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.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- cosmos_originally on Death penalty review promised
- Daniel on Open thread 11/8
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- oliveoyl on Roberts already wants a fourth term
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- Daniel on Open thread 11/8
- satatom on Open thread 11/8
- satatom on Shooting is tragic, terrible
- Regular on Open thread 11/8
- Phantom on Open thread 11/8
237 Comments
Another insurance horror story – the plight of the insured:
“Too many other people already have coverage so meager that a medical crisis means financial calamity.
One of them is Lawrence Yurdin, a 64-year-old computer security specialist. Although the brochure on his Aetna policy seemed to indicate it covered up to $150,000 a year in hospital care, the fine print excluded nearly all of the treatment he received at an Austin, Tex., hospital.”
“He and the hospital say they were surprised to eventually learn that the $150,000 hospital coverage in the Aetna policy was mainly for room and board. Coverage was capped at $10,000 for “other hospital services,” which turned out to include nearly all routine hospital care — the expenses incurred in the operating room, for example, and the cost of any medication he received.
In other words, Aetna would have paid for Mr. Yurdin to stay in the hospital for more than five months — as long as he did not need an operation or any lab tests or drugs while he was there.”
“He and his wife, Claire, filed for bankruptcy last December, as his unpaid medical bills approached $200,000.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/business/01meddebt.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
How can the govt. compete with insurance plans like that?
“How can the govt. compete with insurance plans like that?”
Easy. Who owns GM?
“Robert Dinnigan is worried what will happen to his daughter Amanda if GM goes bankrupt this week.
Not because he works there – but because he’s suing them.
He and hundreds of others who’ve taken GM and Chrysler to court for injuries they blame on defects are worried they’ll end up with nothing to pay their loved one’s medical bills if the companies go belly up.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/05/26/2009-05-26_little_girls_fight_vs_reeling_auto_giant.html#ixzz0K0lM28NZ&D
On this date, Jul 1st, record setting temperatures for Wichita Kansas
High: 109 °F (1980)
Low: 58 °F (1995)
DavidB,
It sounds like that the unfortunate fellow purchased a plan for hospital stays, not for general health care. I’ve seen these plans and knew what they were, I’m surprised people misinterpret them for what they are supposed to do.
That is, cover the a large chunk of medical costs which is the stay in a hospital.
Mother of 550 pound 14 year old charged with neglect.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/Story?id=7941609&page=2
I gotta wonder what this kid has to be doing to get so utterly fat.
I gotta wonder what this kid has to be doing to get so utterly fat.
==================================
I’m guessing nothing, other than eating.
WHy is Obama backing Hugo Chavez’ s puppet in Honduras? The more I learn about the facts down there, the more I dislike Obama’s position on this issue:
As military “coups” go, the one this weekend in Honduras was strangely, well, democratic. The military didn’t oust President Manuel Zelaya on its own but instead followed an order of the Supreme Court. It also quickly turned power over to the president of the Honduran Congress, a man from the same party as Mr. Zelaya. The legislature and legal authorities all remain intact.
We mention these not so small details because they are being overlooked as the world, including the U.S. President, denounces tiny Honduras in a way that it never has, say, Iran. President Obama is joining the U.N., Fidel Castro, Hugo Chávez and other model democrats in demanding that Mr. Zelaya be allowed to return from exile and restored to power. Maybe it’s time to sort the real from the phony Latin American democrats. . . . .
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640649700876791.html#mod=djemEditorialPage
Read the rest yourself. It appears that Chavez has outmaneuvered our rookie president on this one.
HLP posted June 30, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Dear Hank,
Name the top climate scientists who do not agree that a record El Nino in 1998 added a warm spike to the global temperatures.
___________________________________________
You continually display your ignorance of global warming, temperature, weather and climate.
The very definition of El Nino is a temporary ‘warm spike’ of localized temperatures.
If the ocean transfers heat to the atmosphere the ocean cools a little. The average temperature of the globe did not change.
Name a top climate scientist that believes that El Nino contributed to global warming.
You can’t.
—————————–
Dear Hank,
Probably every top climate scientist believes that the record 1998 El Nino aided the warming caused by AGW.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/
“The top of Fig. 2 provides seasonal resolution of global and low latitude surface temperature, and an index that measures the state of the natural tropical temperature oscillation. The figure indicates that the La Niña cool cycle peaked in early 2008. The global effect of the tropical oscillation is made clear by the average temperature anomaly over the global ocean (bottom of Fig. 2). The “El Niño of the century”, in 1997-98, stands out, as well as the recent La Niña.”
—————-
See the graph.
Again Hank. . . name the top climate scientists who do not agree that the record El Nino in 1998 added a warm spike to global temperatures.
Why is Obama Supporting a Leftist President in Honduras Who Wanted to Change His Constitution to Allow Him To Eliminate Term Limits on the President?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/30/obamas-support-ousted-honduran-leader-accused-breaking-law-stirs-concerns/?test=latestnews?test=latestnews
Support for Ousted Honduran President Raises Questions About ‘Democratic’ Leadership
Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, who is backed by U.S. nemesis Hugo Chavez,was overthrown in a military coup Sunday after the Honduran Congress and Supreme Court said he maneuvered illegally to amend the constitution — apparently in hopes of extending his rule.
But while Zelaya wins widespread support, including from President Obama as well as Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, critics in the United States are asking why the U.S. leader doesn’t take a stand against clearly illegal actions by Honduras’ ousted chief executive.
“Manuel Zelaya trampled the Honduran constitution by pushing for his illegal referendum to allow him to rule indefinitely, and by firing the top military official, Gen. Romeo Vasquez Velasquez, when he refused to comply with Zelaya’s unconstitutional orders,” said Rep. Connie Mack, R-Fla.
Zelaya, the ousted leftist leader, ignored a ruling from the Honduran Supreme Court, warnings from the military and opposition by a sizable swath of his country’s population when he maneuvered to amend his country’s constitution, apparently in hopes of extending his own rule.
Makes you wonder why THE ONE would support President Zelaya who ignores his own Constitution, and ignores lawful directives from his own Congress and Supreme Court.
Honduran President Manuel Zelaya sounds like a Dictator wanting to maintain illegal control over his own country, yet THE ONE supports him.
Hmmm……
cosmos squirms:
name the top climate scientists who do not agree that the record El Nino in 1998 added a warm spike to global temperatures.
You provide the answer cosmos – it’s not anyone’s job or desire to answer your stupid questions.
Perhaps you can explain why your IPCC backed ‘Warmer’ scientists claim there is change in the arctic for 30 years when most credible scientists note that the cyclic events in the Arctic are 50 years and perhaps as much as 100 years.
Just because you don’t like the answers cosmos, doesn’t mean they are incorrect. It’s established climate science.
JJ – next order of business..repeal the 22nd Amendment…Reid’s proposed it before.
Whatya know….it’s in committee…
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hj111-5
Regular posted July 1, 2009 at 9:51 am
cosmos squirms:
name the top climate scientists who do not agree that the record El Nino in 1998 added a warm spike to global temperatures.
You provide the answer cosmos – it’s not anyone’s job or desire to answer your stupid questions.
——————-
Regular,
1) I’m asking Hank to support his claim — it’s his responsibility.
2) I do not know of any top climate scientists who agree with Hank’s claim.
Mark Sanford admitted to breaking S.C. law against adultery, should he be charged?
Mark Sanford admitted to breaking S.C. law against adultery, should he be charged?
==================================
Yes.
DFB
Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:02 am | Permalink
Whatya know….it’s in committee…
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hj111-5
——————————–
Yup. Maybe that’s why THE ONE is supporting Zelaya, who’s also trying to eliminate Presidential term limits.
From DFB’s link:
“Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.”
Sponsor: Rep. José Serrano [D-NY16](no cosponsors)
Cosponsors [as of 2009-04-18]
Hmmmm Seems that DFB is wrong on this bill… proposed NOT by Reid… but by Serrano…
Such a proposal was also made by Republicans from Michigan during Reagan’s presidency…
Serrano has proposed this bill several times before…
Chas – you seriously worry me in your reading comprehension…out of everything you read, please show me where I said anything but “Reid’s proposed it before”…didn’t say he did THIS time…said he did “before”, which he has.
But hey, according to you, I’m a RWE trying to take over the govt…apparently trying to eliminate term limits with a 48 yr old in office is just normal course of business and is justified because a GOP did it with a 70+ yr old in office…and further proof your party knows it has no “bench” behind Obama.
“Mental” prowess like yours, is exactly one of the reasons I think a state petitioned Const Convention is long overdue. Term limits for ALL…congress & fed judges included…stops the ignorant proposals like these from BOTH parties. Reforming the “mini-legislatures” of committees in congress stops BOTH parties from playing children’s games. A Fed Bal Budget requirement stops BOTH parties from continuing to try to sell the story that deficits are good.
“Serrano introduced or cosponsored the same proposal in 1997 and 1999, when Democrat Bill Clinton was president, and again in 2001 just days before Republican George Bush was sworn in for his first term. He also introduced it in 2003, 2005 and 2007, all before Barack Obama even announced he was running for president.
All of these bills died in committee without ever coming to a vote. None of Serrano’s bills attracted any cosponsors, except for the 1997 and 1999 versions, each of which was cosponsored by Rep. Chris Shays of Connecticut, a Republican.”
http://www.npr.org/blogs/politicaljunkie/2009/06/ronald_reagan_and_the_22nd_ame.html
“…said he did “before”, which he has.” [DFB]
Actually, He DIDNT propose it before.
Chas,
STFU
So Chas’s brilliant conclusion is:
If a Bill is introduced 10 times before and doesn’t pass, it never will pass in the future.
The same logic could be used when crossing the street:
If I cross the street 10 times without looking both ways and I get safely across the street, then I never have to look both ways in the future when crossing the street.
So Chas, why don’t you prove your point of logic is accurate?
Chas sees a speck of flysiht in pepper, and he just has to try to pick it out.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:10 am | Permalink
Regular,
1) I’m asking Hank to support his claim — it’s his responsibility.
2) I do not know of any top climate scientists who agree with Hank’s claim.
——————————
No, your playing a game, asking an idiot question.
You already no the answer or the answer you WANT TO HEAR.
Stop being an imbecile and asking leading questions that are meaningless.
