans evolve to the point where the practice of treating others with human dignity is commonplace.
Do the Saudis have the right to ban the Franks from their country or perhaps put them on trial for violations of their codified law?
Since Frank has diplomatic immunity the answer would be no.
A repressive regime like Saudi Arabia has a right, consistent with national sovereignty, to its own laws. We have a right to take those laws into consideration when dealing with them. Of course, other considerations–most prominently oil–come into play.
All more the more reason we need to become energy independent.
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink
I hope humans evolve to the point where the practice of treating others with human dignity is commonplace.
———————
I doubt evolution has much to do with it. A couple that has a five o’clock shadow, stems and berries and both leaving the seat up has different values and consequences in an established society.
Discrimination usually brings race to our minds, but takes many forms. Here today we’ve been discussing sexual orientation and proving that discrimination is alive and well.
Linda why is your definition of discrimination more salient that mine? Do you have some divine appointment that gave you the grand vision that Oprah had when she called Obama ‘The One’? Where was the left when this happened? Oh yes they were in Alaska trying to find out out if Palins BIL should have been fired for tasing his step son and threatening his father in law with a lead bullet between his teeth.
I am honest enough to say I don’t agree with you.I am not dishonest enough to say because we disagree you are hateful and intolerant.
BJ we do agree that we won’t talk. I have read more than one book and you are just too limited in your ability to converse. That wasn’t very nice was it? I will take it back because it sounded much to much like a leftwingnut radical.
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink
Do the Saudis have the right to ban the Franks from their country or perhaps put them on trial for violations of their codified law?
Since Frank has diplomatic immunity the answer would be no.
A repressive regime like Saudi Arabia has a right, consistent with national sovereignty, to its own laws. We have a right to take those laws into consideration when dealing with them. Of course, other considerations–most prominently oil–come into play.
All more the more reason we need to become energy independent.
=============================
So, is the right of gay marriage an inherent right or is it a societal right. You avoided answering the question to my satisfaction.
Isn’t it your party that says we shouldn’t interfere with other countries and their sovereignty?
And, if gay marriage is not an inherent right, but based on societal moral standards, then what is the objection for establishing parameters for marriage?
Should marriage be done away with completely and substituted with common law bonding?
How does one countries marriage “laws” translates across international borders with societies that have different moral standards?
Is marriage a moral or an amoral issue?
And for those interested (why I would have no idea), let us also legalize and legitimize Polygamy.
Seriously, if you legalize Gay/Lesbian marriages (and I cannot see why not), you must also consider legalizing polygamy. THere is no reason not to.
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink
I hope humans evolve to the point where the practice of treating others with human dignity is commonplace
—————
Linda maybe you have got something from what was said today. After all it was your statement about intolerance and hate that started this discussion.
Rags- It’s called “equal protection of the laws.”
——————————
Is it “equal protection of the laws” if…
-A blind guy wants to be an airline pilot?
-How about a 5′2 90 lb girl that wants to be a nfl line backer?
-How about a 6′7 guy that wants to play volleyball for the girls team?
-How about letting a girl with an IQ of 80 into MENSA?
A few excerpts from an excellent article about the current blatant media bias, and the harm it is causing the country.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=1
“Meanwhile, I watched with disbelief as the nation’s leading newspapers, many of whom I’d written for in the past, slowly let opinion pieces creep into the news section, and from there onto the front page. Personal opinions and comments that, had they appeared in my stories in 1979, would have gotten my butt kicked by the nearest copy editor, were now standard operating procedure at the New York Times, the Washington Post, and soon after in almost every small town paper in the U.S.
But what really shattered my faith — and I know the day and place where it happened — was the war in Lebanon three summers ago. The hotel I was staying at in Windhoek, Namibia, only carried CNN, a network I’d already learned to approach with skepticism. But this was CNN International, which is even worse.
I sat there, first with my jaw hanging down, then actually shouting at the TV, as one field reporter after another reported the carnage of the Israeli attacks on Beirut, with almost no corresponding coverage of the Hezbollah missiles raining down on northern Israel. The reporting was so utterly and shamelessly biased that I sat there for hours watching, assuming that eventually CNNi would get around to telling the rest of the story … but it never happened.” ….
….”But nothing, nothing I’ve seen has matched the media bias on display in the current presidential campaign.
Republicans are justifiably foaming at the mouth over the sheer one-sidedness of the press coverage of the two candidates and their running mates. But in the last few days, even Democrats, who have been gloating over the pass — no, make that shameless support — they’ve gotten from the press, are starting to get uncomfortable as they realize that no one wins in the long run when we don’t have a free and fair press.
I was one of the first people in the traditional media to call for the firing of Dan Rather — not because of his phony story, but because he refused to admit his mistake — but, bless him, even Gunga Dan thinks the media is one-sided in this election.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not one of those people who think the media has been too hard on, say, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin, by rushing reportorial SWAT teams to her home state of Alaska to rifle through her garbage. This is the big leagues, and if she wants to suit up and take the field, then Gov. Palin better be ready to play.”…..
…..”If the current polls are correct, we are about to elect as president of the United States a man who is essentially a cipher, who has left almost no paper trail, seems to have few friends (that at least will talk) and has entire years missing out of his biography.
That isn’t Sen. Obama’s fault: His job is to put his best face forward. No, it is the traditional media’s fault, for it alone (unlike the alternative media) has had the resources to cover this story properly, and has systematically refused to do so.
Why, for example to quote the lawyer for Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., haven’t we seen an interview with Sen. Obama’s grad school drug dealer — when we know all about Mrs. McCain’s addiction? Are Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko that hard to interview? All those phony voter registrations that hard to scrutinize? And why are Sen. Biden’s endless gaffes almost always covered up, or rationalized, by the traditional media?”
Regular- So, is the right of gay marriage an inherent right or is it a societal right?
————————————
It is not a “right” at all.
I don’t want to talk to ya okie.
I want to defeat you.
And that’s going very well!
#
biased1
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:38 pm | Permalink
Regular- So, is the right of gay marriage an inherent right or is it a societal right?
————————————
It is not a “right” at all.
======================
I agree somewhat, but marriage is more than a privilege as it implies status under a society’s laws.
The ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’ appears to be the standard our founders based their constitutional rights on for a large portion of the bill of rights.
‘Pursuit of happiness’ is a very gray area. What constitutes happiness?
biased, with the possible exception of your first example, there is nothing there which would call the equal protection argument into play. Even your first example doesn’t raise an equal protection issue as such.
A better example would be whether automatically denying a 5′2″ 90 pound female from a position as a firefighter is a violation of equal protection. Notice the use of the term “automatically” and the insertion of a governmental function within the example.
So, Okie — WHEN have you ever stated a LEGAL reason to oppose same sex marriage??
All I have ever seen you post is a bunch of gay bashing diatribe…. mixed in with a few religious undertones….
The ‘life, liberty and pursuit of happiness’
———————————
So “hapiness” is legislated?
And, if gay marriage is not an inherent right, but based on societal moral standards, then what is the objection for establishing parameters for marriage?
You’re framing the issue incorrectly. There is no such thing as “gay marriage.” There is only marriage.
The issues is whether consenting adults should be allowed to participate in marriage (a legal contract) regardless of sex.
Now: Is marriage an important contract? Many would say it’s critically important.
But even if it wasn’t, gay marriages bans would still run afoul of equal protection principles and basic societal fairness. Government regulations on contracts have to have, at the very least, a rational basis. Such bans have no rational basis–that’s why the courts keep overturning these statutes, and why the religious-right activists keep pursuing amendments. You can put any unfair thing you want in a Constitution–it can’t be overturned by a court.
There are indeed moral issues.
(1)Should government apply the religion-derived standards of some to all people?
(2) Should government discriminate a class of people based on inherent characteristics (in the case, sex and sexual orientation)?
(3) Should goverment grant legal status to sacraments performed in some churches, but not in others?
Again, equal protection. That’s the issue.
A better example would be whether automatically denying a 5?2? 90 pound female from a position as a firefighter is a violation of equal protection.
——————————————-
So she doesn’t have a “right” to be a firefighter?
On whether marriage is a “right”, see e.g., Loving v. Virginia (not on point as to “gay” marriage, admittedly).
societal fairness.
————————
No such animal.
lj, we had that discussion here some time back.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2006/03/if_gay_marriage/
biased, if the person so described can meet the physical demands of the position, yes, she has the right to apply; but, again, she may not be automatically excluded from the position merely due to physical size. Nor is the “right” to be a firefighter automatic, either, whether for our hypothetical female or a male standing 6′7″ weighing 250 pounds. The “right” is really IMO the right to apply for the job without automatic exclusion or inclusion based upon gender or physical size.
P.S. Actually, looking it over, it was more a raging flame-war on gay marriage. Never mind.
VT,
How does that play into women in combat oriented jobs in the military?
avtolle
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:53 pm | Permalink
biased, if the person so described can meet the physical demands of the position, yes, she has the right to apply;
————————————-
So if she is physically unable to perform the duties of the position, she has no “right” to the position?
i.e. Women can not enlist under the 11B MOS (infantry)
Being a firefighter is not a right. Being able to apply for the job without automatically being rejected is a right.
Chas surprised that they let you and BJ out from under your rocks on the same day. I am not required to justify my opinion with a legal reason. What is the problem with the left? The left can have opinions all day long and that is ok. If I give an opinion I have to justify it legally. Why?? Who are you the blog police?
————————
BJ just for clarification you won’t defeat me. Even if Obama wins and that isn’t a given yet, my life will go on, I will survive. Not so sure about the future of our great nation or the future of my kids and grandkids. Will the incentive we gave them to work hard and acomplish good things be undermined by the JRs of the world with their hands out and the nanny state rushing to fill them up. That is what we should be worrying about.
Excellent piece upthread outlander. Only fools would sit by and watch what is happening here and think it is ok. Obama will be vetted but unfortunately it might be while he is the commander in chief destroying our country. The news media will lament the fact that no one saw what was coming and the circle goes on and on and on.
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:59 pm | Permalink
Being a firefighter is not a right. Being able to apply for the job without automatically being rejected is a right.
———————————-
is it “fair” to reject her just because she doesn’t meet the standards or criteria for being a firefighter?
It is fair to reject her if she cannot fulfill the requirements of the position. IMO.
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:46 pm | Permalink
So, Okie — WHEN have you ever stated a LEGAL reason to oppose same sex marriage??
All I have ever seen you post is a bunch of gay bashing diatribe…. mixed in with a few religious undertones
—————
And Chass when you use big words like diatribe you should really know what they mean. I will wait patiently while you review my posts today and tell me where I have bashed anyone other than you and JR today. I don’t bash gays. That is unless you and Jr are gay and I didn’t know it. Sorry if that is the case let me know and I will quit bashing you.
is it “fair” to reject her just because she doesn’t meet the standards or criteria for being a firefighter?
Duh. Isn’t that how employers are supposed to make decisions? On merit?
Would it be fair to reject chas as your CEO for lack of skill?
Alaska Senator Ted Stevens GUILTY!
Chass are religious undertones in the blues or green hues. I am more a warm color person so am concerned if these colors are incompatible.
My wife just told me Sen. Stevens, R-AK was found guilty on all charges…
Hmmmmm…..
Will the voters of Alaska return Stevens to the Senate now that he has been judged guilty of corruption?
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:03 pm | Permalink
Would it be fair to reject chas as your CEO for lack of skill?
_________________________________________
No skill — no job… simple…
BUT — the right to APPLY for the job?? That could be discriminatory…. depending on the particular job….
Come on, Sol… get back to reality, ok??
Sol,
Employing women in combat oriented jobs within the military is an interesting conundrum. From what I can read, hear, etc., the number of positions being closed to women due to the relationship of the same to combat is diminishing. It is my personal opinion that so long as the physical requirements for the position may be met, there is no reason based in law or the Constitution for excluding females. This, once again, is an example of how societal mores shape official policy in the U.S. and other countries.
It is disturbing to many, I believe, to contemplate putting females into harm’s way as a part of a combat operation. While continuation of the civilization is dependent upon having both males and females of appropriate age available to propogate, biologically, at least, the loss of a female is a larger loss than the loss of a male. It is that realization, I believe, that has shaped the concept in may societies and civilizations of combat troops being male, as the death of one or many males is, from a purely biological perspective, less harmful to the species than the loss of one or more females.
Just my thoughts. From a strictly “legal” perspective, there is little to justify exclusion of females from combat based solely upon their gender.
HEH
The voters of Alaska don’t have much choice!
Stevens is going to jail!
His name must remain on the ballot!
ANOTHER pick up in the Senate for the good guy Dems!
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:02 pm | Permalink
It is fair to reject her if she cannot fulfill the requirements of the position. IMO.