“So Chas’s brilliant conclusion is:
If a Bill is introduced 10 times before and doesn’t pass, it never will pass in the future.” [Johnson]
Stop LYING Johnson… I never said anything like that… That must be your own perverted logic that you are posting…
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:44 am | Permalink
“So Chas’s brilliant conclusion is:
If a Bill is introduced 10 times before and doesn’t pass, it never will pass in the future.” [Johnson]
Stop LYING Johnson… I never said anything like that… That must be your own perverted logic that you are posting…
———————————
So what is your main point in your 10:21 and 10:35 posts?
Oh, and btw, what’s the difference between Race and Skin Color?
According to modern Anthropology theory there is no such thing as race.
Regular
Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:48 am | Permalink
According to modern Anthropology theory there is no such thing as race.
————————–
That’s why I’m curious to see Chas define it, since he was posting about race earlier.
And so the Democrats have proposed the elimination of Term Limits for the President of the United States.
For what purpose? To keep THE ONE in power forever?
Like a Dictator?
(I hear Chas busily searching Wiki for a definition…..)
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:55 am | Permalink
And so the Democrats have proposed the elimination of Term Limits for the President of the United States.
For what purpose? To keep THE ONE in power forever?
Like a Dictator?
==================================================
In fairness that has been proposed by Hoyer (D-Maryland) in every session since 1985.
JimJim.. due to conflict of interest considerations, If Obama were to sign an end of presidential term limits bill, it would only take affect for the president who follows him…
I stand corrected… January, 1989, during the first Month of George H. W. Bush’s administration, Sen. Reid introduced:
S.J.RES.36 : A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second amendment.
Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 1/31/1989) Cosponsors (1)
Co-Sponsor: Howell Heflin, AL
“So what is your main point in your 10:21 and 10:35 posts?
Oh, and btw, what’s the difference between Race and Skin Color?” [Johnson]
Ummm…. What do my two previous posts have to do with race or skin color?? I smell some heavy evidence of Johnson Trolling
Regular posted July 1, 2009 at 10:43 am
#
cosmos_originally
Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:10 am | Permalink
Regular,
1) I’m asking Hank to support his claim — it’s his responsibility.
2) I do not know of any top climate scientists who agree with Hank’s claim.
——————————
No, your(sic) playing a game, asking an idiot question.
——————————
Regular,
I’m not playing a “game”, but Hank did make an idiot claim, that he cannot support.
Or maybe Regular made several typos. . .?
‘No, you’re playing a game, asking an idiot [Hank] a question.’
DavidB
Posted July 1, 2009 at 11:11 am | Permalink
JimJim.. due to conflict of interest considerations, If Obama were to sign an end of presidential term limits bill, it would only take affect for the president who follows him…
=============================================
Great point, DavidB… That should put an end to all of the fear mongering about an Obama Third Term. It probably wont, but it should… IF the ratification of the amendment in 1951 was not applicable to Harry Truman, so the repeal would also not be applicable to the current incumbent, no matter who it would be…
“But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.”
Amendment XXII — Section 1
Why dont the Republicans concentrate on something actually useful… like the Audit of the Fed. Reserve, or the line item veto for the POTUS?? Instead they get all hyperventilating over some looney tune trying to repeal the 22nd Amendment…
And the party of NO keeps spinning its wheels.
Why did the MSM in S.C.sit on the Sanford affair after receiving the e-mails six months ago?
Maybe I missed the answer, but just why is Obama supporting Zelaya?
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 11:18 am | Permalink
“So what is your main point in your 10:21 and 10:35 posts?
Oh, and btw, what’s the difference between Race and Skin Color?” [Johnson]
Ummm…. What do my two previous posts have to do with race or skin color?? I smell some heavy evidence of Johnson Trolling
————————————-
Oh great, you don’t understand your posts either.
Chasbeen posits: “Why dont the Republicans concentrate on something actually useful… like the Audit of the Fed. Reserve, or the line item veto for the POTUS?? Instead they get all hyperventilating over some looney tune trying to repeal the 22nd Amendment…”
____________________
If you could read through anything but your ideological glasses…that’s EXACTLY what I proposed the last time you called me a RWE trying to take over the world! I specifically lined out the only things that would have a chance of getting 38 states to ratify them, ie, term limits, bal budget, line item veto & open up the fed.
But since the GOP’s the “party of no”…remind me again who authored HR 1207, the bill to audit the fed…weird..Ron Paul..a Republican..and then who’s burying it in committee….huh, weird…your hero Barney Frank a Dem…even weirder…Ron Paul’s been calling for this for years, regardless of who’s in the WH.
Seriously, if you could put together a coherent thought when you’re making an “argument” you might get taken more seriously by some of your brethren.
“Why dont the Republicans concentrate on something actually useful… like the Audit of the Fed. Reserve,
Welcome to reality chass. HR 1207. Been posting on it for a while now. Seems Dr. Paul got more than 50% as co-sponsors. It is Barney Franks holding up the works now.
Wonder what Barney has to hide?
Barney Frank, uber evil Congressman. The Right must have villians to survive.
“If you could read through anything but your ideological glasses…that’s EXACTLY what I proposed the last time you called me a RWE trying to take over the world!” [BFD -- errr DFB]
WRONG…. It doesnt take constitutional amendments to give the POTUS a line item veto, or to audit the Fed. Reserve…
SOL — I told you the other day that I have no disagreement with auditing the Fed. Reserve… (I’m not at all clear that the Government can order an audit of a private corporation.) If the audit can be ordered, bring it on… If the Fed. has done wrong things, fix it… If not, then leave it alone…
DFB — If Congress wasnt inclined to give the line item veto to Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, or Bush II, they why would you think they might give it to the POTUS in this administration?? Hmmmm???
“Wonder what Barney has to hide?” [Sol]
Barney would have nothing to hide, unless Barney is an officer of the Fed. Reserve… which he isnt…
WRONG…. It doesn’t take constitutional amendments to give the POTUS a line item veto,
Actually, Chas, it would take exactly that. To do otherwise would be an unconstitutional delegation of congressional authority to the executive. (Please don’t ask me to look up the cites!).
And the Fed is not the typical private corporation. It is a creation of Congress, and is subject to their regulation – or abolishment, if they so choose. They have the authority to order an audit of the Fed (though I think same is a waste of time).
Obama supporting the rule of law, not Zelaya in particular.
Obama says that lawful means should have resolved the issues, not a military coup.
Obama supporting the rule of law, not Zelaya in particular.
Obama says that lawful means should have resolved the issues, not a military coup.
And while I understand that, DavidB, and at first glance that appears to be the right position, a little bit of digging (and I mean just a little bit) uncovers much more. In fact, it was Zelaya who was orchestrating an illegal election, in an apparant attempt to override Honduras’ constitution. And this “coup” was ordered by the nation’s Supreme Court, after which power was immediately returned to the legislature. If this was a “coup,” it’s the most rule of law coup ever.
Obama’s on the wrong side here; our naive rookie president has been outmaneuvered by Chavez. Either that, or he’s Chavez’s ideological soulmate (some would argue that, I won’t – yet).
#
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 12:04 pm | Permalink
Maybe I missed the answer, but just why is Obama supporting Zelaya?
______________
Maybe Obama supports Zelaya because even though the 22nd may not be fully amended, Obama can claim a convoluted moral authority despite any conflict of interest. With the MSM having “shivers running up the legs”, I wouldn’t be surprised if the amendment will now have legs.
BEWARE THE OBAMA ‘EVIL EYE’
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashoe.htm
GMC — Where does the Constitution PROHIBIT the line item veto?? Please??
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 12:58 pm | Permalink
“Wonder what Barney has to hide?” [Sol]
Barney would have nothing to hide, unless Barney is an officer of the Fed. Reserve… which he isnt…
________________
The Fed. Reserve is one of, if not the most powerful entity in the world. It has trillions of $$$ at It’s disposal. Bawney Frwank is a puppet sold to the highest bidder.
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 1:25 pm | Permalink
GMC — Where does the Constitution PROHIBIT the line item veto?? Please??
=======================================
Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998), is a legal case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the line-item veto as granted in the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 violated the Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution because it impermissibly gave the President of the United States the power to unilaterally amend or repeal parts of statutes that had been duly passed by the United States Congress. The decision of the Court, in a six-to-three majority, was delivered by Justice John Paul Stevens. Wiki
Chas – Art. I, Sec. 7. The Constitution specifically speaks of a process of passing legislation, and makes no provision for a president to sign part of a bill. The Constitution, remember, is a grant of authority more than a prohibition on it; it specifies what Gov’t may do, and limits gov’t to those things. If the authority is not there, and cannot be reasonably interpreted to be there, it isn’t there. The consititution is not a “you didn’t say I couldn’t!” document.
Court decision, BTW, affirms this reading. Here’s the quick dirty research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._City_of_New_York
I would argue that there are a number of things the Federal gov’t now does that cannot in fact be reasonably interpreted to be permissible under constitutional authority, but that’s a discussion for another time . . . .
Where do the major players stand on this Issue?
Stance Person Profession
John Edwards (D) Attorney and Former Presidential Candidate
John McCain (R) Senator & Retired Naval Captain
Rudy Giuliani (R) Fmr. NYC Mayor
Fred Thompson (R) Presidential Candidate, Lawyer, Lobbyist, Actor, and Former Senator
Dennis Kucinich (D) Congressman
Joe Biden (D) 47th Vice President of the United States
Mitt Romney (R) CEO & Former Governor
Mike Huckabee (R) Fmr. Governor & Minister
Ron Paul (R) Congressman and Physician
Bill Richardson (D) Secretary of Commerce designate (Obama Administration)
Sam Brownback (R) Senator
Chris Dodd (D) Senator
Mike Gravel Fmr. Alaskan Senator
Duncan Hunter (R) Congressman
Tom Tancredo (R) U.S. Representative
Gayle Harrell (R)
Sam Nunn (D) Former U.S. Senator
Check the following web site to see where thesse individuals stand on the Line Item Veto issue… Very strange mix of for/against
http://www.politicalbase.com/issues/line-item-veto/26/
“GMC — Where does the Constitution PROHIBIT the line item veto?? Please??”
Chas, according to Wiki, a line-item-veto cannot give “unilateral authority to the Executive to disallow specific spending line items”.
There have been several bills for line-item-vetoes which do give unilateral authority to the President but so far none have caught on by the members of congress.
Thanks GMC — most appeciated… I found the Wiki article, but didnt find the Art/Sec you reference above… again, thanks!!
Reg – great minds think alike! And a thought just came to me: will Chas FINALLY (despite being shownso on so many occasions) admit that he is actually WRONG on something.
Or maybe just – ya know –
S addle
T he
F lying
U nicorns
and fly away?
I’m not sure a weak heart could take that; the shock would be too great.
So, basically, what Ron Paul is attempting to do is pass legislation that would over-ride the SCOTUS definition in Clinton v. NY??
Chas – geez..you seriously should try to think more than an inch deep sometime…
Where do I start…as for anything in the Const preventing an audit of the fed reserve or giving line item veto..nothing..which is my point…that I’ll make AGAIN since you were too thick to understand it a couple weeks ago when you flew off the handle about me being a RWE who was trying to overthrow the govt…congress won’t give up any toys. Line item veto potentially takes away their ability to tack on ideological bs onto bills too important to veto in total…they could even lose earmark ability…so gee…wonder why they wouldn’t give it to ANY President freely…idiot.
As for the Fed Res audit…Donn hit it on the head…because the Fed Reserve has been granted a monopoly from the govt, and whoever is the chair of the Sen Finance & House Banking committees are in their pocket. Plus, it give ANY administration incredibly dangerous power to play with economics by injecting inflated dollars, cheap credit, raising/lowering interest rates, etc as if they somehow are the keepers of the economy & makers of all jobs…just as congress believes they are.
Now, since you wouldn’t read my justification previously, before flying off the handle like 2 yr old who lost their binkie…the point of Const Convention is at best an opportunity to reign in Fed powers they’ve collected over the last 200+ yrs, at worst a wake-up call to them to stop the insanity, just as they did the last & only time a Const Conv got close to fruition, where congress scrambled and repealed Prohibition to try to quell the public disdain for their actions and infringements beyond the scope of their granted rights.
Now, I’ll type slowly for you…congress, SCOTUS, ANY Admin, any agency, etc will never purposefully give up their toys, even though many are playing with toys that aren’t theirs (rights held at the state/people level not affirmatively granted to the Feds)….so the naivity of your ramblings about “well, why didn’t they do under these other Presidents…” is silly. I’m not bashing your beloved party, I’m bashing BOTH parties with this concept, because they’ve BOTH proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they can’t handle & don’t deserve the power they’ve granted to themselves.
I have never seen an Unicorn, but pretty sure I saw a four feet tall Jack-a-lope along side the road in Texas. It was carry a case of Pearl beer or maybe that was me – can’t remember – it was hot and I was wearing shorts and cowboy boots.
GMC, I asked for your legal expertise on this matter NOT because I favor the Line Item Veto, but because DFB, Sol, and others here are pushing FOR it… I think you have helped clarify this matter…. And I already thanked you for the help here…
So, I dont know for sure what it is that I am wrong about??
I also said earlier, I would favor an Audit of the Fed. Reserve, as long as it wouldnt be against established laws for Congress to do such a thing…
I guess for some folks, asking for clarification from those who know is wrong??
The family that prays together, preys together.
http://www.tribstar.com/news/local_story_181214709.html
If only the pastor knew about the 10 Commandments because then they would know stealing is wrong.
I still remember Reagan… and other Presidents… at every State of the Union Address, ragging on Congress to give them what many governors have — the line item veto… I always figured there was some reason Congress wouldnt do it… given the vast differences of the Presidents who asked for it…
congress, SCOTUS, ANY Admin, any agency, etc will never purposefully give up their toys, even though many are playing with toys that aren’t theirs
No sh**. No institution – ever – gives up power willingly. Which is why if you think the massive intervention into the economy by this administration is only “temporary” to deal with this recession – well, you are likely to be in for a shock.
Get used to Government Motors. It may not be going away for a long time.
GMC70
Posted July 1, 2009 at 1:38 pm | Permalink
Chas – Art. I, Sec. 7. The Constitution specifically speaks of a process of passing legislation, and makes no provision for a president to sign part of a bill. The Constitution, remember, is a grant of authority more than a prohibition on it; it specifies what Gov’t may do, and limits gov’t to those things. If the authority is not there, and cannot be reasonably interpreted to be there, it isn’t there. The consititution is not a “you didn’t say I couldn’t!” document.
Court decision, BTW, affirms this reading. Here’s the quick dirty research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._City_of_New_York
I would argue that there are a number of things the Federal gov’t now does that cannot in fact be reasonably interpreted to be permissible under constitutional authority, but that’s a discussion for another time . . . .
=============================================
READ THAT DFB…. That should pretty much clear things up for you….
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 12:52 pm | Permalink
“If you could read through anything but your ideological glasses…that’s EXACTLY what I proposed the last time you called me a RWE trying to take over the world!” [BFD -- errr DFB]
WRONG…. It doesnt take constitutional amendments to give the POTUS a line item veto, or to audit the Fed. Reserve… (emphasis added)
SOL — I told you the other day that I have no disagreement with auditing the Fed. Reserve… (I’m not at all clear that the Government can order an audit of a private corporation.) If the audit can be ordered, bring it on… If the Fed. has done wrong things, fix it… If not, then leave it alone…
——–
Chas – facts are funny things. 1) You did, in fact, assert the wrongful “fact”. 2) And you “asked” for that expertise only after I noted that in fact you were in error. I asked you not to ask me to do the research, though it turns out any number of folks found much the same thing. You no doubt believed that such a question was a “gotcha;” you like to go down that road, and often find yourself lost there.
Ready to Saddle That Flying Unicorn yet?
It turns out, folks, no no one’s surprise, that weak hearts are safe, facts notwithstanding. . .
Let’s see —
Penske has bought Saturn….
Chrysler has reopened its plants, re-employing about 15,000 workers… Fiat has also stepped into the Chrysler mess…
I’m doing what a Repoublican Banker friend of mine is doing — taking a wait-and-see position for now…
Also, a Chevrolet dealer friend of mine in Texas tells me he isnt too worried right now… He just bought his third dealership a month ago…
They should have a Saturn with Penske modifications to it. Perhaps some racing stripes and maybe a 3.0 liter Turbo-charged engine with co2 induced flame throwers on the back.
Would be the ultimate mix of Batman and the Penske Indy consumer experience – sans the mask and cape thing.
“If the audit can be ordered, bring it on… If the Fed. has done wrong things, fix it… If not, then leave it alone…” [What I said]
Now, what do you find in error with that statement?? Hmmmmm???
As for the Constitutional Amendment…. IF what you say is true, why is the Line Item Veto Act of 2006 still pending in the Senate, and has apparently passed the House?? Will this one also be declared Unconstitutional by SCOTUS??
IF so, they why are all these people wanting to side with passing the Line Item Veto Act of 2006???
“Recent Legislation
The Legislative Line-Item Veto Act of 2006, sponsored in the Senate by Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI), would let the President highlight earmarks and send them back for Congress to vote on whether to retain the highlighted earmark spending. The bill passed in the House and is awaiting a vote in the Senate.”
http://www.politicalbase.com/issues/line-item-veto/26/
Also, why has every President since at least Reagan asked for something that they should know would be Unconstitutional for the Congress to give them??
Just wondering, since GMC, you seem to take delight in accusing me of being WRONG… Hey, I asked for your opinion on this matter… Because you are a lawyer, AND, I thanked you for your assistance….
So, just what the He11 is your problem??
#
Chas
Posted June 27, 2009 at 11:24 am | Permalink
Why is it wrong to vote FOR a bill not fully read, but OK to vote AGAINST a bill not fully read?? Seems like it might be wrong in BOTH cases… not just those voting YES…
But, there’s that CON logic again!! LOL
______________
ooops CON logic is an oxymoron…. I forgot..
______________
Chazz the spazz again shows his lib logic. He must buy used cars and houses without checking them out (reading them) either.
But then again if you’re spending other peoples money ($$$billions) , WTF does it matter?
This is Male Restroom Etiquette month. All males are asked to abide by these simple rules here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzO1mCAVyMw&feature=PlayList&p=7FF80533FB172A29&index=0
“…they can’t handle & don’t deserve the power they’ve granted to themselves.” [DFB]
Ummm… given what GMC has informed us, Congress hasnt granted budget appropriations to themselves… it has been granted to them by the Constitution… (see upthread)
Since Presidents of BOTH parties have asked for the Line-Item Veto, I am hardly protecting my own Party… (which, BTW, I have never stated what my Party is on this Blog)…
DFB — perhaps you need to stick to your own concepts, instead of trying to interpret mine… So far, you’ve been 100% wrong on interpreting my concepts…
Honduras:
When Zelaya could not legally hold the referendum to change the term limits he was going to hold a non-binding vote – which WAS legal –
The coup is unlawful and was uncalled for….
BTW, GMC — After reading the Art./Sec. in the COTUS, as well as the 1998 SCOTUS decision, I understand why the line-item veto was found to be Unconstitutional… Not that I disagree with the ruling anyway… The ONLY thing I thought was that it wouldnt take a Constitutional Amendment to give such veto power to the President…
My reasoning for that is simple… I asked myself why so many Presidents of BOTH parties would ask for something Unconstitutional… given their staffs of legal eagles, and all…
I have never heard a President in a State of the Union address say: “I want the American People to give me what so many governors have — the line-item veto”
I HAVE heard them say, to Congress: “Give me what all of these governors have — the line item veto”
Gotta hand it to him. No one – I mean no one – twists and turns like Chas. Black is white, up is down, left is right (oh, and we don’t know his party! LOL).
His wife must either be a patient woman, or ready to strangle him. Either that, or he’s so henpecked at home that this is the only place he can be “right.”
Chas, politicians ask for what know they can’t have (or promise what they know they can’t do) all the time. It’s just political posturing.
The question now is when will Obama recognize he backed the wrong side in the Honduran situation?
Or is he a Chas: NEVER wrong!
OK Donn — Here it is plain and hopefully simple enough for you to understand…
1) You and other CONS were griping that people voted FOR that Bill, without reading what they were voting for…
2) MY comment was/is, WHY would it then be OK to vote AGAINST that Bill, without reading what they were voting against??