—————————————-
But her neighbor is a firefighter, her cousin is a firefighter, firefighters get to go to the ball free, they have their own lake and cabin for summertime use, and she really WANTS to be a firefighter.
Couldn’t you just lower the standards?
Couldn’t you just change the criteria?
Couldn’t you just change the qualifications?
I mean, just to be fair?
BlueJay
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:04 pm | Permalink
Alaska Senator Ted Stevens GUILTY!
————-
BJ your obvious elation over this verdict puts you in good company. Palin shares your view and so do I. He was corrupt and should pay the ultimate price whatever that is. Of course if he were Cold Cash Jefferson and from LA he would be re-elected..
If the polls are to be believed, Sen. Stevens’ conviction will be the end of his Senate career (at least with regard to the current election).
Okie — as I said upthread you have STILL not posted any LEGAL reason to oppose same sex marriage… All you seem to know how to do is to attack me with a bunch of phony hyperbole, and vindictive ad hominems….
IF you cant be subjected to the THEME of the item…. then why not just shut up…
I think a very lucrative business model might be one which made authentic looking custom made marriage licenses. These can be framed and admired by all who would see them and used to legitmize every possible conceivable union by consenting adults.
By purchasing such a piece a paper, a gay couple and any other possible combination of parties who want to be married can satisfy their desires without having to have a popular majority (or sympathetic judge) to rule that their particular combination is in fact a marriage.
Whew! That was easy.
After all, why does what billions of people think matter when you have found love! If you are truly devoted to another party, no law is needed to legitmize what it is that you choose to call marriage.
Just get your piece of paper and call it a marriage and enjoy a lifetime of “licensed” matrimony to your one(s) and only!
Ah, but we don’t know what the attitude of the residents of Louisiana would be if “Cold Cash” Jefferson was convicted, as that has yet to happen. Right now, it appears that the good folks of Louisiana are relying upon the presumption of innocence (as hard as that presumption may be to maintain, given the reported circumstances).
VT,
I had thought about the POW side of things more. Remember – Jessica? Captured and rescued in Iraq? Also, the protective nature of most American males. Would having females on the battlefield change the dynamic of how injuries are handled while under operations?
I agree with your conclusion.
Biased,
You have strayed from the original topic. If an individual, for whatever reason, cannot perform to the job title’s expectations, that individual should not be considered for the position. Clear enough?
Palin was tied up with Stevens.
She built a railroad from Wasilla to Ted’s ski resort town.
Tell it to the Israeli military…
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:09 pm | Permalink
Okie — as I said upthread you have STILL not posted any LEGAL reason to oppose same sex marriage… All you seem to know how to do is to attack me with a bunch of phony hyperbole, and vindictive ad hominems….
IF you cant be subjected to the THEME of the item…. then why not just shut up…
—————–
Chass I know you are enomoured with your own arrogance but you need to realize that neither I nor anyone else on this blog has to meet your ’standards’ in order to post here. I have stated my reasons and you can take them or let them be but you can’t tell me ’shup up’ because I don’t reach you definition of right and wrong. You seem to be the one hung up on the ‘legal’ thing. Maybe you should get help for that. BTW have you seen the movie Sybil?
The Associated Press just announced the ATF claims it has broken up a Skinheads/White Supremacist plot to assassinate Barack Obama.
Those skinheads. Liberals every one of ‘em.
I wish to point out that if Sen. Stevens is reelected by the people of Alaska, his convictions will not bar him from serving as Senator. It would be up to the Senate to vote to exclude him (by a 2/3 vote).
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:15 pm | Permalink
Biased,
You have strayed from the original topic. If an individual, for whatever reason, cannot perform to the job title’s expectations, that individual should not be considered for the position. Clear enough?
———————————————
So you are discriminating against her size? or ability?
Is that “equal protection?”
equal ability = equal protection?
equal size = equal protection?
equal qualifications = equal protection?
is that what you are saying?
ha HA!
As cons go, Stevens was one of my least favorite. A real jerk that one.
Hey Ted?
Go to jail!
Go directly to jail.
Do not pass Go Do not collect $200
#
BlueJay
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:07 pm | Permalink
HEH
The voters of Alaska don’t have much choice!
Stevens is going to jail!
His name must remain on the ballot!
ANOTHER pick up in the Senate for the good guy Dems!
——————-
Doesn’t the Governor of Alaska pick another Senator if he/she cannot complete his term? :D
Each count in the indictment carries a possible 5-year penalty. At Stevens’ age, that’s a life sentence.
Re-election is the least of his worries now. But you what would be really ironic? If he somehow won anyway (I doubt it), the governor would have to appoint a temporary successor when he went to prison.
Guess who the governor is.
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:20 pm | Permalink
The Associated Press just announced the ATF claims it has broken up a Skinheads/White Supremacist plot to assassinate Barack Obama.
Those skinheads. Liberals every one of ‘em.
———————-
They’re nice people except for those nails sticking out of their boots.
I’m thinking the same thing as Regular??
Aargh! Out, damned spot! :)
BJ I know it is a challenge because you have read a book already this year but you would do well to actually know what you are talking about with respect to Alaska and roads, expecially the one to Kethchikan.
I won’t bore you with the details but you might want to check that out. The road had nothing to do with Stevens and everything to do with being able to get around in Alaska.
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:23 pm | Permalink
Each count in the indictment carries a possible 5-year penalty. At Stevens’ age, that’s a life sentence.
Re-election is the least of his worries now. But you what would be really ironic? If he somehow won anyway (I doubt it), the governor would have to appoint a temporary successor when he went to prison.
Guess who the governor is.
———————-
Todd Palin, United States Senator and Champion Snow Machine competitor. :D
Would Gov. Palin (should the situation hypothesized by Rage come about) pull a “Fred Hall” by resigning, then once the lieutenant governor was sworn in as governor, as a part of the deal be appointed by the new governor as Senator?
#
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:24 pm | Permalink
I’m thinking the same thing as Regular??
Aargh! Out, damned spot! :)
—————–
I was just using some ’spot remover.’ :D
BTW, I’m not familiar with federal sentencing guidelines, but opine that Sen. Stevens will serve little time as the result of his convictions under the same. Remember, the convictions are for making false statements on the required disclosure forms, not for, e.g., bribery.
vt interesting prospect.
Biased,
If an individual, for whatever reason, cannot perform to the job title’s expectations, that individual should not be considered for the position.
Where is your disconnect? Equal opportunity, not equal outcome. The best gets the position. Thought you were a conservative.
Rage
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:53 pm | Permalink
lj, we had that discussion here some time back.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2006/03/if_gay_marriage/
Looks like it. Didn;t read thru it all, but I don;t think I took part. That’s okay. We’ve had the same discussion about gay marriage time after time.
Really, I don;t care. Give gay/lesbians the right to marry. Give Poligamists the right to marry. Doesn’t hurt me if either one was made legal. And that should be the basis behind legislation prohibiting acts. In general, the deciding factors should be: Is is detrimental to the interest of the state and to it’s citizenry, and does it have enough public support. Should be all three. I am sure someone will come up with an exception. That’s okay, speaking in generalities here.
#
avtolle
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:26 pm | Permalink
Would Gov. Palin (should the situation hypothesized by Rage come about) pull a “Fred Hall” by resigning, then once the lieutenant governor was sworn in as governor, as a part of the deal be appointed by the new governor as Senator?
——————–
Wouldn’t be any stranger than a dead Senator being re-elected and his wife appointed to serve his term.
And, Vaughn, if Palin were a Senator she really would have an input to policy, unlike her thoughts from the position of VPOTUS.
Equal opportunity, not equal outcome. The best gets the position. Thought you were a conservative.
—————————-
Thought you were against discrimination.
I’m still shaking my head and smiling about the twists and turns and possibilities. Truth is often stranger than fiction! Would anyone have been able to write the entire script of this election season!?
Your argument is to bend the rules. That if an individual cannot perform to the job title’s requirements, they should still be able to hold the job. That is equal outcome; a decidedly liberal mindset.
I advocate for all to be able to apply for the position and the best selected for the position. That is equal opportunity; a decidedly conservative mindset.
Again, where is your disconnect?
littlejane- In general, the deciding factors should be: Is is detrimental to the interest of the state and to it’s citizenry, and does it have enough public support.
———————————-
Then I guess you are ok without gay marriage.
True?
I mean, it doesn’t hurt you if they DON”T get married does it?
It DOESN’T hurt the citizenry if they don’t.
It DOESN’t hurt the state if they don’t.
I’m ok without it.
“biased1,” I swear. Do you all drink “Nathaniel’s” stupid question juice?
“So you are discriminating against her size? or ability?
Is that “equal protection?”
equal ability = equal protection?
equal size = equal protection?
equal qualifications = equal protection? is that what you are saying?”
In a word, “no.”
In two words, “no, idiot.”
I’m a short, scrawny old guy.
A young, physically fit, athletic woman would be far better suited to be a Fire Fighter or combat soldier, or stevedore than I.
The job requirements have nothing to do with whether you sit or stand when you pee.
Out
That is equal outcome; a decidedly liberal mindset.
Since he’s having an amusing argument with an idiot, I’ll let that one slide! :)
Awwww
These two need a very special home.
http://wichita.craigslist.org/zip/895655433.html
MH, biased½ may be here to make Nathan look like Solomon.
SolDevVB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm | Permalink
Your argument is to bend the rules. That if an individual cannot perform to the job title’s requirements, they should still be able to hold the job. That is equal outcome; a decidedly liberal mindset.
I advocate for all to be able to apply for the position and the best selected for the position. That is equal opportunity; a decidedly conservative mindset.
Again, where is your disconnect?
——————————————
The disconnect is yours I guess.
Can you dicriminate against size?
Does a 6′2 210 lb man have a right to be a fireman over a 5′2 90 lb woman?
What if he was 65 years old?
THEN could you discriminate?
My point being, we “discriminate ALL the time, there IS no “equal protection” given when one is an apple and one is an orange.
Would you agree?
#
BlueJay
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:42 pm | Permalink
Awwww
These two need a very special home.
http://wichita.craigslist.org/zip/895655433.html
====================
I have a burlap sack, we could make a trip to the river.
“Rage” –
Like Solomon Grundy, the Green Lantern’s nemesis, the undead zombie from those old DC comic books?
Yeah. That’s not a bad theory.
I’d put the sack over your head and give you a shove Regular. Without hesitation.
Biased1–
I didn’t see a post by littlejane. Could you please point it out to me?
Biased1–
I didn’t see a post by littlejane. Could you please point it out to me?
biased1
Posted October 27, 2008 at 2:36 pm | Permalink
Rags- It’s called “equal protection of the laws.”
——————————
Is it “equal protection of the laws” if…
-A blind guy wants to be an airline pilot?
-How about a 5?2 90 lb girl that wants to be a nfl line backer?
-How about a 6?7 guy that wants to play volleyball for the girls team?
-How about letting a girl with an IQ of 80 into MENSA?
===================================================================
In the interest of Equal Protection, Providing the General Welfare, the Fairness Doctrine, and Spreading the Wealth Around, the following rules will now be enforced:
1. The NFL will be expanded from 32 Teams and 1,600 players, to 320,000 Teams and 16,000,000 players.
2. Those smaller, slower, older, younger, and weaker players who have been excluded from playing in the past, will now be guaranteed a position (and 20 minutes of playing time per game) on one of the teams.
3. Exhorbitant High Salaries paid to current NFL players will be spread out EQUALLY to all 16 million players. (Currently all the money and all the playing time goes to just the top 0.01% of the players) The current average salary of $1.5 million will be reduced to $150.
4. TV broadcasts of all 320,000 teams will be FAIR and each team will have 1 game broadcast every 13 years. (Not counting playoffs, as all of the 96,000 playoff games will be televised.)
Monkeyoldpuss-
In two words, “no, idiot.”
I’m a short, scrawny old guy.
A young, physically fit, athletic woman would be far better suited to be a Fire Fighter or combat soldier, or stevedore than I.
………………………
I have no doubts there. however, decidedly off the point.
………………………
The job requirements have nothing to do with whether you sit or stand when you pee.
………………………
The point was, is it FAIR, if she WANTS to be a firefighter to not LET her be a firefighter?
Even if she can’t meet the requirements.
Are having the requirements fair?
From KDP website:
“But don’t worry, Stevens wasn’t keeping all that money to himself. His PAC, Northern Lights, has donated almost $20,000 to Pat Roberts’ campaign. I guess that’s what friends are for…
No wonder Stevens and Roberts are such good friends- they’ve got a lot in common. Both accept shady money from Big Oil and both have been in Washington for entirely too long.
MaxGrobnik
Posted October 27, 2008 at 3:51 pm | Permalink
——————–
Outstanding!!