Now, what the he11 does that have to do with your stupid, ignorant statement about buying cars??? Hmmmmm???
Should be simple enough for you >>>>
IF it is WRONG to vote FOR a Bill you havent yet read, then,
It is ALSO WRONG to vote AGAINST a Bill you havent yet read.
GMC — would you encourage such posturing, if what they ask for that they cant have is clearly(as you point out quite well) illegal??
#
Regular
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:15 pm | Permalink
This is Male Restroom Etiquette month. All males are asked to abide by these simple rules here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzO1mCAVyMw&feature=PlayList&p=7FF80533FB172A29&index=0
______________
Somebody needs to tell brian that “teabagging” is absolutely prohibited too.
Encouraged or not, it’s done. Routinely. By both parties (including the one you claim we don’t know you support).
And BTW, voting against a 1200+ page bill, shoved through by party leadership and without being thoroughly gone over, is exactly the right thing to do when the majority is forcing a vote immediately. The Democrats DON’T WANT anyone to read the bill; if they did, they wouldn’t get the votes. That’s how you lard it up with items that would never pass had members known what was in it.
Just as you wouln’t buy a car you haven’t inspected and drove, it’s irresponsible to pass legislation that hasn’t been read. The right vote is to vote no.
Was Zaleya indeed asking for a non-binding referendum which would be LEGAL(as DaviB says),
or wasnt he??
I would HOPE Obama is attempting to learn the answer to that question…
Is it possible for people on different ends of a spectrum to agree that something is wrong??
From the sounds of the anti-Obama crowds, apparently Castro, Chavez, and Obama — while on different ends of a spectrum… arent allowed to be in agreement if they all see a wrongful action…
I havent seen the whole story on Honduras yet… My denominational offices tell me they will have more clarifying information by tomorrow… So…. I will wait to see more information… from people on the ground IN Honduras….
Maybe everybody should take that position, and see what happens…
On the surface, I would feel a bit uneasy about the POTUS backing a military coup… if Zaleya was calling for a lawful non-binding referundum…
Most interesting, GMC… My question about you encouraging something wasnt about the Bill voted on last week…
I was about the line-item veto matter… Duhhh… Looks like you sort of tied those two together somehow….
“Chas, politicians ask for what know they can’t have (or promise what they know they can’t do) all the time. It’s just political posturing.” [GMC]
____________________________________________
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:30 pm | Permalink
GMC — would you encourage such posturing, if what they ask for that they cant have is clearly(as you point out quite well) illegal??
____________________________________________
Now, there… put those together…. I wasnt asking you about the Bill passed last week… see???
chas, I and most prudent people don’t not share the same logic as you do. Let me make it simple for you since you are logic impaired.
Would you vote to confirm a candidate if you knew very little about him? Or….would you vote not to confirm him until you found out something about him? Of course, knowing all along that the confirmation vote would come up later after you could check him out.
Chazz’s moma used to say “Stupid is as stupid does.”
Chas – If I was confusing (it wouldn’t be the first time) sorry. The first part of the last post was in answer to your question.
Just had to add the second part. Buying without inspection is stupid, whether a car, or a bill.
“It is ALSO WRONG to vote AGAINST a Bill you havent yet read.”
____________________________________
Normally Chas., I try not to antagonize someone as incredibly stupid as you seem to be with facts and logic but the above statement is so incredibly stupid I’m amazed that even you came up with it.
If some one tries to get you to vote for a bill without giving you a chance to read it (it didn’t even exist in its completed written form on Friday) that is the only reason you need to vote against it!
Tell me you’re not really that stupid!
Gun Confiscation, It Can Never Happen Here?!?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6505651.html
Federal agents hunt for guns, one house at a time
By DANE SCHILLER Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle
June 30, 2009, 9:36PM
DavidB
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:22 pm | Permalink
Honduras:
When Zelaya could not legally hold the referendum to change the term limits he was going to hold a non-binding vote – which WAS legal –
The coup is unlawful and was uncalled for….
===============================================
Frankly, DavidB — I dont know if what you are saying here is true, or just propaganda from a different “side” of this current Honduras mess….
Do you, by chance, have a link or two??
Does anybody share the same opinion as chas, on voting for a major bill not read?
HLP
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:45 pm | Permalink
“It is ALSO WRONG to vote AGAINST a Bill you havent yet read.”
____________________________________
Hank, your rant is hardly worth the effort… I wouldnt vote FOR a Bill I havent yet read… HOWEVER, I wouldnt vote AGINST a Bill I had NOT read either… Neither one makes much sense…
And you think that’s stupid?? What a nimrod…
DavidB, Maggot, brian, Monkey, cosMo, I can’t wait to hear your opinion on the matter.
Nevermind cosMo, we know you’ve already drank the koolaide.
See, Hank, what you apparently arent aware of, is that I have never said I WOULD have supported that Bill… But, You can bet your sweet bippy I wouldnt vote for it, unless I had read it, or at minimum had a very complete synopsis of it from a staff person assigned the task of reading bills….
GET IT NOW???? YOU GUYS ARE JUST FLAYMING, WELL, BECAUSE YOU CAN, I GUESS…. JUST BEGGING FOR A FIGHT, AS MY DAD WOULD HAVE SAID…. ROFL!!!
HANK, GO BEG YOUR FIGHT WITH SOMEBODY WHO WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR A BILL THEY HAVENT READ YET….
donndublin
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:48 pm | Permalink
Does anybody share the same opinion as chas, on voting for a major bill not read?
=====================================
Oh sure, many people sign documents all the time without reading them.
Not that I do.
So, I’m sure many people would share Chas’ opinion.
Remember, by definition, half the people are BELOW AVERAGE.
Not that any House members WOULD have asked my advice on the Bill last week, BUT —
IF any of them would have asked, my advice would have been to postpone the vote till all members could — ya know — READ the damn thing… There were people up there arguing against a Bill they hadnt read!! And you had others up there arguing for a Bill they hadnt read…. SPEED isnt always the best remedy, unless you are racing at Indy….
So, Chas, your vote, when it is demanded of you on the roll call, is – what, exactly?
A “present” vote – one Obama is familiar with – is equivalent to a “no.”
Confiscation, It Can’t Happen Here?!?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6505651.html
In front of a run-down shack in north Houston, federal agents step from a government sedan into 102-degree heat and face a critical question: How can the woman living here buy four high-end handguns in one day?
The house is worth $35,000. A screen dangles by a wall-unit air conditioner. Porch swing slats are smashed, the smattering of grass is flattened by cars and burned yellow by sun.
“I’ll do the talking on this one,” agent Tim Sloan, of South Carolina, told partner Brian Tumiel, of New York.
(So, your Income Level determines whether you have 2nd Amendment Rights?)
OH MY!!, here comes the all CAPS. You’re in big trouble now Hank.
And just is my opinion, Donn?? Can you read?? Did you pass elementary reading??
You’re flamye is turned up so high, you cant read the screen in front of you… OR, you really dont want to read it… which would mean you, like Johnson, just get off by trolling….
SPEED isnt always the best remedy, unless you are racing at Indy….
No – but it IS how the majority rams through its favored legislation and lards it up. Now – the vote is up: Yours is?
Confiscation, It Can’t Happen Here?!?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6505651.html
Among other things, the agents are combing neighborhoods and asking people about suspicious purchases as well as seeking explanations as to how their guns ended up used in murders, kidnappings and other crimes in Mexico.
(What are “Suspicious” purchases?)
#
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:56 pm | Permalink
donndublin
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:48 pm | Permalink
Does anybody share the same opinion as chas, on voting for a major bill not read?
=====================================
Oh sure, many people sign documents all the time without reading them.
Not that I do.
So, I’m sure many people would share Chas’ opinion.
Remember, by definition, half the people are BELOW AVERAGE.
______________
And we all know where chazz is on the matter or shall I say below the matter.
“IF any of them would have asked, my advice would have been to postpone the vote till all members could — ya know — READ the damn thing…” [ME]
GMC, I expect better reading skills from you…. Do you not see what I just posted??
Had a postponement been offered, I feel pretty sure it would have passed…. And you dont???
By the way… I’m actually not affiliated with EITHER Party… I wouldnt want you to keep lying about something you dont know… not good, ya know….
Confiscation, It Can’t Happen Here?!?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6505651.html
The ATF recently dispatched 100 veteran agents to its Houston division, which reaches to the border.
The mission is especially challenging because, officials say, that while Houston is the number one point of origin for weapons traced back to the United States from Mexico, the government can’t compile databases on gun owners under federal law.
(Ahhhh, the Argument for Gun REGISTRATION!)
Agents instead review firearms dealers’ records in person.
(Intimidation tactics!)
People who are legally in the United States and have clean criminal records, but are facing economic problems are often recruited by traffickers to buy weapons on their behalf in order to shield themselves from scrutiny.
(Proof of that theory? So, it’s OK to search homes of people with “clean records” based on their being in the ‘wrong’ neighborhood?)
Johnson, IF a police officer knocked on your door… and laid one of YOUR guns on your table, and asked if you had any idea how that gun ended up being used in a murder in Mexico…. How would you respond???
Confiscation, It Can’t Happen Here?!?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6505651.html
The night before, the duo were in a stakeout where they watched a weapons sale.
They also combined efforts with the Drug Enforcement Administration for an aircraft to stealthily follow traffickers to the border.
(Black Helicopter?)
On this day, agents weren’t wearing raid jackets or combat boots and weren’t armed with warrants.
(No warrants?)
Confiscation, It Can’t Happen Here?!?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6505651.html
Another tip took agents on a 30-minute drive from the shack to a sprawling home with a pool in the back and an American flag out front.
It turned out two handguns, of a type drug gangsters prefer, were bought by a pastor for target practice.
(What type of handguns do ‘gangsters’ prefer?)
Some stories, they say, are hard to believe.
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 2:59 pm | Permalink
And just is my opinion, Donn?? Can you read?? Did you pass elementary reading??
You’re flamye is turned up so high, you cant read the screen in front of you… OR, you really dont want to read it… which would mean you, like Johnson, just get off by trolling….
______________
chas, everyone knows your opinion on the bill. You’re just trying to justify voting for it by saying it just as “Wrong” to vote against it.
Now you’re back-peddling so fast, you don’t know which way you’re going. Perhaps it’s better to get off that treadmill before you hurt yourself.
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:06 pm | Permalink
Johnson, IF a police officer knocked on your door… and laid one of YOUR guns on your table, and asked if you had any idea how that gun ended up being used in a murder in Mexico…. How would you respond???
—————————-
I’d call his Supervisor and ask him if the officer had lost all common sense, police training and regard for due process under the law. :)
GMC?? I dont think 219-212 is exactly a STRONG majority vote… Looks like spillover from both sides of the aisle….
“And just is my opinion, Donn?? Can you read?? Did you pass elementary reading??”
______________
The question is chazz. Can you write coherently? Can you think logically?
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:06 pm | Permalink
Johnson, IF a police officer knocked on your door… and laid one of YOUR guns on your table, and asked if you had any idea how that gun ended up being used in a murder in Mexico…. How would you respond???
———————
1. I’d call my lawyer and make sure I do everything I can to ensure my Constitutional Rights are protected.
2. I’ve never sold a gun I owned.
3. If I did ever sell a gun I owned, I’d sell it legally and have a document showing who bought it.
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:11 pm | Permalink
GMC?? I dont think 219-212 is exactly a STRONG majority vote… Looks like spillover from both sides of the aisle….
______________
218 dims voted FOR a bill they didn’t read and 204 pubs voted AGAINST a bill they didn’t read.
We know which ones are careful to pass major legislation before making it the law of the land.
Donn — I havent ever posted which way I would have voted on that Bill… And from the way you seem to catlogue posts here, you know damned well you are lying on that item….
What I SAID was that NOBODY should vote on a Bill like that if it hasnt been read…
Now, are you going to continue in your stupidity, or just drop it, and find something else to flayme about?? Hmmmm???
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6505651.html
Another tip took agents on a 30-minute drive from the shack to a sprawling home with a pool in the back and an American flag out front.
It turned out two handguns, of a type drug gangsters prefer, were bought by a pastor for target practice.
————————————-
Chas, what would you do if the cops showed up at your door and asked why a Pastor would buy 2 ‘gangster’ guns?
The police have no warrant, and no probable cause to suspect you have violated any laws, the sale just looks ’suspicious’.
Reg — Are you saying that a police officer wouldnt be within his rights as a law enforcement officer, to knock on Johnson’s door, show him his OWN(Johnson’s) gun, and ask him if he might know how it came to be used in a murder in Mexico???
Which law would that violate??
Be specific….
Oh yea, I would assume Johnson would be mirandized, if necessary….
8 Republicans voted for the Bill, and 44 Democrats voted against the Bill.
Hmmmm Looks like you dont want to answer the question I raised…. So, I dont think I will answer yours either…
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:17 pm | Permalink
Donn — I havent ever posted which way I would have voted on that Bill… And from the way you seem to catlogue posts here, you know damned well you are lying on that item….
What I SAID was that NOBODY should vote on a Bill like that if it hasnt been read…
———————————-
So you agree the vote should have been postponed a week to allow everyone to read the Bill and allow more then 3 hours to debate the Bill?
The Honduras situation is fluid and, not being an expert on Honduran constitutional law puts makes it difficult to to know exactly wha the legal facts are. This is why we have a Department of State.
Here is a good run down of the situation:
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=47389
Gee, if those 8 reublicans hadnt crossed the aisle, then we wouldnt be having the discussion, now would we??
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:19 pm | Permalink
Reg — Are you saying that a police officer wouldnt be within his rights as a law enforcement officer, to knock on Johnson’s door, show him his OWN(Johnson’s) gun, and ask him if he might know how it came to be used in a murder in Mexico???
Which law would that violate??
Be specific….
—————————
Oh, they can ask. You don’t have to answer.
Door-to-door Gestapo tactics, is that the approach you recommend in America?
BTW, in Houston, it’s Federal Agents going door-to-door, not the local police.
“So you agree the vote should have been postponed a week to allow everyone to read the Bill and allow more then 3 hours to debate the Bill?” [Johnson]
Damn, you can read… However, I didnt say anything about a time frame, or about debate… But, definitely I would have been urging for a postponement on the vote… just like I have said earlier….
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:23 pm | Permalink
Gee, if those 8 reublicans hadnt crossed the aisle, then we wouldnt be having the discussion, now would we??
———————————–
Oh yes we would, but not this week. Next week for sure.
I dont think law enforcement officers need warrants to ask questions… If they are doing illegal searches… That can and should be dealt with by proper authorities…
The 8 cap-and-tax Republicans…and the 44 Democrats who voted no
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/26/the-8-cap-and-tax-republicans/
The 8 cap-and-tax Republican turncoats again are:
Bono Mack (CA) (202) 225-5330
Castle (DE) (202) 225-4165
Kirk (IL) (202) 225-4835 (And he’s seriously considering running for Senate!)
Lance (NJ) (202) 225-5361
LoBiondo (NJ) (202) 225-6572
McHugh (NY) (202) 225-4611
Reichert (WA) (202) 225-7761
Smith (NJ) (202) 225-3765
Reminder: The two Republicans who didn’t vote: Jeff Flake (AZ) and John Sullivan (OK).
Here’s why: Flake had a “family conflict” (his daughter is reportedly in a beauty pageant in Alabama tomorrow) and Sullivan is undergoing alcohol treatment.
As I noted earlier today, Dem. Rep. Patrick Kennedy was pulled out of rehab to cast his vote.
And another reminder that the full roll call vote is here.
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:19 pm | Permalink
Reg — Are you saying that a police officer wouldnt be within his rights as a law enforcement officer, to knock on Johnson’s door, show him his OWN(Johnson’s) gun, and ask him if he might know how it came to be used in a murder in Mexico???
Which law would that violate??
Be specific….
—————————-
Well Chas, there are precedents under the law about police using tactics that may incriminate a suspect unless they are read their rights.
As JJ stated before, they can ask, I don’t have to answer – theoretically speaking.
“It is ALSO WRONG to vote AGAINST a Bill you havent yet read.”-chazz
It’s no mystery to anyone on this blog on where you stand of AGW. Just keep spinning till you make yourself dizzy.
That hole you’re digging is over your head now.
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:26 pm | Permalink
“So you agree the vote should have been postponed a week to allow everyone to read the Bill and allow more then 3 hours to debate the Bill?” [Johnson]
Damn, you can read… However, I didnt say anything about a time frame, or about debate… But, definitely I would have been urging for a postponement on the vote… just like I have said earlier….
——————————
Amazing!
Chas, I agree with you on:
1. Delaying the Cap & Tax vote.
2. Trucks to Trains.
3. Federal Reserve Audit.
I’m buying a lottery ticket tonight.
The two Republicans who didn’t vote: Jeff Flake (AZ) and John Sullivan (OK). Sullivan is undergoing alcohol treatment.
dam Okies
So if I understand this gun article correctly, you basically have “straw” buyers purchasing weapons under their names someone else, the guns turn out to be used in a crime correct?
Not a whole lot different than dealing in stolen property. He buddy, take this gold ring into the pawn shop and we’ll split the money paid for it.
The ring turns out to be stolen.
The one who’s name on the pawn is the one law enforcement is at the very least going to approach first.
I don’t see this as a gun issue. It’s a simple law enforcement investigation.
“WASHINGTON — As the most ambitious energy and climate-change legislation ever introduced in Congress made its way to a floor vote last Friday, it grew fat with compromises, carve-outs, concessions and out-and-out gifts intended to win the votes of wavering lawmakers and the support of powerful industries.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/us/politics/01climate.html?_r=1&nl=pol&emc=pola1
I agree Kia… for a change….
REG — I noted above that I am assuming Johnson is mirandized by the officers, before asking questions…. Did you forget to read that part??? Hmmmm???
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:38 pm | Permalink
I agree Kia… for a change….
REG — I noted above that I am assuming Johnson is mirandized by the officers, before asking questions…. Did you forget to read that part??? Hmmmm???
————————-
You got a hypothetical answer for your hypothetical question. Deal with it…
donndublin
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:30 pm | Permalink
“It is ALSO WRONG to vote AGAINST a Bill you havent yet read.”-chazz
It’s no mystery to anyone on this blog on where you stand of AGW. Just keep spinning till you make yourself dizzy.
That hole you’re digging is over your head now.
================================================
Don, what the HE11 is wrong with your brain, man??? Why do you keep posting your extreme stupidity???
Are you really that re+arded???
WRONG to vote FOR a bill not read….
WRONG to vote against a bill not read….
Postpone the freaking vote till the damned thing can be read….
And your problem with that position is what, exactly???? And since my statement on this has NOT CHANGED…. Just how am I spinning on ANYthing??? Hmmmmm????
Best go have dinner, before your butt on that plate you just got handed gets cold…
Donn — You claim to know where I stand on AGW??? SHOW WHERE I STAND ON AGW!!! You can look for a long time, and not find that one… at least not what YOU are looking for…. Go… go find it!!! We will all wait for a week or two….
I think if a gun registered to me is used in a murder, answering a few questions on my porch is the least of my worries.
#
Hud
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:37 pm | Permalink
“WASHINGTON — As the most ambitious energy and climate-change legislation ever introduced in Congress made its way to a floor vote last Friday, it grew fat with compromises, carve-outs, concessions and out-and-out gifts intended to win the votes of wavering lawmakers and the support of powerful industries.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/us/politics/01climate.html?_r=1&nl=pol&emc=pola1
“The deal making continued right up until the final minutes, with the bill’s co-author Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, doling out billions of dollars in promises on the House floor to secure the final votes needed for passage.”
__________________
Now we know why those “8 reublicans crossed the aisle”.
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:44 pm | Permalink
Donn — You claim to know where I stand on AGW??? SHOW WHERE I STAND ON AGW!!! You can look for a long time, and not find that one… at least not what YOU are looking for…. Go… go find it!!! We will all wait for a week or two….
__________________
Does anybody hear who posts about AGW not know where chas stands on the issue?
You might as well claim that I nor anyone else knows if you’re a “Con” or not.
Damn you are stupid.
Speaking of the BLOG all time standard for stupid. . .