I think the word for jobs that require strength is accommodation.
I remember in one of the classes I took that the Air Force required (sexual harassment and etc), the subject came up about physical requirements for various jobs.
One of the attendees was a bomb loader. In his job it is required that 100 pounds be lifted to shoulder height or higher. He stated that this factor didn’t allow females in his career field.
Come to find out, that the truth of the matter is that two people attend the loading of a bomb usually and the bomb rack/lifter is elevated to such a height that only a few inches is needed to maneuver the bomb into place.
Turns out the 100 pound lifting requirement was a job description requirement held over from Army Air Force regulations back in the 1940s. :)
So the worker was accommodated by technology in this instance and I’m sure in other jobs they could be accommodated to do physically demanding jobs.
Para Rescue is one job in the Air Force that I’m unsure females are allowed to do. I guess hanging upside down on a rope from a helicopter lifting an injured Airman does require quite a bit of strength which a female may not possess.
There’s still a difference between Men and Women that many recognize even today.
If a military draft was required in the future, would all you equal rights supporters have the daughters of America thrown into combat?
I would not.
MAX- Para Rescue is one job in the Air Force that I’m unsure females are allowed to do. I guess hanging upside down on a rope from a helicopter lifting an injured Airman does require quite a bit of strength which a female may not possess.
——————————-
I never intended for this to be male/female equality, more of just one person/one person equality.
And so far, everyone seems to agree (without saying so) it is ok to discriminate.
Biassed1/2 —–
Suppose there was a job listed in the Want Ads: LEFT handed individual needed for assembly work. Job cannot be accomplished by any who are RIGHT handed….
SO…. A RiGHT handed person applies for the job…
1) Do you still maintain the RIGHT handed person be given the employment, in spite of the clearly stated Job Description??
2) Should the RIGHT handed person be automatically disqualified from APPLYING for the Job???
Be careful of your answer….
“biased1″ first resorts to name-calling –
“Monkeyoldpuss-”
I’m sure “okobserver” will chime in here and lambaste you for name-calling.
Or not.
Then “biased1″ goes into full-”Nathaniel” with —
“The point was, is it FAIR, if she WANTS to be a firefighter to not LET her be a firefighter?
Even if she can’t meet the requirements.
Are having the requirements fair?”
As with so many CON arguments (see “MaxGrobnik’s” NFL/blind airline pilot above), you’re desperate to grasp at reductio ad absurum tactics.
I have no idea how much a length of fire hose weighs, but it certainly makes sense to expect a Fire Fighter to be able to lift it. I just checked the want ads and phrases such as “Must be able to lift 50 lbs to shoulder level,” aren’t uncommon for, say, a beverage truck delivery driver.
Sure, having requirements are fair… if the requirements are fair.
There’s nothing about hauling a roll of firehose or carrying a typical American out of a burning house or unloading a case of beer from a truck that has anything intrinsically relative to gender or race or religion or sexual preference.
You CONs’ desperate efforts at straw man arguments (”liberals believe….”) are suffering from shallow thinking and deep b.s.
“Not only to liberals believe all American should be forced to get abortions (regardless of gender)…..”
Speculum, meet “biased1.”
“biased1,” meet speculum.
LOL… Professional Marathon Runner Wanted. Olympic speeds required. Legless men need not apply.
I was qualified Engineering Officer of the Watch at A1W, the prototype for the Enterprise #3 Enigine room. Probably one of the most demanding, nerve wracking jobs in the Navy.
While there, Westinghouse tried to get several civilian women engineers qualified on that watchstation to no avail. They couldn’t handle the stress.
There are differences between the sexes other than physical.
Save the keystrokes and follow this same debate in the UK:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/769612.stm
OK Hank… I dont disagree with you totally… but let’s make that an honest statement all the way >>> There is a LOT of stress in that particular assignment…
I am pretty certain that there are also a good number of men, who couldnt hand that kind of stress…. Right??
Of course the NBA, NHL, MLB, etc…will all have to be Equalized under Obama.
“MaxGrobnik” channels the 1940s –
“If a military draft was required in the future, would all you equal rights supporters have the daughters of America thrown into combat?
I would not.”
And the question is why not?
I am not familiar with all the physical requirements for flying, say, a B-2 Bomber. But I suspect a 90-pound, 5′2″ pilot could probably handle the mission. I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5′2″ pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
And, of course, “if a military draft were required in the future…” I’d want the best people available to defend my sorry ass.
Gender, race, religion, sexual preference wouldn’t really fit into my equation when compared with each individual’s capability to fit the mission.
You know those in the military would gain more pay and better working conditions if they just formed a Union.
Plot to assassinate Obama broken up:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081027/pl_nm/us_usa_politics_plot_5
Republican Colo. Sec. of State giving out bad info.!
“But Coffman’s office also admitted to a mistake on its part.
The office inadvertently advised about 4,000 voters whose registration applications were incomplete that they had until Oct. 6 to fix the problem.
In fact, those voters have until Election Day to complete the applications, Coffman’s office conceded, saying it planned to mail letters with the correct information to those 4,000 voters.
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
I am pretty certain that there are also a good number of men, who couldnt hand that kind of stress…. Right??
______________________________________________
We had a lot of men that couldn’t qualify for one reason or another. The stress involved was the biggest factor in a lot of them not making it.
Remember — MANY women served in WW II, AND in Korea… Not drafted, but served… many in high ranking Officer positiions…
Hey, Hotlips Hoolihan was a Major!! Outranked all of the surgeons except Winchester!!
Thanks Hank….
“But I suspect a 90-pound, 5?2? pilot could probably handle the mission.”
Would not bet on this one.
Once knew a man who wanted to be a pilot in the Navy. He did get selected but there was only one aircraft that had a seat which would fit his body. He was very tall.
$1 trillion spent on Iraq: What else could have been with that much money:
Examples:
$1 trillion could pave the entire U.S. interstate highway system with gold — 23.5-karat gold leaf. It could buy every person on the planet an iPod. It could give every high school student in the United States a free college education. It could pay off every American’s credit card. It could buy a Buick for every senior citizen still driving in the United States.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081027/books_trillion_dollars.html?.v=1
PALIN’S RELATIONS WITH STEVENS
8/29/08
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/08/29/1305615.aspx
Ted Stevens, the grand-daddy of Alaskan politics, has a wary relationship with the new Republican VP pick — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
When Palin was running for governor in 2006, she ousted long time Alaska fixture Frank Murkowski in a hard fought primary. Stevens and Murkowski are long time friends and Palin was able to defeat the sitting governor by running on ethics and clean government reformist platform.
Stevens ultimately came to endorse Palin, but it was late in the game. He endorsed her less than three weeks before the general election, although he did cut a television advertisement for her.
In July of last year, Palin shocked and angered Stevens by publicly criticizing him for his role in the VECO scandal and called for him to speak out about it.
“I think I join others in wanting to know of the senator’s innocence,” Palin said. “Right now, we’re not hearing anything.”
When Stevens was indicted last month for month on corruption charges, Palin said the indictment “rocks the foundation of the state” and added that she shares with others “dismay” and concern.
Stevens is running for re-election to the Senate this year, and he is in a tough race. He survived his primary last week, despite the fact that Palin backed his opponent.
Monkey,
YOU may want to force women into combat through the Draft, but I do not.
Why? It’s the wrong thing to do. There are still differences between the sexes, and the finer sex should be free to VOLUNTEER for combat and if she can meet the physical/mental qualifications, fine.
Forcing women into Combat isn’t right Monkey. Why do you think that it is right?
DavidB
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:39 pm | Permalink
$1 trillion spent on Iraq: What else could have been with that much money
=====================================================
That’s the Lib mantra.
That Iraq money could’ve been given to ME!
I saw some Obama fans protesting the other day. They were chanting about the war, and how that money should have been used to pay for their college tuition!!!
Greedy b*stards!
They don’t care about deficits. They don’t care about Government spending as long as they get their tin cups filled.
Guess what Libs, if there wasn’t an Iraq war, that money would not have gone to you or anyone else!
Why?
There was no money. It was all borrowed. But you don’t care about borrowing money, unless it isn’t spent on yourselves.
Can you not get any more greedy slime on you? You are all drippin with it.
Damn Max… you used that one yesterday…. Too early for re-runs, isnt it??? or is your Bot poster broken??
Maybe Monkey and Chas like those propaganda pictures and stories coming out of combat after an American woman soldier is captured.
You know what they do to the women prisoners, things that are not done to the men prisoners.
Women in combat are treated much differently if captured. It’s a tougher situation for them, then the men.
Therefore, the women should NOT be drafted and forced into combat positions. If a woman volunteeers and is qualified, fine that’s her choice. But don’t force women into a situation that men are not forced into.
Damn Chas,
You Libs keep regurgitating the same mantra about how that Iraq war money could have better been spent on YOURSELVES. (Y’all couldn’t care less about the lives lost or the budget deficit.)
Thus I’ll keep responding with the same response.
Consider it my Phony End-of Day Blessing to you Libs.
Good riddance to the mad Marxist Max the Communist!!!
MAX — Wake up you friggin redneck!!!
Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women into COMBAT positions??? You flame every day on this Blog about one thing or another… NOW there may be some who will MAKE you back up your lunacy…
So, Max — SHOW us all where either Monkey or I said to draft women into Combat…. Or dont you realize how MANY jobs there are in the military for both men AND women to do that have nothing to do with direct combat duty???
My guess is that youre just flaming…. because you WANT to!!
“HLP” struts –
“While there, Westinghouse tried to get several civilian women engineers qualified on that watchstation to no avail. They couldn’t handle the stress.”
Those women couldn’t.
Are you saying that no woman could “handle the stress?”
Well, of course, you are –
“There are differences between the sexes other than physical.”
Gee! Ya’think?
And there might even be differences between individuals that have nothing to do with gender, perhaps?
mxyzptlk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
Good riddance to the mad Marxist Max the Communist!!!
============
mxyzptlk, his name is Obama and they caught the skinheads, sorry.
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
Yep looks like Max’s Bot Poster is puking out re-runs…. so Max, cuts and runs!!
LOL
Ummm MAX…. I never said what you just said I did… But you cant post without lying, so nothing new here….
(Chas has a memory chip missing)
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
MAX — Wake up you friggin redneck!!!
Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women into COMBAT positions??? You flame every day on this Blog about one thing or another… NOW there may be some who will MAKE you back up your lunacy…
So, Max — SHOW us all where either Monkey or I said to draft women into Combat…. Or dont you realize how MANY jobs there are in the military for both men AND women to do that have nothing to do with direct combat duty???
My guess is that youre just flaming…. because you WANT to!!
===================================================================
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
Chas-”Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women”
====
Chas-”Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!”
——————–
Ha HA HA!!! ROFLMA!!
Do try to keep up Chas, ok!!! ROFL!!!
MAX you having a bad reading day… ANTI you too, apparently….
WHERE do you find anything about what I posted regarding women and the draft that says ONE thing about drafting women to COMBAT??
Arrogant A$$holes!!! BOTH of you!!! Why dont you take a couple of your precious GUNS, and go fight some Taliban or something productive….
#
Hud
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:35 pm | Permalink
“But I suspect a 90-pound, 5?2? pilot could probably handle the mission.”
Would not bet on this one.
Once knew a man who wanted to be a pilot in the Navy. He did get selected but there was only one aircraft that had a seat which would fit his body. He was very tall.
————————————-
Yeah, that happened to me…wasn’t my standing height, but my sitting height.
It turns out I have the torso of someone who is six foot six. So when the canopy was closed on the trainer, my helmet hit the inside of the canopy and it just wasn’t gonna work. :D
Chas=BDP
LOL!!!
ANTI — YOU FLAMING LIAR!!!
THIS IS WHAT I POSTED…. WHY CANT YOU POST THE ENTIRE QUOTE, YOU IGNORANT A$$???
“Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women into COMBAT positions???”
Chas-Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
“Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!”
========
Chas, you didn’t say anything about non-combat duties, so one MUST believe you meant EQUAL duties. INCLUDING COMBAT…LOL!!! BDP!!! HA HAHAHAHAHA!!!
AS>><SGEdsfe#???
Oh my, “MaxGrobnik” –
“YOU may want to force women into combat through the Draft, but I do not.
Why? It’s the wrong thing to do. There are still differences between the sexes, and the finer sex should be free to VOLUNTEER for combat and if she can meet the physical/mental qualifications, fine.”
First of all, you base all of this on the hypothetical that the United States would need to rely on a draft.
And, for no other reason than your patronizing used of the 1940s term “the finer sex” gets a free ride at democracy even if she meets the physical/mental qualifications? And why?
Shouldn’t someone in the “less-finer sex” get the same option? (Even if he’s not the grandson of a United States Senator and the son of a congressman?)