Dear cosmos,
I am seriously convinced that you aren’t smart enough to have a civil discussion on anything ’scientific’. You lack a basic understanding of anything having to do with temperature, weather climate and global warming.
Your link basically proves my point. ENSO does not cause any net change in the temperature of the earth. The charts you linked to basically prove that. (even with Hanson’s spin)
Again, (I’m typing really slow) ENSO is little more than an anomoly with the surface temperatures of the ocean. Oceans are a giant, almost infinite for the purposes of any scientific discussion, heat sink. Oceans do not produce heat. Oceans can only store heat and transfer heat to an atmosphere that is cooler that their surface temperature.
All you need to know about global warming:
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime-images.html
” Republican turncoats ” LOL…
Republican eating their own……
Mr_Kia
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:34 pm | Permalink
So if I understand this gun article correctly, you basically have “straw” buyers purchasing weapons under their names someone else, the guns turn out to be used in a crime correct?
———————————
Good question, and the article could be more clear.
It appears though there are at least 2 situations described by the article:
“Among other things, the agents are combing neighborhoods and asking people about suspicious purchases as well as seeking explanations as to how their guns ended up used in murders, kidnappings and other crimes in Mexico.”
1. Guns used in a crime, tracing back to the original owner.
That is allowed by law.
2. ‘Suspicious’ purchases by a woman in a poor neighborhood and a pastor.
There is no law against poor people buying guns or pastors buying guns.
Without evidence and warrants, there is no legal basis for Federal Agents to go door-to-door in poor neighborhoods questioning people on why they bought guns. Or in questioning Pastors or other ’suspicious’ people for buying guns.
Why would the Feds be involved in ’simple law enforcement’?
donndublin posted July 1, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Does anybody hear who posts . . .
DavidB
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:58 pm | Permalink
” Republican turncoats ” LOL…
Republican eating their own……
—————————–
Too bad both parties don’t do that more often. No standards are upheld usually by EITHER party.
Text to Speech.
#
cosmos_originally
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:58 pm | Permalink
donndublin posted July 1, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Does anybody hear who posts . . .
——————-
Yeah, anyone who uses accessibility software that translates text to speech.
Any other questions cosmos?
Sue the Feds, JimJim.. for asking questions… DUH!
HLP posted July 1, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Speaking of the BLOG all time standard for stupid. . .
Dear cosmos,
I am seriously convinced that you aren’t smart enough to have a civil discussion on anything ’scientific’. You lack a basic understanding of anything having to do with temperature, weather climate and global warming.
Your link basically proves my point. ENSO does not cause any net change in the temperature of the earth.
—————————-
Dear Hank,
What exactly is your definition of “net change in the temperature of the earth”?
ENSO events cause short-term temperature fluctuations, such as the added warming in 1998.
Again Hank. . . name the top climate scientists who do not agree that a record El Nino in 1998 added a warm spike to the global temperatures.
Can you do that Hank? Or can you only attack me?
#
Chas
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:44 pm | Permalink
Donn — You claim to know where I stand on AGW??? SHOW WHERE I STAND ON AGW!!! You can look for a long time, and not find that one… at least not what YOU are looking for…. Go… go find it!!! We will all wait for a week or two….
________________
Chas
Posted June 30, 2008 at 8:07 pm | Permalink
Cosmos, a BIG AMEN to Henrik Tikkanen!!!
______________
______________
chazz, This says it all.
How time flies when you’re having fun.
50% of all murders go unsolved.
And we have the Feds going door-to-door questioning law-abiding citizens as to why they bought guns, without having any evidence they committed a crime.
You have no problem with that David?
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:58 pm | Permalink
2. ‘Suspicious’ purchases by a woman in a poor neighborhood and a pastor.
There is no law against poor people buying guns or pastors buying guns.
—————————————————-
That’s true. I’m guessing that if the guns were propoerly registered they were also obtained thru legal means (i.e. not out of the trunk of a car).
—————————————————-
Why would the Feds be involved in ’simple law enforcement’?
————————————————–
Feds would be involved as the guns were used in a crime committed in another country. The way I read it they were involved in cooperation with authorities in Mexico. That’s not a bad thing. We need their help as well (the Israel Mireles murder case in El Dorado a good example).
HLP posted July 1, 2009 at 3:54 pm
All you need to know about global warming:
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime-images.html
—————-
Hank can also foolishly insist that solar intensity is the only factor in Earth’s climate.
Hank seems to believe that climate science should ignore the levels of greenhouse gases and aerosols in the atmosphere, albedo, etc. . .
BTW Hank. . . the trend in solar intensity does not explain the warming trend since the mid-1970’s.
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:15 pm | Permalink
And we have the Feds going door-to-door questioning law-abiding citizens as to why they bought guns, without having any evidence they committed a crime.
—————————————————-
If all we have is a gun used in a crime and a registered owner who should they be questioning?
Tikkanen’s quote applies to more than AGW science.
Because we don’t think about future generations, they will never forget us. – Henrik Tikkanen
I have no problem with law enforcement investigating possible crimes.
Mr_Kia
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:18 pm | Permalink
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 3:58 pm | Permalink
2. ‘Suspicious’ purchases by a woman in a poor neighborhood and a pastor.
There is no law against poor people buying guns or pastors buying guns.
—————————————————-
That’s true. I’m guessing that if the guns were propoerly registered they were also obtained thru legal means (i.e. not out of the trunk of a car).
—————————–
Guns are not registered in most states, including Texas.
Some details are not in the article, however the Feds have access to Form 4473 records and/or NICS checks when someone legally purchases a firearm.
If you buy a gun or 5 guns today Mr Kia, would you expect the Feds to knock on your door tomorrow to ask you why you bought a gun or guns?
Mr_Kia
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:21 pm | Permalink
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:15 pm | Permalink
And we have the Feds going door-to-door questioning law-abiding citizens as to why they bought guns, without having any evidence they committed a crime.
—————————————————-
If all we have is a gun used in a crime and a registered owner who should they be questioning?
——————————
Again, TWO different situations were described in the article.
1. As you describe, a crime committed with a gun that has been recovered, and is traced back to the original owner.
No problem, logical, makes sense, and legal. (Even the Tiahrt Amendment allows this!)
2. A PURCHASE by a law abiding citizen, who because of their Poverty Level or Occupation is questioned by the FEDS to find out why they legally bought a gun. There’s no crime known to occur.
This is clearly not logical, an infringement of 2nd Amendment rights, and an intimidation tactic used by the Gestapo.
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:29 pm | Permalink
If you buy a gun or 5 guns today Mr Kia, would you expect the Feds to knock on your door tomorrow to ask you why you bought a gun or guns?
====================================================
Not necessarily. There’s such a thing in law enforcement as probable cause.
Crimes are being committed and crimes need to be investigated.
Illegal gun trade is no different than drug dealing.
Again with the reductio ad Hitlerum!!!!
Again with the reductio ad Hitlerum!!!!
“What exactly is your definition of “net change in the temperature of the earth”?”
___________________________________
See?
I told you that you weren’t smart enough to have a ’scientific’ discussion!
___________________________________
This part of your post is a complete fabrication proving that you can’t be civil:
“Hank can also foolishly insist that solar intensity is the only factor in Earth’s climate.”
Hank seems to believe that climate science should ignore the levels of greenhouse gases and aerosols in the atmosphere, albedo, etc. . .”
BTW Hank. . . the trend in solar intensity does not explain the warming trend since the mid-1970’s.”
_________________________________
nitwit
I think you’re taking racial or economic profiling and making it a 2nd ammendment issue.
I don’t have a problem with law enforcement going into a gang/drug infested neighborhood and asking someone on welfare or without a job how they manage to drive an Escalade.
This is the same thing to me.
If you bought 10,000 guns and 8,000 show up in the hands of drug gangs.. questions need to be asked!!!! whahahahhahahahahahaahah
Knock Knock.
“Hello Chas, I’m Jack Bloodhound, and these are my partners Dom Guido, and Bruno Nagurski. Nick Strongman, and Bubba Barnes are out in the car in front of your house. We’re Federal Agents.”
“We understand you purchased a Glock 22 and a Springfield XD 45 last week at the Bullet Stop”.
Chas in a nervous voice responds, “Yes sir, but how did you know that? Is there a problem?”
Jack with a sly smile says, “It’s our business to know such things Chas, and we’re here to find out if there is a problem. Capeesh?” Chas nods.
Jack continues, “So you have the Glock & XD?” Chas nods.
“Chas, you know that the Glock & XD are ‘gangsta’ style guns, the mob prefers them, so we wanna know what YOU are intending to do with these guns. You are a preacher aren’t you?” Chas nods.
“Don’t lie now Chas, we are Federal Agents and it’s a law to lie to Federal Agents!” Chas stammers out, “But I got my papers online, you know, through Holyrollers.com, and I’m completely legit”.
Jack laughs, “Don’t worry boy, I get it. You are a preacher. Ok. Fine. Now what in the H is a preacher doing buying 2 gangsta guns?”
Chas – “Target shooting, and self defense. I was gonna get my carry permit too.”
Jack, Dom, and Bruno all three laugh! Jack says, “Now Chas, who you gonna sell the guns to?” Chas whines, almost crying now, “Nobody! THEY ARE MINE! THEY ARE FOR ME!”
Jack grabs Chas by his white collar, “Boy, you better not by lying to me! You lying to me? And quit yelling!” Chas whimpers, “I’m sorry sir, I didn’t mean to yell, but I’ve never broken any laws, I just bought those guns for me, for target shooting and self-defense, really. I wouldn’t lie.”
Jack let’s Chas go and says, “OK boy, but if I hear anything on the street about you selling those guns, we’ll be back, Capeesh?” Chas wets pants and nods.
Just the facts, m’am.
Mr_Kia
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:44 pm | Permalink
I think you’re taking racial or economic profiling and making it a 2nd ammendment issue.
I don’t have a problem with law enforcement going into a gang/drug infested neighborhood and asking someone on welfare or without a job how they manage to drive an Escalade.
This is the same thing to me.
===================================
How about police checks going to/from certain neighborhoods? Searching every car?
That ok too?
Isn’t that what DUI checkpoints are?
Mr_Kia
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:58 pm | Permalink
Isn’t that what DUI checkpoints are?
————————
Similar, but I was referring to what the police in Washington DC did. Blocking off certain neighborhoods, stopping traffic to/from, and searching cars for guns. No probable cause other then the neighborhood you are in at the time.
Both are illegal, IMHO.
One final thought.
Law enforcement is outnumbered grossly by the bad guys in this country.
There’s a fine line between common sense and violation of our civil liberties.
There’s a fine line in being a good citizen and screaming about your rights.
Unless you want to allow vigilante justice, I don’t have a problem with a little inconvience to help the good guys out.
June 4, 2008
Police to Seal Off D.C. Neighborhoods
Can you say Police State? The Examiner has the scoop on a controversial new program announced today that would create so-called “Neighborhood Safety Zones” which would serve to partially seal off certain parts of the city. D.C. Police would set-up checkpoints in targeted areas, demand to see ID and refuse admittance to people who don’t live there, work there or have a “legitimate reason” to be there. Wow. Just, wow.
Some of the words used to describe such a plan by those quoted in the Examiner story include “breathtaking” and “cockamamie,” but that hardly begins to scratch the surface. Interim Attorney General Peter Nickles actually said that measures of this sort have “been used in other cities.” Which cities are those, Mr. Nickles? Warsaw?
Today’s proposal appears to be a desperate attempt by the city to tamp down recent violence that has ravaged the city, especially in Ward 5. The “Neighborhood Safety Zones” would last up to 10 days. It’s a struggle to think of words to describe such a plan other than authoritarian or ghettoization.
http://dcist.com/2008/06/04/mpd_to_seal_off.php
Police Roadblocks in your neighborhood ok with you? Fine.
Not in mine. No way.
Mr_Kia
Posted July 1, 2009 at 5:02 pm | Permalink
One final thought.
Law enforcement is outnumbered grossly by the bad guys in this country.
—————————
Sure, and most police do a great job. The bad guys get caught, and the courts and parole boards let them back out again.
No wonder the cops are outnumbered.
Why don’t we inconvenience the criminals a little bit?
Hank cannot define his use of “net change in the temperature of the earth”.
And Hank earlier posted: “All you need to know about global warming . . . [solar link]“
Hank, please explain why we should not think you meant that climate science should ignore the levels of greenhouse gases and aerosols in the atmosphere, albedo, etc. . .
And Hank still cannot name any top climate scientists who do not agree that a record El Nino in 1998 added a warm spike to the global temperatures.
Thanks for the “discussion”, Hank.
Now, now, Jim…you forgot. There are no “criminals”. Just unfortunate individuals who came from ‘broken homes’ and they are not responsible for their actions. Just as the ACLU.. or the next lib you see…
Hank said: “All you need to know about global warming: [solar link]“, so I guess we don’t need to know about this . . . ?
‘Super-size deposits of frozen carbon threat to climate change‘
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-06/gcp-sdo_1063009.php
as = ask
Chas – your shallowness of thought knows no depths…
Chas drools: “I would argue that there are a number of things the Federal gov’t now does that cannot in fact be reasonably interpreted to be permissible under constitutional authority, but that’s a discussion for another time (GMC) . . . .
=============================================
READ THAT DFB…. That should pretty much clear things up for you…”
___________________
Ok…that’s exactly what I was saying all along…that congress/admins/SCOTUS/etc have outrun their coverage…appears to me GMC agrees…and your answer is to use GMC’s comments to make it appear as if you’re making a point??? Is it the difference between words like “can” and “cannot” that throw you?
Chas tries again later:
1. “…they can’t handle & don’t deserve the power they’ve granted to themselves.” [DFB]
“Ummm… given what GMC has informed us, Congress hasnt granted budget appropriations to themselves… it has been granted to them by the Constitution… (see upthread)” (Chas)
_______________________
Seriously, can you even stay on subject??? You’re either the purest definition of a living non sequitor, or horribly riddled with ADD. Where in the dog H did I say anything about congress granting anything to do with budget appropriations??? I can go through and lay out the powers that ARE spelled out in the Const too…of course never mentioned those…was talking about powers NOT spelled out… Ok, freakshow…tell me where it says in the Constitution that Committee Chairs/Members should have excessively powerful control over bills within their committee relative to the members not on that committee? Tell me where it says in the Constitution that govt can buy auto makers, banks, insurance, etc? Tell me where in the Constitution it says govt should pay for abortions? Tell me where in the Constitution it justifies SS, Medicare, welfare, etc?
Last try..let me put it in terms you might understand…
Congress is all rich people. Executive Branch folk are all rich people. Judicial Branch is all rich people. Obviously, rich people need to be taught a lesson and forced to share their riches with everyone…but they don’t want to share. In fact they want you to share more with them, but they’re not asking you, they’re telling you. You ask them nicely not to, and to follow the rules…but they laugh and take some more of your toys. You cry. Then you remember in the rules, that if you get 34 states to petition congress, they don’t get to take your toys without your permission anymore and you can have a say in what the rules are going forward. And maybe, just maybe, you can make all those evil rich people in DC share their toys.
The correct response. Jim, if I may borrow your hypothetical:
JimJohnson
Posted July 1, 2009 at 4:54 pm | Permalink
Knock Knock.
“Hello Chas, I’m Jack Bloodhound, and these are my partners Dom Guido, and Bruno Nagurski. Nick Strongman, and Bubba Barnes are out in the car in front of your house. We’re Federal Agents.”
“We understand you purchased a Glock 22 and a Springfield XD 45 last week at the Bullet Stop”.
Chas in a nervous voice responds, “Yes sir, but how did you know that? Is there a problem?”
Jack with a sly smile says, “It’s our business to know such things Chas, and we’re here to find out if there is a problem. Capeesh?” Chas nods.
Jack continues, “So you have the Glock & XD?”
==
The proper answer:
Chas answers: “None of your business. And this conversation is over. Good day.”
He then closes the door. End of story.
___
Just so you know, BTW, the technique used here, called a “knock and talk,” does not require a warrant, or probable cause, or Miranda warnings (which apply only to custodial interrogation). But neither are citizens required to answer any questions. Be polite, but firm: “No sir, I will not answer your questions,” and end the conversation
But if you do answer, don’t lie.
“…but they don’t want to share. In fact they want you to share more with them, but they’re not asking you, they’re telling you.”
Oh come on, how do you know this? Surely they want to share.
“After Call From Senator’s Office, Small Hawaii Bank Got U.S. Aid”
http://www.businessinsider.com/hawaii-bank-got-tarp-cash-after-senators-phone-call-2009-7
Chas
Posted June 30, 2008 at 8:07 pm | Permalink
Cosmos, a BIG AMEN to Henrik Tikkanen!!!
==============================================
Donn — Are you STUPID that you dont understand that Tikkanen’s statement applies to nearly any of life’s situations or circumstances??? I dont care if it’s environment, or education, or getting your kids’ tonsils taken out…. If Society forgets about our kids, they will NEVER forget us….
And, yep, Donn… I gotta say a BIG AMEN!! to that!!! Sorry you are so damned dumb you cant think in abtract terms… The world isnt all black and white….
Cut and Run?
Thousands of U.S. Marines descended upon the volatile Helmand River valley in helicopters and armored convoys early Thursday morning, mounting an operation that represents the first large-scale test of the U.S. military’s new counter-insurgency strategy in Afghanistan.
Obama makes Bush and the diaper wearing Republicans look like pansies!!!!!
(CNN) — U.S. troops have launched a “major operation” against Taliban fighters in southern Afghanistan, U.S. military officials announced in Afghanistan early Thursday.
U.S. Marines gather for a briefing in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, on Wednesday.
About 4,000 Americans, mostly from the Marines, and 650 Afghan soldiers and police launched Operation Khanjar — “strike of the sword” — in the Helmand River valley, the U.S. command in Kabul announced.
The push is the largest since the Pentagon began moving additional troops into the conflict this year, and it follows a British-led operation launched last week in the same region, the Marines said.
It is also the first big move since U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal took over as the allied commander in Afghanistan in mid-June.
Oh agree with your 5:49 GMC.
Most folks are gonna talk though, many will even invite them in their house to sit down.
And the intimidation factor is definately there.
They can even invite you downtown for questioning, if they want to intimate you a little more.
Yes you can say no, but can they not arrest you for questioning if you refuse?
I’d make em arrest me. Not say a word. And lawyer up.
Obama is so tough:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/07/01/officials-clinton-pressed-obama-harder-line-iran/?test=latestnews?test=latestnews
Officials: Clinton Pressed Obama to Take Harder Line on Iran
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton urged President Obama for two days to toughen his language on Iran before he did so.
The Washington Times
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton urged President Obama for two days to toughen his language on Iran before he did so, and then was surprised when he condemned Iran’s crackdown on demonstrators last week, the Washington Times reported administration officials as saying.
Iranian Government Says Neda Soltan’s Murder Was ‘Staged’
The murder of 26-year-old protester Neda Soltan was staged, Iran’s chief of police said Wednesday — a statement that rights groups and Iran watchers are calling a propagandistic lie.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529780,00.html?test=latestnews
Fox jumped right on that 3 day old story about Neda, huh??
1934 Chicago Tribune Cartoon Asks–Planned Economy Or Planned Destruction?
Could anyone come up with a more fitting description of what is going on now than
this cartoon from the 1934 Chicago Tribune. Makes it a little difficult to say that history does not repeat itself!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2232625/posts
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy,
its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” – Winston Churchill
Hey, CONs–
Listen to what your news channel Fux aired today:
June 30, 2009 6:23 pm ET
From the June 30 edition of Fox News’ Glenn Beck:
Beck guest Scheuer: “The only chance we have as a country right now is” for bin Laden to “detonate a major weapon” in U.S.
BECK: Yes, sir. OK. So you have seen this. Do you really, honestly believe that we have come to a place to where those very senior people in the highest offices of the land, Congress and the White House, really will not do the right thing in the end, that they won’t see the error of their ways?
SCHEUER: No, sir, they will not. Not — the only chance we have as a country right now is for Osama bin Laden to deploy and detonate a major weapon in the United States. Because it’s going to take a grassroots, bottom-up pressure, because these politicians prize their office, prize the praise of the media and the Europeans.