“Forcing women into Combat isn’t right Monkey. Why do you think that it is right?”
Personally, I kinda think forcing people into Combat isn’t all that good idea unless a people’s very survival depends on it. Israel thinks its very survival depends on it so women are required to take military or other national service training. It happens all over the world.
(And if you think prisoners of war don’t get raped — regardless of gender — you probably don’t want to read John McCain’s book.)
TO SEE THE FULL CONTEXT:
=================================================
MaxGrobnik
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:02 pm | Permalink
There’s still a difference between Men and Women that many recognize even today.
If a military draft was required in the future, would all you equal rights supporters have the daughters of America thrown into combat?
I would not.
=================================================
Monkeyhawk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:27 pm | Permalink
“MaxGrobnik” channels the 1940s –
“If a military draft was required in the future, would all you equal rights supporters have the daughters of America thrown into combat?
I would not.”
And the question is why not?
I am not familiar with all the physical requirements for flying, say, a B-2 Bomber. But I suspect a 90-pound, 5?2? pilot could probably handle the mission. I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5?2? pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
And, of course, “if a military draft were required in the future…” I’d want the best people available to defend my sorry ass.
Gender, race, religion, sexual preference wouldn’t really fit into my equation when compared with each individual’s capability to fit the mission.
================================================================================================
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them too!!
=======================================================================================
(NOTE: REMEMBER HOTLIPS WAS IN COMBAT!)
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:34 pm | Permalink
Remember — MANY women served in WW II, AND in Korea… Not drafted, but served… many in high ranking Officer positiions…
Hey, Hotlips Hoolihan was a Major!! Outranked all of the surgeons except Winchester!!
=============================================================================
Remember Chas,
I’m not the one voting for the candidate who will CUT AND RUN.
YOU are!
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
Personally, I never understood why it is only MALES who were considered worthy of defending our country… back when we DID have a draft….
BTW, I dont believe a return to the draft will happen, except in the event of some SEVERE ctastrophe!!
And what the heck?? Women all want equal rights…. So, draft them
Chas
—————-
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
MAX — Wake up you friggin redneck!!!
Please show ANY place that either Monkey OR I said anything about drafting women into COMBAT positions??? You flame every day on this Blog about one thing or another… NOW there may be some who will MAKE you back up your lunacy…
——————
Busted by your own words you luny. You really are delusional!!
Chas is so funny when he get’s hot under his collar. (If he has one.)
ROFLMAO!!!
sNort!
sNort!
I just hope they put a bigger rock on Chas tomorrow so he can’t escape so easily.
I think Chas blew out his Huggies! Get the garden hose!!!
Chas musta Cut and got the Runs!
Chas is on a short leash with the ‘purple chicken coop’ these days.
OK and ANTI,
HIGH FIVE!
MaxGrobnik
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:27 pm | Permalink
Chas musta Cut and got the Runs!
——
To many sprouts and tofu!
High 5 brotha! Ok, I need to catch my breath. I’ll check in later, y’all.
ANTI
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:12 pm | Permalink
Chas=BDP
LOL!!!
=============================================================
Chas=BDMFP
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:07 pm | Permalink
Yep looks like Max’s Bot Poster is puking out re-runs…. so Max, cuts and runs!!
LOL
==================================================================
Lookie Boy, who cut and run here?
You did, Boy.
ROFLMAO
Yuck
Yuck
Yuck
“Chas is on a short leash with the ‘purple chicken coop’ these days.”
No, he isn’t. Better if you not comment on things you know nothing about.
Huh, I guess that comes across as a simple “shut up” doesn’t it?
(NOTE: REMEMBER HOTLIPS WAS IN COMBAT!)
Chas
Posted October 27, 2008 at 4:34 pm | Permalink
Remember — MANY women served in WW II, AND in Korea… Not drafted, but served… many in high ranking Officer positiions…
Hey, Hotlips Hoolihan was a Major!! Outranked all of the surgeons except Winchester!!
—————————–
No, Hotlips was in a combat zone, but engaged as a Staff, non-combatant position. All medical personnel are non-combatants. Their only authorization to carry a firearm or use weapons against the enemy is to protect themselves or their patients. Offensive aggression is a violation of the Geneva convention and the UCMJ.
YOU DUMB SH*TS CANT EVEN READ SIMPLE ENGLISH…. I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT DRAFTING WOMEN INTO COMBAT…
SO STOP YOUR FRIGGIN LYING!!!
AND, MAX, HOTLIPS WAS NOT IN COMBAT… THEY WERE IN A MASH UNIT… BEHIND THE LINES…. WATCH MORE OLD RERUNS, AND YOU WOULD KNOW THAT!!!
We now return to the usual programming, with Marta.
Marta will show us all how to eliminate nasty poopie pet stains and odor from your carpet.
Say Regular,
As long as we are talking as if Mash was real life, remember the episode where Hotlips and Hawkeye were caught behind enemy lines in a combat zone?
Would that not be a combat situation?
What’s harder to believe?
1. Whether Hank really believes that there is only ONE COPY of a video of Barack Obama toasting “terrorists” which has been safely hidden away by one of the nation’s leading newspapers
OR
2. That he actually gives a damn about Jews given his repeated Jew-baiting on this WEBlog?
Chas,
C a l m
Y o u r s e l f.
R e
Lax.
Think happy thoughts about a time when you were happy in your happy place.
THEN RELEASE YOUR DAMN CAP’S LOCK KEY!
The CONTEXT Chas,
the CONTEXT of the discussion is very clear up above it is even
R E P O S T E D
for you.
And the last time the US had a DRAFT Chas, men were drafted into C O M B A T.
Get a clue Chas.
Admit your lie and the errors of your ways.
Ask the Lord for forgiveness, and you shall receive the peace of the Lord into your Heart.
Repent Chas.
Repent.
Before it is too late.
Not only that, CapN, Michelle Obama has an Uncle who is a Rabbi!! LOL
Oh, and I know Hotlips held a pistol several times.
Gotta go,
Marta is on!
#
MaxGrobnik
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:39 pm | Permalink
Say Regular,
As long as we are talking as if Mash was real life, remember the episode where Hotlips and Hawkeye were caught behind enemy lines in a combat zone?
Would that not be a combat situation?
—————————————-
Yeah, they (Hawkeye and Hotlips) can defend themselves, but they can’t launch an offensive strike against the enemy (i.e. set out land mines, mortar launchers, etc.)
The RepubliCONs have become the party of the labored hypothesis.
It’s much easier for them to believe that Obama was secretly born in Kenya that the birth announcement that appeared in a Honolulu paper in August 1961 was “faked” than to believe the birth certificate that says “legal document” is an actual legal document just like a judge in open court ruled.
It’s easier for Hank to believe that the LA Times is hiding a damaging video of Obama than to believe that anyone who gave the Times the video would have kept a back-up that would have been posted to YOUTUBE by now.
It’s easier for them to believe that a “6′4″ black man” took the time to carve a B for Barack into a girl’s face while robbing her than to believe that a McCain operative had simply staged the attack for sympathy.
And having proven that she’s a liar and a cheat, what’s their excuse?
She’s a Democrat who did it to make Republicans look bad.
Reality is whatever they say it is.
Max I remember that episode… and they werent supposed to be behind enemy lines either!!
And MAYBE you wouldnt look like such a stupid FOOL, if you didnt lie all the time!!
ANTI — I could really post some good stuff, if I cut and pasted some of YOUR vitiolic comments, and posted them as YOUR statement….
Granny… YOU as usual, have a READING comprehension problem… no news there!! LOL
In fact, this thread has greatly deteriorated…. gee, since Max came on… Amazing how frequently that happens!! ROFL!!
Re: Max, ANTI, Granny…
DNFTFT’S
I’m Outta Here!! …for now….
Don’t mean to overdo this. But there seems to be a great deal of need today.
Hey farmgrrl? Here is a friend for your puppy.
http://wichita.craigslist.org/zip/895879140.html
From Indie’s great link yesterday–
The bottom line: During the past 60 years, Democrats have presided over much less unemployment and much more robust income growth [than Republican administrations].
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1021/p09s01-coop.html
Alliance Defense Fund attorneys and allied attorneys filed a lawsuit Thursday against the city of Westminster, MD on behalf of pro-life organization Defend Life. Police insisted that participants in Defend Life’s “Face the Truth” 2008 tour needed permits to peacefully share their pro-life message along a public street. Police told them that they needed permits from the city and the Maryland State Highway Administration, as well as permission from the owner of a nearby shopping center. Subsequently, a police captain told Defend Life that its permit requests would be denied and refused to provide an explanation.
In reality, the only authority pro-lifers need to publicize their message unimpeded on public property is a copy of the U.S. Constitution.
- – -
Not all the economic news is bad. Sarasota County, FL has cut the money it sends to a local Planned Parenthood abortion mill. Officials, citing poor economic conditions and the need to better balance the city budget, removed the second $12,500 of the original $25,000 allocated for Planned Parenthood.
Cut all taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood.
- – -
Pregnant bank teller Niasha Delain, 25, of Queens, NY was found brutally murdered on Saturday, the day she was due to give birth. She and her unborn baby were declared dead at the murder scene.
Homicide is the leading cause of death of pregnant women.
- – -
“Each child comes with the message that God is not yet discouraged of man.”
. . . Sir Rabindranath Tagore, Indian Nobel Prize-winning poet
2. That he actually gives a damn about Jews given his repeated Jew-baiting on this WEBlog?
____________________________________________
It was a joke, Capn,
Any other examples of my so-called ‘repeated’ Jew baiting?
Are you the wienie that complained and got the post with the joke in it pulled?
I swear, you must have gone to the J R school of lying and whining.
nitwit
http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/10/25/obamamaniacs-show-their-class/
How many of you saw this on the news. The brick house below the safety tip sign is my sons next door neighbor. Theirs is the beige house on the left.
Reading the blog beneath the pictures show what the Obaminacs are capable of.
Monkeyhawk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:05 pm | Permalink
“HLP” struts –
“While there, Westinghouse tried to get several civilian women engineers qualified on that watchstation to no avail. They couldn’t handle the stress.”
_________________________________________________
Wasn’t bragging, Monkeyman. Just a fact. You want bragging?
I was one of the best EOOW there!
Now that’s a ’strut’! ANd it’s the truth!
civilian
I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5?2? pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
USAF (or at least ANG) would not allow that height. I think the shortest a pilot can be is 5 feet 9 inches or 5 feet 10 inches. Close to that anyway. Then again, the “rules” may have changed in 30 or so years.
I see HUD and Regular answered the question I thought of on “too tall”.
Seriously, if you legalize Gay/Lesbian marriages (and I cannot see why not), you must also consider legalizing polygamy. THere is no reason not to.
You might want to take that up with the IRS.
I had really hoped someone would watch that YouTube video, “A Class Divided.” We aren’t third graders and we should know better, but we haven’t learned the lessons. Here it is again, in case anyone would like to see how cruel human nature can be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8gCJ4K4tnE
And if anyone is interested in reading up on this teacher’s decision to help her third graders learn the lessons of discrimination, here is the story:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/etc/friday.html
Chas, try hard to learn the art of not responding. There is NO need of a rebuttal when you are being criticized. It is only someone’s opinion of you, not who you are. It just seems to turn into a feeding frenzy when you acknowledge it.
#
Predestined
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:32 pm | Permalink
I wouldn’t be surprised if we already had a few 90-pound, 5?2? pilots protecting your sorry ass right now.
USAF (or at least ANG) would not allow that height. I think the shortest a pilot can be is 5 feet 9 inches or 5 feet 10 inches. Close to that anyway. Then again, the “rules” may have changed in 30 or so years.
I see HUD and Regular answered the question I thought of on “too tall”.
=========================
To tell you the truth, I don’t know anymore the exact requirements for height. Six foot seven rings a bell (they can fly cargo/bombers.) Minimum height I think is 5′7″, although I could be wrong.
A lot of the best pilots for jet fighters are ’spark plug’ bodies – range from 5′8 to 5′11 and heavier than average.
The reason is that they can get their eye level blood pressure up quickly when they do they straining maneuver while at high G anti-combat maneuvers.
The slender, marathon runner has a longer vertical column of blood to push up if they are taller and more prone to loss of consciousness (blacking out) in high G turns.
#
Predestined
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:32 pm | Permalink
Seriously, if you legalize Gay/Lesbian marriages (and I cannot see why not), you must also consider legalizing polygamy. THere is no reason not to.
You might want to take that up with the IRS.
————————————
Besides the perpetual grin on my face with multiple wives, imagine all the tax deductions. :D
Major Margaret “Hotlips” Houlihan was Chief Nurse.
Watch the movie. Better yet, read the book by Richard Hooker from which the movie was made.
#
BlueJay
Posted October 27, 2008 at 5:36 pm | Permalink
“Chas is on a short leash with the ‘purple chicken coop’ these days.”
No, he isn’t. Better if you not comment on things you know nothing about.
Huh, I guess that comes across as a simple “shut up” doesn’t it?
———
I will post whenever and however I please, you leach! I guess that comes across as a simple “FU” doesn’t it?
Besides the perpetual grin on my face with multiple wives, imagine all the tax deductions. :D
========
Listening to more than one jabber on endlessly or nag? I’ll stick with just one wife.
Right back atcha “ANTI”.
Oh and Hank? I don’t lie. That’s you.
dunsel
Obama’s Education Groups Funded Controversial Organizations in the ’90s, Tax Returns Show
Barack Obama’s boards gave tens of thousands to ACORN and more than $1 million to racially charged organizations, a study of tax returns shows.
By Maxim Lott
FOXNews.com
Monday, October 27, 2008
The Annenberg Challenge and the Woods Fund of Chicago funded numerous controversial groups while Barack Obama served on their boards between 1995 and 2002, an analysis of their tax returns shows.
In 2001, when Obama was a part-time director of The Woods Fund of Chicago, it gave $75,000 to ACORN, the voter registration group now under investigation for voter fraud in 12 states.
The Woods Fund also gave $6,000 to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ, which Obama attended. The reason for the donation to the church is unclear — it is simply listed as “for special purposes” in the group’s IRS tax form.
It gave a further $60,000 to the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University, which was founded and run by Bernardine Dohrn, the wife of domestic terrorist William Ayers and, with her husband, a former member of the 1960s radical group the Weather Underground.
Other controversial donations that year included $50,000 to the Small Schools Network — which was founded by Ayers and run by Michael Klonsky, a friend of Ayers’ and the former chairman of the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist), an offshoot of the 1960s radical group Students for a Democratic Society — and $40,000 to the Arab American Action Network, which critics have accused of being anti-Semitic.
The Woods Fund did not respond to questions about the funding.
When Obama co-chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which calls itself “a public-private partnership improving education for 1.5 million urban and rural public school students,” it gave to some of the same groups — partnering with ACORN to manage funding for schools and giving over $1 million to the Small Schools Network.
It also gave nearly $1 million to a group called the South Shore African Village Collaborative, whose goals, according to Annenberg’s archived Web site, are “to develop more collegial relationships between teachers and principals. Professional development topics include school leadership, team building, parent and community involvement, developing thematic units, instructional strategies, strategic planning, and distance learning and teleconferencing.”
But the group mentions other goals in its grant application to the Annenberg Challenge:
“Our children need to understand the historical context of our struggles for liberation from those forces that seek to destroy us,” one page of the application reads.
Stanley Kurtz, a Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, found the collaborative’s original application when going through Annenberg’s archives.
Asked to comment, Yvonne Williams-Kinnison, executive director of the collaborative’s parent group, the Coalition for Improved Education in South Shore said, “I don’t want to put more fuel on the fire. You can call us back after the election…. I don’t want to compromise the position.”
Late Afrocentrist scholars Jacob Carruthers and Asa Hilliard were both invited to give SSAVC teachers a training session, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge noted in a report, adding that the “consciousness raising session … received rave reviews, and has prepared the way for the curriculum readiness survey session.”
But Carruthers has been a controversial figure because of inflammatory statements he made in writing.
“The submission to Western civilization and its most outstanding offspring, American civilization, is, in reality, surrender to white supremacy,” Carruthers wrote in his 1999 book, “Intellectual Warfare.” “Some of us have chosen to reject the culture of our oppressors and recover our disrupted ancestral culture.”
In the book, he compared the process of blacks assimilating into American culture with rape.
“We may not be able to get our virginity back after the rape, but we do not have to marry the rapist,” Carruthers said.
Hilliard has come under fire for advocating what many consider an extreme Afrocentric curriculum.
He selected the articles for the “African-American Baseline Essays” published in 1987 and first used in the Portland, Ore., school district. The essays have been criticized for claiming, among other things, that ancient Egyptians were the first to discover manned flight and the theory of evolution.
An Obama spokesman called investigation of these ties “pathetic.”
“This is another pathetic attempt by FOX News to distract voters from the economic challenges facing this nation by patching together tenuous links to smear Barack Obama,” Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com.
“The Annenberg Challenge was a bipartisan organization dedicated to improving the performance of students and teachers in Chicago Public Schools that was funded by a Republican philanthropist who was friends with President Reagan and launched by Republican Gov. Jim Edgar.”
But Kurtz says those founders of the Annenberg Challenge would not have known the details about to whom their Chicago office — one of 18 around the country — was giving money.
“If you read Ayers’ proposal to Annenberg, it doesn’t sound radical. But if you actually read Ayers’ education writings, they are very radical indeed,” Kurtz said. “Ayers, like so many other savvy professors, knows enough not to state his actual views frankly when applying for money. But you can find the truth in his writings.”
The controversial donations make up only a small portion of the overall amount doled out by the Annenberg and Woods funds. The Woods Fund gave over $3.5 million to 115 different groups in 2001, and the Annenberg Chellenge dispensed nearly $11 million to 63 groups at its height in 1999.
Most of the groups are mainstream and well respected, ranging from the Jazz Institute of Chicago to the Successful Schools Project.
But Kurtz says that this should not obscure what he describes as controversial donations.
“If John McCain had given to white supremacist groups and people said, ‘Hey, the majority of funding didn’t go to supremacist groups’ — that wouldn’t even cut the ice,” Kurtz said.
“I feel certain [Obama] knew about these radical groups,” Kurtz said. “We know that he read the applications because he made statements about the quality of proposals.”
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/27/obamas-education-groups-funded-controversial-organiations-s-tax-returns/
imagine all the tax deductions. :D
And that’s exactly why.
The law banning polygamy was passed in 1862, the same year the first federal/national income tax was created. Coincidence? Your guess is as good as mine.
Linda I watched this video. It was sad to think how easily we can turn people into discriminators, Christian bashers, people intoleratnt of those around them. Do you think we do that on this blog?
Did you by chance look at the signs that were painted in my sons front yard? This is hate also. This was distruction of personal property. Hundred of dollars of property damage.
The saddest part for my son is that his next door neighbors are in a biracial marriage. She is black and it didn’t matter. To haters they don’t have to be taught. Neither sides has a monolopy on love or hate. We have spent the day on a discussion that at the end of the day is boiling down to who hates who more?
Interesting discussion above regarding women being assigned to combat roles.
Can’t speak for any civilians who have never served, but as someone who has spent some time in fox hole but more time digging the damned things, we had a saying in my unit about women serving with us, similar to what is known as the the NIMBY affect.
NIMFH
But noone in the grunt companies I served with could say a complete sentence without swearing.
So it would more rightly be:
NIMFFH
I think the people who painted that hate on that home are sick. A lot like you described the woman who had the black eyes and the backwards “B” on her cheek. What I find disconcerting is that sick people need to be put into a group we oppose so we may hate them more. Why would either the people who painted the hate or the woman who claimed something that didn’t happen need to become examples of a political persuasion?
“The brick house below the safety tip sign is my sons next door neighbor. Theirs is the beige house on the left.”
Nice digs. How many garages do those places have, 3?
I’m not having any luck working up feelings for folks livin’ so large. Boo hoo.
Those spray painted houses are probably a bunch of kids, 15-22 years old would be my bet.
Probably brought the spray paint for Halloween and spiked on an opportunity to do it before there were too many police patrols.
#
BlueJay
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:18 pm | Permalink
“The brick house below the safety tip sign is my sons next door neighbor. Theirs is the beige house on the left.”
Nice digs. How many garages do those places have, 3?
I’m not having any luck working up feelings for folks livin’ so large. Boo hoo.
=========================
That’s not living large Junior.
There are thousands of communities with houses just like that.
#
Predestined
Posted October 27, 2008 at 6:56 pm | Permalink
imagine all the tax deductions. :D
And that’s exactly why.
The law banning polygamy was passed in 1862, the same year the first federal/national income tax was created. Coincidence? Your guess is as good as mine.
————————–
You didn’t address the grinning part. :)
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?
#
mxyzptlk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?
============================
Nope, they got the skinny on an Al Qaeda leader and took him out.
“Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?”
No, the military trying to save the lives of their soldiers.
mxyzptlk and Regular,
How can I, the average American, know the truth of this situation? Who can be believed? I have been disappointed often, put my trust in words that turned out to be untrustworthy. It can’t be what both sides have painted it?
How am I to know? Will there ever be trust again?
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:26 pm | Permalink
mxyzptlk and Regular,
How can I, the average American, know the truth of this situation? Who can be believed? I have been disappointed often, put my trust in words that turned out to be untrustworthy. It can’t be what both sides have painted it?
How am I to know? Will there ever be trust again?
=======================
Well, hard to explain…best analogy is to serve in a position where life and death is involved. Doesn’t have to be in the military, police or fire – it could be a nurse or Doctor who make decisions to save lives.
Trust, especially with a team of individuals, highly trained and skilled to save lives is a very high level of trust.
Doesn’t matter of the skin color, gay or straight, young or old or hairstyle. :)
There are thousands of examples of trust in occupations and also many famous cases of people learning to trust each other in survival situations.
Like myself and Capn America…we fight like cats and dogs, but if it were in a combat situation, no enemy is going to get to him and I will die defending him or you for the matter of fact.
Getting in the doldrums with politics and religion discussion can get you down. We all know what’s basically right and wrong. The methodology, path and implementation is what we argue about when there is no personal risk or perhaps boredom takes over.
Life is grand, have a blast!
Okay, that last post was over the top, but you get my meaning on trust, I hope. :D
Yes a little over the top. Especially that part about CapnAmerica. I don’t think you’d find him anywhere close to a combat zone. I think I heard he went to Canada in his day.
Kansas trivia question:
What TV channel was it that played “Bugler’s Holiday” as their theme song for the News broadcast?
I think it was KAKE, but it’s been a few years. Anyone else remember?
Here’s the “bugler holiday” theme.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRLRSwt3SD0&feature=related
HERE IT IS FOLKS, ANOTHER OBAMA “REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH” STATEMENT.
From a Radio Show in 2001:
Barack Obama, in 2001:
You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil-rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be okay, but the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.
And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution — at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.
And that hasn’t shifted, and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil-rights movement was because the civil-rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmFhYzIzMGQ1Y2FlMTA4N2M1N2VmZWUzM2Y4ZmNmYmI=
Respectable post Regular, enjoyed that.
NOW WE KNOW WHAT “CHANGE” MEANS!
“REDISTRIBUTIVE CHANGE”!!!
From Brack “The Socialist” Obama:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmFhYzIzMGQ1Y2FlMTA4N2M1N2VmZWUzM2Y4ZmNmYmI=
You know, I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way. [snip] You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues, you know, in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time. You know, the court is just not very good at it, and politically, it’s just very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard.
So I think that, although you can craft theoretical justifications for it, legally, you know, I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts.”
I don’t know about the theme song, but I do know it was a beeeeuuuutiful day in kakeland!
indainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:50 pm | Permalink
I don’t know about the theme song, but I do know it was a beeeeuuuutiful day in kakeland!
——————
Ya, I remember that. Back in the day when Joyland was the big deal in town. :D
At least for the younger set. :)
When you approached Joyland from the parking lot there were hills between the sidewalks leading to the entrance. They were HUGE hills when I was a girl. We used to lay down at the top and roll down those hills, get up and run to the top to repeat that roll down that steep hill! We could usually get in three or four rolls down before the parents began urging us to quit so we could get to the fun. I guess parents didn’t know we were already having fun! It’s no wonder I got sick on that cotton candy. I probably was sick before I got on the roller coaster. ;-)
Are you old enough and of Wichita long enough to remember Kiddie Land? The roller coaster there was small but mighty! At one point in that park’s history they had a trampoline park that was my favorite! Long before a back yard trampoline was heard of. Kids today have much in their daily lives that I was lucky if I experienced once every year or so. Now I’m sounding like a crabby old complainer and I didn’t mean to. It’s a different time.
Oh, and will the LA Times relase their video of Obama?
Strange, the Press involved in a coverup.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Confirmed: MSM Holds Video Of Barack Obama Attending Jew-Bash & Toasting a Former PLO Operative… Refuse to Release the Video!
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/10/confirmed-msm-holds-video-of-barack.html
Introduction: The LA Times is holding a video that shows Barack Obama celebrating with a group of Palestinians who are openly hostile towards Israel. Barack Obama even gives a toast to a former PLO operative at this celebration. If the American public saw this side of Barack Obama he would never be elected president.
But, the media refuses to release this video.
‘If Obama’s a socialist, so is McCain‘
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/385183_teepenonline28.html
In their rush to make Obama out as a socialist readying tumbrels for the rich, conservatives have sometimes explicitly but for the most part implicitly reverted to the old country-club grumble that the graduated income tax is nothing more than a radical scheme to coddle the undeserving poor with the money of the deserving rich.
Some radicalism. The income tax, with progressive rates no less, was introduced in 1862 to pay for the Civil War. It become permanent with the adoption of the Constitution’s enabling 16th amendment in 1913, after the Supreme Court had demurred in the meantime.
The income tax is the way we been doing our civic business off and on for nearly 150 years and fulltime for nearly 100. If Obama is a socialist for proposing to reassert its pre-Bush progressivity, then unless McCain means to repeal the income tax he is a socialist, too. He’s just squabbling with Obama, not about some grand difference of economic philosophy, but only about how much the wealthy should pay.
It looks like Sarah ‘troopergate ethics violations’ Palin does not want to criticize Stevens.
So much for Palin being McCain’s strong ethics reformer. . .
‘Palin reserved in reaction to Stevens’ verdict’
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hZX9J_TPxF9jduXlUSdlRZBIx_9wD94342D00
“But Monday, Palin wasn’t taking on Stevens. She said it was a sad day for Alaska and said it highlighted the corrupting influence of Big Oil in Alaska.
Stevens was convicted of seven counts of lying about $250,000 in home improvements and other gifts from oil contractor Bill Allen.
“I will carefully monitor this situation and take any appropriate action as needed,” Palin said. “In the meantime, I ask the people of Alaska to join me in respecting the workings of our judicial system.”
Stevens has not said what he plans to do and Palin’s reluctance to call on him to step down may reflect just how powerful the Alaska senator remains. He is still popular and could win re-election.”
Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Barack Obama
Joe Raymond / Associated Press
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obamamideast10apr10,0,1780231,full.story
By Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
April 10, 2008
CHICAGO — It was a celebration of Palestinian culture — a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.
A special tribute came from Khalidi’s friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi’s wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.
And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor’s going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.
Their belief is not drawn from Obama’s speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.
At Khalidi’s 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.”
One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 8:01 pm | Permalink
When you approached Joyland from the parking lot there were hills between the sidewalks leading to the entrance. They were HUGE hills when I was a girl. We used to lay down at the top and roll down those hills, get up and run to the top to repeat that roll down that steep hill! We could usually get in three or four rolls down before the parents began urging us to quit so we could get to the fun. I guess parents didn’t know we were already having fun! It’s no wonder I got sick on that cotton candy. I probably was sick before I got on the roller coaster. ;-)
Are you old enough and of Wichita long enough to remember Kiddie Land? The roller coaster there was small but mighty! At one point in that park’s history they had a trampoline park that was my favorite! Long before a back yard trampoline was heard of. Kids today have much in their daily lives that I was lucky if I experienced once every year or so. Now I’m sounding like a crabby old complainer and I didn’t mean to. It’s a different time.
—————
I remember kiddieland being talked about, but my grandparents always took us to Joyland, so never went tere.
When I was very young, 3-4 years old, the music from the carousel scared my tiny little tummy and I wouldn’t get on it. :D
It was those clown faces, snarling horses and that deep “thump thump.”
Cosmos,
Lame defense of Obama.
Calling McCain a Socialist with Zero Foundation in Fact.
Claiming anyone who supports the income tax makes them a Socialist is ridiculous.
The ba*tardization of the Income Tax into a Welfare Handout – That is, Giving Money To People who Pay ZERO Tax and calling it a Tax Refund is pure Socialism.
Obama will give a tax cut to 95% of Americans, but 40% of Americans pay ZERO income tax.
THAT is Socialism.
Cosmos, go back to your own Universe now.
I never got old enough to be UNafraid of the ferris wheel. Seemed to always be lucky enough to ride with someone brave who wanted to rock. And I remember the sound and the clown playing the organ. That clown was a bit scary — had a kind of sneer on his face…
Thanks, Regular. I was grumpy and down about the divisiveness. A walk down memory lane was “just the ticket” for what ailed me. ;-)
‘Obama Camp Pushes Back On Interpretation Of Radio Remarks’
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/27/obama-camp-pushes-back-on_n_138157.html
“Obama spokesman Bill Burton had to shrug and point out the obvious: “In the interview, Obama went into extensive detail to explain why the courts should not get into that business of ‘redistributing’ wealth. Obama’s point — and what he called a tragedy — was that legal victories in the Civil Rights led too many people to rely on the courts to change society for the better.” ”
‘Obama advisor pushes back on ‘redistribution’ ‘
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Obama_advisor_pushes_back_on_redistribution.html?showall
“What the critics are missing is that the term ‘redistribution’ didn’t mean in the Constitutional context equalized wealth or anything like that. It meant some positive rights, most prominently the right to education, and also the right to a lawyer…What he’s saying – this is the irony of it – he’s basically taking the side of the conservatives then and now against the liberals.”
My favorite Alaskan blogger admitted she understood Ted Stevens might still win reelection to his Senate seat, but she is predicting the Democratic challenger will see victory and she wants to have a talk with him. I laughed and thought how great it would be to have this same talk with every politician who will celebrate victory next week.
———-
“I chatted with Mark Begich the other day and asked him how he was doing. He said he was hanging in there, but that these last few days felt like a lifetime. The next time I see him, I’m going to ask him how he is doing. Then I’m going to grab his tie, and pull him forehead-to-forehead. Then I’m going to look him square in the eyes from two inches away and say, “Don’t. Screw. Up.” The Democrats have a golden opportunity to be the white knights, and restore a modicum of respect to Alaskan politics. But power corrupts unless we are on our guard….however many years, or decades we hold elected office.
So Mr. Begich, be wise, be careful, and treat the Senate seat with care.”
http://mudflats.wordpress.com/
What do the gun nuts have to say about this one?
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/10/28/america/Boy-Shoots-Himself.php
“And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor’s going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.
Their belief is not drawn from Obama’s speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.”
So what is the issue? The fact that he’s willing to listen? I don’t get why that’s a bad idea. Don’t you think the Palestinians deserve a voice also?
I think what depresses me most about this election is all those who claim to be Christian who think nothing of spreading gossip and falsehoods about a good man who has the potential to be not only a good leader, but a great one. They claim to be Christian, but are so filled with hatred and intolerance, especially towards anyone who disagrees with their point of view. They have very little, if any, compassion for their fellow man and go against nearly every value that Jesus taught. They are so arrogant that they refuse to listen to or consider anything that doesn’t validate their narrow, rigid opinions and will believe any lie meant to tear someone down, no matter how ridiculous it is. I hate their false and venomous attacks on good people…and all in the name of Christian and family values. I’m SO sick of it and will be glad when this election is over so I won’t be surrounded by it so much.
I believe the Christian religion has really been damaged by those who use it to manipulate others and as a weapon to justify hatred, intolerance, and anger. It’s been hijacked and turned into something different than what Jesus meant it to be.
To the gun nuts it’s just collateral damage, Linda…no big deal.
Kids drown in swimming pools and die in car accidents all the time…the only thing that’s important to them is that guns be as available as possible with no restrictions. Just ask Nathan if you don’t believe me.
Boeing and union reach tentative agreemnent.
Good news, Phantom!
What I LOVED about Kiddieland is that the actually had motor powered cars that you could REALLY drive!
As a child, I never left Joyland without throwing one heck of a tantrum.
Isn’t that strange? I don’t remember the cars you could drive. Maybe my folks never let me know about those? I was afraid to throw a tantrum — I might never have had an opportunity to go back if I was less than appreciative. My Dad believed fear was a good motivator.
Good evening Mary!
Wow, you’ve scored a daily double tonight! Get to bad mouth Christians and anyone that believes in the Second Amendment in the same night!
There is so much wrong with the premise in your Christian bashing tirade I don’t know where to start. Your premise is wrong. It gets worse from there on.
As far as your ‘gun nuts’ comments, again your premise is not just wrong, your entire comment is a vicious unsubstantiated lie from beginning to end.
KAKE – TV Ch. 10 had “Bugler’s Holiday” for their News at 10 theme song for many years… along with the face of Greg Gamer as the lead news man on the set… John Froom did the weather.
What channel did Cecil Carrier work for? He died this morning. His father and my grandfather were cousins. I guess that made he and I some kind of cousins however many times removed? I never understood the the whole first, second, third and then the once, twice removed stuff.
Kiddyland is before my time.
I BARELY remember when that swimming pool at Jland had water and people in it.
It is a shame what is happening to Joyland. As much (and more recently) as Cowton, Joyland is a part of community history. I’d like to see the city buy Joyland and quit wasting money on Cowtown.
Regular, “Bugler’s Holiday” was the theme song for Greg Gamer at KAKE, before he moved over to Channel 3.
To go back that far in history, makes me feel old!
http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2008/10/25/obamamaniacs-show-their-class/
Interesting that the HUGE headline on this commentary assumes from the BEGINNING that the vandalism is done by Obama supporters…
How very dense… The police say they have NO CLUES…. but yet, this Blogger has ALL the answers…
Sort of reminds me of McCain… says he KNOWS where Bin Laden is, and KNOWS how to get him… Soooo why is he witholding vital information from Bush and the Military??? A grandstaning tactic???
Hey Chas,
Bill McClain did the weather at noon. He was the one that was known for, “IT’S A BEAUUUUUUUTFUUUUL DAY IN KAKELAND!” No matter what the weather was!
Whoever is posting this total S*it about Obama bashing Jews:
WHY would Obama BASH on people who are a part of Michelle’s family??
Michelle has an uncle who is a Rabbi!
I’m not bad mouthing Christians, Hank…just the fake ones who think nothing about assasinating someone’s character and spreading lies.
Tell me what is false about my statement regarding guns.
Do you really give a rip about 8 yr olds shooting themselves accidently?
McClean ALSO did the weather on KAKE Radio in the morning… same comment… Note that I said John Froom did the weather on the News at 10… I was mostly in school at Noon….
Hank, what is Christian about deliberatly breaking the 8th commandment?
Remember Captain Bill and The Old Cobbler?
How about Deputy Dusty (do you remember his dog’s name?)and Cowboy Frank? My favorite was Freddie Fudd and of course, Major Astro.
Khalidi, despite the ‘exotic’-sounding name, was born and raised in New York and is a respected scholar. His mom is Lebanese. He is not and never has been a PLO operative.
He is a critic of harsh Israeli policies, but not an anti-semite. (It was Sarah Palin who quoted and anti-semite “Jew-hater” in her convention speech!)
Can’t yous guys get anything right?
“A-OK, and all systems go!”
Mary, my mother acted with Major Astro(Tom ______) when she worked with the Wichita Little Theater group way back when….
Major Astro?
I MET him when I was like 5. Captain Bill I remember too.
And going into the holiday season? Henry Harvey is as close to the real Santa as it gets.
My husband worked with him at Channel 24 before he retired. He did the voice overs for the commercials. Very nice man.
I went on Cowboy Frank once when I was a kid.
#
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:20 pm | Permalink
Hank, what is Christian about deliberatly breaking the 8th commandment?
________________________________________________
Well, Mary, nothing. Who deliberately broke the 8th Commandment?
Ahhh yes… Henry Santa Harvey and his little buddy, Kake-man… What a show for the holidays — And Freddy Fudd and the Treehouse the rest of the year…
Now its all cable… no real local personalities left anymore… Well, maybe Larry Hatteburg, still at KAKE….
Yep! Henry Harvery set a HIGH bar for Santa, and so far no one has ever been able to reach it.
So, does anyone remember what channel Cecil Carrier worked for? Guess it will probably be in the paper tomorrow.
Tsk.. Tsk… Tsk….
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:14 pm | Permalink
What channel did Cecil Carrier work for? He died this morning. His father and my grandfather were cousins. I guess that made he and I some kind of cousins however many times removed? I never understood the the whole first, second, third and then the once, twice removed stuff.
————————–
“removed” describes different generations.
Your mom’s or dad’s cousins would be your first cousins once removed. Your grandmother or grandfather’s cousins would be twice removed.
So Cecil Carrier would be your first cousin twice removed.
Second cousins (third, fourth, etc.) describe the Great Grandparents of which you have in common with someone else in your family that is not of your Grandparents lineage.
So, for instance, your Great Grandmother’s grandson was named steven III and he carries the same name as your Grandmother’s maiden name, but they are only related by bloodline and not to your grandfather.
Steven III would be your second cousin via your Great grandmother.
I was a regular on HiFiHop. My friend Gary and I loved to dance and we practiced and practiced and practiced.
Cecil did morning weather on KFH Radio, and did evening weather on KARD-TV Ch. 3
It is absolutely terrible the things OBama said about jews. Israel, is still held firm in God’s hands despite Obama’s promise to cut off funding.
It is typical for some minorities to bad mouth and hate others. Maybe Barack sees jews as a form of competition to his race?
Whatever his reasons, Obama did NOT do right by jewish Americans in his hate of them and lack of support.
Ollie Henry did news on KTVH – 12…
Gus Griebe did sports on KTVH – 12…
Jim Setters (went to school with his kids) did morning news on the old KWBB Radio…
Dusty lived across the street from my aunt and uncle on N. Coolidge… What a BEAUTIFUL horse he had!! Gorgeous Palamino….
And imagine that back then 25th St. N., was the city limits boundary… until I was mybe 8 or 9 yrs. old…
How did McCain’s campaign go so far off base and out to the fringe? WHO is driving that train???
Linda, did you know Willaim Cunningham? He was a regular on HiFiHop also!
Whoever is driving his train, doesnt drive trains much better than McCain flew airplanes… LOL
Regular, that was a great explanation! I have genealogists in my family (thank goodness for those who love to do that investigating so the rest of us can just sit back and enjoy the fruits of their labors!) and they have never explained it that well! Thanks.
“It is absolutely terrible the things OBama said about jews. Israel, is still held firm in God’s hands despite Obama’s promise to cut off funding.
It is typical for some minorities to bad mouth and hate others. Maybe Barack sees jews as a form of competition to his race?
Whatever his reasons, Obama did NOT do right by jewish Americans in his hate of them and lack of support.”
There’s my point, Hank.
Roach, I rarely see such a blatant lie.. even on this blog. You reach heights of lows…
Wichita also had mostly all sand roads in south Wichita and other areas. They were always in funky condition.
15 cent/gallon for gas. :D
…and nickle ‘pop’ with 2 cents back on deposit return.
Mary, if I did know William I have forgotten that I did. sigh Sometimes we knew the style but not the name. Sometimes I have just forgotten what I once knew. sigh
HLP
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:33 pm | Permalink
#
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:20 pm | Permalink
Hank, what is Christian about deliberatly breaking the 8th commandment?
==================
What has Hank stolen? :D
I wish we could somehow get the old tapes of that show…I never missed it on Saturdays, even though I was a young child. I have thought about contacting the station and asking if there is a way to get them…they must have them stored somewhere.
That would be so much fun! I was thin and moved so easily. ;-) Let’s see, it would have been around ‘60, ‘61, ‘62? Was it KTVH?
Now, Mary, I know you are a few years younger than me, but surely not so many that while I was dancing away you could have been a “young child?”
Not much of a point, Mary. If you disagree with the quote, and reasonable people can agree to disagree, then let’s have a discussion on the merits of the quote. . .without using it as an opportunity to bash Christians.
The quote is an opinion, based on facts. Has nothing to do with Christians and the 8th Commandment. (Or, more correctly, I would assume with the 9th Commandment)
I could defend Christianity with you in a separate discussion, if you like. It would take a while, I suppose. Of course, we’d have to start with the basics, since you deny the existence God.
I so rarely watch local TV anymore.
Does Channel 10 still use that old tornado warning deal?
There was a picture of a weather vane and the audio was bells that went ding ding ding ding DING DING.
It struck terror in my heart when I was a kid. My dad was deathly afraid of tornadoes. Now? I go looking for them.
hehehe
“What has Hank stolen? :D”
I was getting around to that, Regular. See my last post.
Two polls out Thursday show Barack Obama restoring his lead among Jewish voters to their historic Democratic levels, even in the crucial swing state of Florida where the candidate has come under much criticism from the Jewish community.
A Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday found Floridian Jews back Obama over Republican rival John McCain by a rate of 77 percent to 20%. And a Gallup survey found that nationwide, Jews prefer Obama by 74% to McCain’s 22%
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1222017612413&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
#
lindainks55
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:52 pm | Permalink
Now, Mary, I know you are a few years younger than me, but surely not so many that while I was dancing away you could have been a “young child?”
===================
“bites tongue and winks”
:D :D :D :D :D :D
I deny the existance of God? How so?
Why are self proclaimed Christians the first to spread lies and falsehoods? You revel in it.
Maybe you should check your “facts” before you post it for the world to see…
The 9th commandment? When did I say someone was coveting someone’s wife? LOL!
The 9th commandment? When did I say someone was coveting someone’s wife? LOL!
=================
…or their ass…
I grew up Catholic:
II am the LORD your God: you shall not have strange Gods before me!
II.
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain!
III.
Remember to keep holy the LORD’S Day!
IV.
Honor your father and your mother!
V.
You shall not kill!
VI.
You shall not commit adultery!
VII.
You shall not steal!
VIII.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor!
IX.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife!
X.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods!
I’m not much younger than you, Linda…but I remember wacthing my baby sitter dance on HiFiHop!
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 9:57 pm | Permalink
I deny the existance of God? How so?
________________________________________________
Haven’t you proclaimed a disbelieve in God in the past? If not, I apologize.
________________________________________________
Why are self proclaimed Christians the first to spread lies and falsehoods?
________________________________________________
Name one lie I’ve ever posted about your chosen one. You need to bring more to the discussion other than ‘Christians are hypocrites’. It’s wearing thin.
________________________________________________
You revel in it.
________________________________________________
You’ve got some serious problems with Christians. “You revel in it” is a vicious lie. You owe me an apology.
VIII.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor!
To all good Christians on this blog…food for thought the next time you decide to post lies about someone in an effort to discredit them.
Let’s see if you can walk the walk.
I would say your posts this morning was a lie. Did you really check out the facts before you posted the trash about Obama being a “jew basher”.
I have no problem with Chritians, Hank…just hypocrites who claim to be Christian.
I respect the Christian religion way too much to ignore the charlatans who tarnish it.
That’s “Christians”
But if they didn’t tell lies about Obama what would they have to say on a political blog? They have nothing positive to say about their candidate of choice. All I’ve seen is criticisms of Obama and attacking the messenger when any criticism of McCain or Palin is posted.
I never said “Christians are hypocrites”…FAKE Christians are hypocrites, Hank.
I would like to consider KFG someone I could be a friend to.
—Freebird1971
“kfg is a fine person in her own right. She reminds me of some of the Texas gals I knew; rougher than a freshly cut pine log; saltier than a brine pickle and more stubborn than an unfed mule in a wheat pasture.
She’s opinionated and makes some generalized attacks on just about everyone she disagrees with.”
—-Regular
Ah no, she is an obnoxious, rude, crude, foul minded, foul mouthed lesbian chicken farmer who couldn’t hold a job she didn’t inherit or steal.
And Freebird1971, yours is a suspect comment since guano farmer is so out outspokenly lesbian.
Another fine example comes along.
#
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:08 pm | Permalink
I would say your posts this morning was a lie. Did you really check out the facts before you posted the trash about Obama being a “jew basher”.
______________________________________
That’s merely your opinion about someone else’s opinion.
Why do you use it to bash my faith?
I don’t think it was a lie. Therefore, I broke no Commandments. Furthermore, I am a Christian but I don’t ever flaunt it on this BLOG. Most times when my faith is challenged I ignore it.
If I think someone has legitimate questions about my faith I offer to take them to lunch (and pay for it) and discuss anything about what and why I believe. No one has ever taken me up on it.
You constantly call any Christian a hypocrite for merely disagreeing with you. You dear, are in danger of breaking the Commandment on ‘bearing false witness against your neighbor’.
You owe me an apology.
Let’s see…Obama is a socialist, he’s a communist, he’s a Muslim, he’s not an American citizen, he refuses to salute the flag, he attended a school for terrorists in training, he hangs out with terrorists, he’s an arab, he hates jews, blah, blah, blah……how can people be so dumb to buy into this BS??
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:12 pm | Permalink
I have no problem with Chritians, Hank…just hypocrites who claim to be Christian.
______________________________________________
Are you calling me a hypocrite?
Now we know where “Nathaniel” get it.
“HLP” whines –
“…You constantly call any Christian a hypocrite for merely disagreeing with you.”
No.
But we frequently point out when “christians” disagree with Jesus.
What you posted this morning was an all out lie…not an “opinion”. It was propaganda, pure and simple.
I don’t care if a Christian disagrees with me about anything…what I hate is when someone jusitifys doing wrong and then claims to be a good Christian.
If you want to post lies…then go ahead..just don’t expect me to believe you follow the values that Jesus taught.
I’m disappointed that you buy into the lies of the right wing pundits.
What do you think, Hank? Is it OK to be Christian and then tell lies in an attempt to ruin them?
A very good commentary by Thomas Sowell. It’s an opinion piece that contains many un-refuted facts. I agree with it and I do so without violating any of the Catholic Ten Commandments.
_____________________________________________
Obama and “The Left”
by Thomas Sowell
Although Senator Barack Obama has been allied with a succession of far left individuals over the years, that is only half the story. There are, after all, some honest and decent people on the left. But these have not been the ones that Obama has been allied with– allied, not merely “associated” with.
ACORN is not just an organization on the left. In addition to the voter frauds that ACORN has been involved in over the years, it is an organization with a history of thuggery, including going to bankers’ homes to harass them and their families, in order to force banks to lend to people with low credit ratings.
Nor was Barack Obama’s relationship with ACORN just a matter of once being their attorney long ago. More recently, he has directed hundreds of thousands of dollars their way. Money talks– and what it says is more important than a politician’s rhetoric in an election year.
Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger are not just people with left-wing opinions. They are reckless demagogues preaching hatred of the lowest sort– and both are recipients of money from Obama.
Bill Ayers is not just “an education professor” who has some left-wing views. He is a confessed and unrepentant terrorist, who more recently has put his message of resentment into the schools– an effort using money from a foundation that Obama headed.
Nor has the help all been one way. During the last debate between John McCain and Barack Obama, Senator McCain mentioned that Senator Obama’s political campaign began in Bill Ayers’ home. Obama immediately denied it and McCain had no real follow-up.
It was not this year’s political campaign that Obama began in Bill Ayers’ home but an earlier campaign for the Illinois state legislature. Barack Obama can match Bill Clinton in slickness at parsing words to evade accusations.
That is one way to get to the White House. But slickness with words is not going to help a president deal with either domestic economic crises or the looming dangers of a nuclear Iran.
People who think that talking points on this or that problem constitute “the real issues” that we should be talking about, instead of Obama’s track record, ignore a very fundamental fact about representative government.
Representative government exists, in the first place, because we the voters cannot possibly have all the information necessary to make rational decisions on all the things that the government does. We cannot rule through polls or referendums. We must trust someone to represent us, especially as President of the United States.
Once we recognize this basic fact of representative government, then the question of how trustworthy a candidate is becomes a more urgent question than any of the so-called “real issues.”
A candidate who spends two decades promoting polarization and then runs as a healer and uniter, rather than a divider, forfeits all trust by that fact alone.
If Ronald Reagan had attempted to run for President of the United States as a liberal, the media would have been all over him. His support for Barry Goldwater would have been in the headlines and in editorial denunciations across the country.
No way would he have been able to get away with using soothing words to suggest that he and Barry Goldwater were like ships that passed in the night.
If Barack Obama had run as what he has always been, rather than as what he has never been, then we could simply cast our votes based on whether or not we agree with what he has always stood for.
Some people take solace from the fact that Senator Obama has verbally shifted position on some issues, like drilling for oil or gun control, since this is supposed to show that he is “pragmatic” rather than ideological.
But political zig-zags show no such moderation as some seem to assume. Lenin zig-zagged and so did Hitler. Zig-zags may show no more than that someone is playing the public for fools.
Some people who see the fraud in what Obama is saying are amazed that others do not. But Obama knows what con men have long known, that their job is not to convince skeptics but to enable the gullible to continue to believe what they want to believe. He does that very well.
Regular
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:23 pm | Permalink
#
mxyzptlk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?
============================
Nope, they got the skinny on an Al Qaeda leader and took him out.
++++++++++
The story I heard on the BBC was that children and adolescents were killed in this attack. The BBC interviewed a professor from the O.U. middle eastern studies program who asserted that Bush adminstration was doing this because it knew it could. Syria is trying to curry favor with the incoming administration, so the Bush folk thought we could get by with this attack without risking retaliation. Man, I hope that dude was wrong because if he is right, I have a lower evaluation of the 43rd presidency than I even thought possible…
I take that back…what I mean to say is that you “repeat” lies when you post the desperate rantings of right wing political pundits without checking out the facts.
By “repeating” lies…you break the 8th commandment (the CATHOLIC 8th commandment, that is.)
Keep drinking the koolade, Hank. I’m done.
“there are none so blind as he who will not see”
“Unrefuted facts”? More like unsupported assertions, Hank.
Nor is Thomas Sowell a particularly credible source (but look!: he’s black!). Creators Syndicate tends to publish hacks who care little about the factual merits of their statements.
#
Mary_Caruso
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:29 pm | Permalink
What do you think, Hank? Is it OK to be Christian and then tell lies in an attempt to ruin them?
__________________________________________
Are you calling me a hypocrite, Mary? Are you calling me a liar? What lies have I told?
You owe me an apology, Mary.
I make a point of showing my son posts from folks like Hank and Boxlock.
To show him the worst of the marriage between cons and Christianity?
Damn I didn’t know Ted Stevens was 84!
Guess they will have to send him to nursing home jail.
Man, I hope that dude was wrong because if he is right, I have a lower evaluation of the 43rd presidency than I even thought possible…
The next 2 months could prove to be scarier than the rest of the man’s term. Hope I’m wrong.
What is the deal with the “open threads” with the Edvard Munch, The Scream, always generating such high post scores – over 500 thus far.
Let’s just hope the election thread on 11-05 will have the same header.
Night all.
He has caused such damage and we should all be concerned about what he is capable of.
2 months, 26 days, 8 hours, 16 minutes
Good night, Steven! Me too. Good night all.
“The next 2 months could prove to be scarier than the rest of the man’s term. Hope I’m wrong.”
Me, too!
Good night, John-boy! :)
Hack?
hehehe
CURRICULUM VITA
ADDRESS: The Hoover Institution
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305
(650) 723-3303
PERSONAL: U.S. Citizen, born June 30, 1930
EDUCATION:
Ph.D. in Economics, University of Chicago, 1968
A.M. in Economics, Columbia University, 1959
A.B. in Economics, magna cum laude, Harvard College, 1958
EXPERIENCE:
Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, September 1980 – present
Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., July 1974 – June 1980
Visiting Professor of Economics, Amherst College, September- December 1977
Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, April- August 1977
Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, July 1976 – March 1977
Project Director, The Urban Institute, August 1972 – July 1974
Associate Professor of Economics, U.C.L.A., September 1970 – June 1972
Associate Professor of Economics, Brandeis University, September 1969 – June 1970
Assistant Professor of Economics, Cornell University, September 1965 – June 1969
Economic Analyst, American Telephone & TelegraphCo., June 1964 – August 1965
Lecturer in Economics, Howard University, September 1963 – June 1964
Instructor in Economics, Douglass College, Rutgers University, September 1962 – June 1963
Labor Economist, U.S. Department of Labor, June 1961 – August 1962
PRINCIPAL PUBLICATIONS:
On Classical Economics (Yale University Press, 2006)
Black Rednecks and White Liberals (Encounter Books, 2005)
The Quest for Cosmic Justice (Free Press,1999)
Conquests and Cultures (Basic Books, 1998)
Migrations and Cultures (Basic Books, 1996)
The Vision of the Anointed (Basic Books, 1995)
Race and Culture: A World View ( Basic Books,1994 )
A Conflict of Visions (William Morrow, 1987)
Ethnic America (Basic Books, 1981)
Knowledge and Decisions (Basic Books, 1980)
Say’s Law: An Historical Analysis (Princeton University Press, 1972)
____________________________________________
Thomas Sowell is a highly respected professor, commentator and author. Calling him a hack is an indicator of your incredible ignorance.
Again, night all. See ya Chas, J R, and annie moose soon.
Good night, Mary Ellen!
Thomas Sowell is a highly respected professor, commentator and author. Calling him a hack is an indicator of your incredible ignorance.
Wrong. I would take his peer-reviewed papers seriously. But his syndicated columns are nothing more than political puffery. That silly column you posted is a perfect example. There is no intellectual substance to it. One cardinal rule of an intellectual argument is that you do not rely on mere assertions to make your point.
And using his curriculum vitae as proof of his credibility when analyzing Barack Obama is like using William Shockley’s CV to validate his view on race, or James Watson’s CV to validate the sexist comments he made in the 60s.
good night; good luck; god bless —-
whatever you conceive god to be!!
blessings ALL
blessings to the Carrier Family
so mote it be!!
Rage — AMEN, and OUT!!
After the interview of Palin by Katie Couric, the cons lost all reason to smile. It’s been all downhill since.
A week out, and comes word that Virginia VIRGINIA is slipping from McCain. With operations in Georgia now and even South Carolina slipping, the DNC is DEEP into traditional Republican territory.
Considerations of personal future (all they really care about) now come into play for Republican cadidates and operatives.
We will not see McCain and Palin together again.
Ted Stevens? Senior Republican in the Senate and tomorrow no con will know him.
Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnel and con icon Elizabeth Dole? No one wants to hitch their wagon to a falling star.
The already fractured right wing is about to descend into Balkan’s like internacine war.
I predict it will be decidedly uncivil.
I will relish every single moment of it.
Rage — AMEN, and OUT!!
Goodnight, Paw!
Cue the closing music. . .
You didn’t address the grinning part. :)
Ah, Reg, I would have, but it’s been a lousy day and there’s no reason to take it out on you with cruelty.
Then again….
Nah
From time to time in this forum, I have asked CONs and Republic Party advocates to tell me why they are voting for John S (for Senile) McCain the Third (for Shrub’s 3rd term).
Even after the first frost, the crickets tend to keep chirping in their silence.
Nobody seems to have a reason to vote for the old man; they only can conjure up reasons to vote against Barack Obama.
I’m tempted to channel Rush Limbaugh with something like a shouted: “THE ONLY REASON IS RACE!” But I’m bigger than Limbaugh, albeit probably 140 pounds lighter on the scales.
So it’s late night and the World Series is suspended. And I have no idea which of you night owls might see this, read this, decide to respond. But I think I have one single over-riding reason to vote for Barack Obama for President of the United States next Tuesday.
Specific issues and nuances thereof? I’ve been around the block a few times and I know, even with an all Democratic federal government, every policy is gonna go through the political sausage maker and no ones “plan” is likely to end up as policy. There will be debates, compromises, negotiations, give-and-take and who knows what kind of spurious issues that will shape the policies of the future. Maybe they’ll work. Maybe they won’t.
But all the CONs’ rants about why they’re voting against Barack Obama (yeah, I’m thinking about you, “Franklin”) in a complete vacuum of any reason to vote for McPalin prompt me to declare.
This is why I’m voting FOR Barack Obama –
Politics, probably since the Clinton/Gingrich wars of the 90s has come to concentrate on our differences even though we have so many more commonalities.
In El Dorado, back on that blustery winder day, I was in the audience when Obama said, “…the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that’s consumed Washington. To end the political strategy that’s been all about division, and instead make it about addition. To build a coalition for change that stretches through red states and blue states.”
Okay, so that probably sounds a bit esoteric for you CONs, but it is the foundation for my voting for Barack Obama.
But… for about the hundredth time… just why would you CONs vote for McCain?
You’ve never told us.
“the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that’s consumed Washington.”
Bury the hatchet?
You DO know who is holding the hatchet? Certainly, Obama must know by now.
SURELY he and you are not STILL into this pollyanna finding good in the enemy?
And we don’t HAVE to work with them. They’re BEAT.
Obama and his supporters STILL have a problem with those of us who question just where it is his intentions are.
StevenEDavis
Posted October 27, 2008 at 10:31 pm | Permalink
Regular
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:23 pm | Permalink
#
mxyzptlk
Posted October 27, 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink
WASHINGTON — A raid into Syria on Sunday was carried out by American Special Operations forces who killed an Iraqi militant responsible for running weapons, money and foreign fighters across the border into Iraq, American officials said Monday.
The helicopter-borne attack into Syria was by far the boldest by American commandos in the five years since the United States invaded Iraq and began to condemn Syria’s role in stoking the Iraqi insurgency. The timing was startling, not least because American officials had praised Syria in recent months for its efforts to halt traffic across the border.
But in justifying the attack, American officials said the Bush administration was determined to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense providing a rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries’ consent.
_________________________________________________
Bush/McCain trying to start Armageddon?
============================
Nope, they got the skinny on an Al Qaeda leader and took him out.
++++++++++
The story I heard on the BBC was that children and adolescents were killed in this attack. The BBC interviewed a professor from the O.U. middle eastern studies program who asserted that Bush adminstration was doing this because it knew it could. Syria is trying to curry favor with the incoming administration, so the Bush folk thought we could get by with this attack without risking retaliation. Man, I hope that dude was wrong because if he is right, I have a lower evaluation of the 43rd presidency than I even thought possible
==============================
So you believe incomplete news sources and Al Qaeda more than Bush?
That’s nice…Al Qaeda has been selling “the U.S. is killing babies and children for years.”
First, get a clue…Al Qaeda in Iraq or its border areas don’t bring their families with them.
Secondly, they have photos of the Al Qaeda leader that is dead (photo ID confirmed)
This is why the military doesn’t like Leftist progressives, they always side with the enemy.
Linda,
I remember Kiddieland. Wasn’t it where the Harry street mall is now? I know that was the Meadowlark/Twin drive-in (right?), but Kiddieland before that?
Help! The memory is going…going…
Oh, and that sneering clown? Tell me I’m weird, but that was one of my favorite things at Joyland. He’s been stolen. Did you know that? His name is/was Louie, named for one of my great-uncles. That was a world famous Wurlitzer organ. (No jokes, guys. Not tonight.)
I guess that made he and I some kind of cousins however many times removed?
Your third cousin, Linda. At least that’s the way I learned it. And I have tons of third, fourth, fifth, sixth… Guess where they all live? ::grin:: Or make that a :P
Regular probably gave the answer and I’m wrong, but, hey, I tried!
Back to a blast from the past…
Henry Harvey’s daughter was in one of my junior high classes at Allison. They lived across the street from my piano teacher, who was the wife of the Pres. of Friends U at the time. Dumb, dumb trivia, I know.
Anybody remember KARD Gang Club? It featured the old Our Gang Club movies. A kid was picked out of the audience to spin the bicycle wheels (or they looked like them anyway) hanging on the wall, although I don’t remember what they were for, and to spin the card cage & draw a card for a prize for a kid watching at home.
Kitty Clover chips to collect to bid on prizes? Anybody ever go to that? And Hyde Park milk that featured (or sponsored?) Hopalong Cassidy?
Major Astro always reminds me of Rodney and the Host.
Hi-Fi Hop (KTVH channel 12). Yeah, I was there once (not a regular like Linda ;) )when I was like 11? That was so cool! NOT
(I’ll go back and check out that cousins thing before hitting the pillow.)
1st cousin twice removed=3rd cousin. I never did learn those “removed” thingies.
I’m outa here. (And hear you cheering.)
“Politics, probably since the Clinton/Gingrich wars of the 90s has come to concentrate on our differences even though we have so many more commonalities.”
I have absolutely nothing in common with any rotten con.
Maybe it is my con beginnings that makes me know. Negotiation is surrender with those people.
‘In pictures: Grief and anger in Syria’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7694001.stm
Linda,
First, the “instructor” who allowed that 8 year old to shoot a fully automatic weapon as he did was negligent.
He was an idiot. Period.
Not that letting an 8 year old shoot a gun is wrong, but the simple fact is that a fully automatic weapon is not something to allow an 8 year old to just shoot.
I teach people how to shoot fully automatic weapons.
When we allow Marines to shoot on full auto, I stand right behind them and hold their shoulder with my wieght and have my other hand ready to reach over to grab the weapon (just in case)
If you have never fired a fully automatic weapon you are not prepared for the recoil of one. Even Marines are not. Let alone an 8 year old kid.
That instructor should have probably not allowed the 8 year old to shoot and at the very least should have been helping the 8 year old hold the gun.
The anti-gun idiots quoted in the article have no clue about what they are talking about.
Even the father is an idiot. He said he thought that the micro uzi would be easier for his kid to handle. If anything it was much worse. I doubt it had a stock to help with the recoil and is so small that you can hardly grip it to prevent recoil.
So here you have an 8 year old that doesn’t know how to handle an uzi let alone a fully auto one.
As he pulled the trigger each shot pushed the weapon up and back in his hands until it was pointed towards his head.
Tragic.
Avoidable.
Preventable.
Something tells me that this “instructor” was just some red neck hill billy who should be ashamed of himself and probably is.
PreD — Major Astro(Tom __________), he WAS The Host, on Rodney and the Host, horror movies.
What do the “gun nuts” have to say about the kid who shot himself with an Uzi??
Hmm?
That’s a terrible ordeal for his family.
But like Mary said, it could have been the mini-van ride there, coulda been a swimming pool, coulda been a jungle gym accident.
Doesn’t sound like it was top-notch “adult supervision”.
The Monkey is a liar again….as he placed in quotes something I never said.
“Lezzie-carpet-munching-chicken-dung-pig,”
That must be something he is thinking.
Did anyone expect better of him? Not really.