Only — it’s an absurd situation. Again, only Osama can execute an attack which will force Americans to demand that their government protect them effectively, consistently, and with as much violence as necessary.
******
Wow. Just wow.
Remember when Lt. Calley in Vietnam said that “sometimes the only way to save a village is to destroy it?”
I guess this is the modern version–the only way to save America is if bin Laden kills a lot more people here.
Sick.
You people are sick.
CapnAmerica,
No, the correct thing to say is that Scheuer is sick.
Taking what one man says and then blaming an entirely different group of people who didn’t say it and don’t agree with it is illogical and wrong.
Well Capn, it would probably be because you make us nauseous.
Well, with that little snipe back at the Capn’s idiocy, I’m out. Peace.
Well of COURSE cons are hoping for an attack on America.
They are reactionaries and the only way they can spread their …disease.. is with something to react to.
Yup, I’m with you, BlueJay.
The Freeptards love Glenn Beck next to Rush “I’m On Drugs” Limbaugh.
Nathan claims “it’s just one guy.”
Really? Really, Nathan.
So where’s the outrage? Where are the angry e-mails and the “let’s boycott his sponsors”?
Yeah. Well, you don’t do that if that’s what you think too . . .
When Rush Limbaugh claimed that liberals “want our soldiers to die in Iraq . . . “, I swear if I ever saw that guy in real life, I punch every one of his teeth down his throat for that despicable lie.
But when a right-wing talk show host says the best thing for America right now is a “major bin Laden attack,” the most anger the right-wing can offer is “well . . . we didn’t say that, it’s just one guy.”
That is not near good enough, and you know it.
Listen to that silence from the CON side . . .
It’s like Roeder. How do they say they disagree with a person that they secretly agree with?
Actually, I first saw this posted on FreeRepublic.
Let’s see what the CONs there (who don’t represent any CONs here of course hahahaha) have to say:
This will probably upset the Libtards, but former CIA Scheuer has the guts to speak the truth. A lot of people need some waking up these days.
by LilRascal
To: LilRascal
I doubt even that would work.
by elkfersupper (Member of the Original Defiant Class)
To: LilRascal
The first thing Obama would do upon a mass-casualty Al Qaeda attack is apologize…then announce his “re-conversion” to Islam.
Then he’d seek to have Rush Limbaugh jailed for causing the attack.
Then he’d try to confiscate all OUR guns.
Oh…and as part of his “Islamification” he’d put Michelle in a burqa.
Just might be an even trade…/sarc>
Cheers!
by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: LilRascal
I agree people have been asleep, but I sense that they’re beginning to come out of their semi-comatose state and wonder what the devil is going on.
by Think free or die (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money – M.Thatcher)
To: Think free or die
He’ll blame Bush.It was w’s fault for making the ragheads mad at us.
by pistolpetestoys (Outside of a dog a book is a mans best friend;inside a dog it’s too dark to read.)
To: elkfersupper
Obama needs to designate a couple of cities -— say Philadelphia on the East coast and San Francisco on the west -— as sacrificial targets. If Osama hits them, he will have a free pass to pull out and go on living, the kind of deal we gave to Mookie in Iraq.
by Sundog (I hope Michelle Obama isn’t going to be punished with a baby.)
To: LilRascal
Even if the terrorists attack again, the MSM lapdogs will be yelling “Bush’s fault!” before the blood dries.
by ozzymandus
To: pistolpetestoys
No, no, no…they clearly wear sheets on their heads :-)
CapnAmerica
Posted July 1, 2009 at 10:55 pm | Permalink
“Listen to that silence from the CON side . . . ”
Um, if you hadn’t noticed no one is posting right now and I did say something.
To: LilRascal
“… “major bin Laden attack” would wake p US officials.”
It would not. I bet they’re (”the so called US officials”) are counting on it! It would give the crypto-commie Democrats an excuse to impose further draconian tyrannical measures against the American economy and population. Particularly against all of those Christian, conservative, white Americans they hate with all their being.
by StormEye
To: grey_whiskers
“re-conversion” to Islam?
He is already out of the closet… he just hasnt said it in those words!
******
Wow. You CONs must be so proud.
“Listen to that silence from the CON side . . . ”
Nathan responds, “if you hadn’t noticed no one is posting right now.”
HELLO! Mein Gott, why is Nathan a bachelor? Because he hasn’t gotten married yet.
Talk about begging the question.
Yeah, great come back, Nathan. The silence from the CONs is because . . . wait for it . . . nobody is posting right now.?
Sheeesh, you can’t make this siht up, I tell you what.
CapnAmerica,
Once again, you resort to personal attacks.
What happened to that civility you were talking about the other day?
Once again, I have extended to you the offer of civil discussion and this is the 2nd time now that you have attacked me personally.
Do you want to have civil discussion here or not?
‘Course it kinda goes back to “I don’t need to prove that the earth is only 10,000 years old because it’s my religion.”
That’s question begging too. The Hindus had a religious tradition that the widow should not outlive the husband. So when a husband died, she was expected to commit suttee or ritual immolation by throwing herself on the burning funeral pyre of her husband.
Trouble was, a lot of widows didn’t want to commit suttee, so the husband’s family members helped convince her by throwing her on the pyre involuntarily.
According to Nathan, that is fine because it’s their religion.
CapnAmerica,
There was no one posting here before you made your comment. There continued to be no one posting after it. Then it was you who declared that the silence proved something…
So, in reality, what you did was walk into an empty room, make a statement, and then procede to say that because no one was in that room to reply the silence proved something…
I’m not attacking you personally, Nathan.
I’m attacking your ideas because they are really . . . how can I say this diplomatically so it doesn’t hurt your itty bitty feewings . . .
Can you take some constructive criticism?
Your ideas are idiotic.
what you did was walk into an empty room
Well, if it’s so empty, why are you responding now?
CapnAmerica,
I must have missed that part in debate, where you just called someones ideas idiotic…
No, in reality, if you think my ideas are wrong, dumb, or disagree, you simply post why.
There is no need in a civil discussion to simply resort to calling them idiotic.
And why don’t you respond to the issue at hand–Glenn Beck sat and listened to a guy say that the best thing that could happen to America is a bunch of dead Americans on our soil, and he said nothing critical of that.
Neither do you.
See my 11:14 post, Nathan.
What is the sudden interest in diplomacy Nathaniel?
We did not see it from you or from cons in general when bush was in power.
You and yours are OUT of power. If you wished to be listened to, you must say something interesting.
If you outlaw abortion, as you wish, what is your plan for the care of millions of unwanted babies?
Health care is clearly broken. I know. I can’t get any. Can you help?
For more than 25 years, wealth has been concentrated to the few and the greedy. Aside from taxing those folks their drain on society, do YOU have a suggestion for elevating the American worker?
The American way of life, as currently held dear, is not sustainable and yet is the goal of China and India. Do YOU have ideas as to how we can both maintain the American way of life AND preserve the planet and its resources for future generations?
Being the party of NO! It’s TOO expensive and I won’t pay! isn’t working.
What can you say that is interesting?
CapnAmerica,
The issue at hand?
How about we focus on your illogical assertion that because one man said something it means all Conservatives must agree and then you procede to call them sick?
BlueJay–
I have agreed to have a civil conversation with you but all you want to do is make fun and name-call.
I’m not going to dignify your insults with an answer.
Translation: I don’t know my asp from a hole in the ground.
Glenn Beck gave the guy air Nathaniel.
And you can deny what one of your own said all you like.
He still said it.
What is the POSITIVE message from the right?
What can they offer me?
My 11:27 post was answering as Nathan would answer.
But actually, I gave him too much credit.
Check the wide-eyed “I just don’t know what you’re talking about” classic Nathan of 11:25.
Can he really be THAT dumb?
Unfortunately, I’m not seeing a lot of evidence to the contrary these days.
CapnAmerica,
I will add you to the list of liberals here who have no interest in a civil discussion. (You do remember that it was you complaining about this in another thread last week)
MonkeyHawk, JM Walker, BlueJay, CapnAmerica
I think I am forgetting someone…
Remember this the next time you feel like complaining about civility here.
Let’s try this one more time.
Mo ichido as they say in Japan.
Consider, Nathan, what the response would be from CONs or Libs if Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow had a guest on who said, “the best thing for America regarding Iraq would be for every last soldier there to DIE! That way, America would finally see the error of its imperial ways.”
How would you react then? What would you say to us Libs if we said, “well, that was just one guy talking”?
Nathan, are going to answer the question?
Can you answer the question?
(It seems a lot of people have to ask you to do that these days . . . )
CapnAmerica,
Lets try this one more time.
How do you explain your illogical assertion that because one man said something it means all Conservatives must agree and then you procede to call them all sick?
Can you answer the question?
Okay, well time for computer chess.
We stumped Nathan, but then . . . that’s kinda like stumping a . . . uh . . . stump.
“Better to be thought the fool by keeping silent than open one’s mouth and remove all doubt,” eh, Nathan.
I can’t say as I blame you.
I think you need to admit, Nathaniel, that you are insulated from the real life realities that face most Americans.
You have a guaranteed income and guaranteed health care.
You come to that, as your father did, through your service in the military. Civilian activism has worked to guarantee reward for your service. And I don’t know anyone that would disagree with that.
But we cannot all join the military to solve our problems and provide our needs. Neither can a civilian populace continue to pay for and support your benefits when they have not even the resources to provide for themselves.
You and yours have done well in the give and take. But lately, you’re doing a lot of taking and not wanting to talk about giving back.
If you HAVE ideas outside of “that’s just the way it is” then SHARE them.
And it appears as if CapnAmerica and BlueJay can’t do anything other than attack me personally rather than CapnAmerica explain or attempt to prove his illogical assertion.
CapnAmerica,
Remember this day.
Twice you have accepted deals with me for civility and then broke those deals.
Now, after your complaints about civility, I once again offered you a deal. You refused. You continue to make personal attacks.
Just admit it, you can’t help it. Neither can many of the other liberals here.
You simply can’t be civil.
Yup I attacked you Nathaniel.
I challenged you to present ideas and you don’t have any.
Another evening of “Nathaniel’s” whining.
The Marines must be so proud.
Well that’s enough for me.
I don’t have a guaranteed income or lifetime health care like Nathaniel and his father.
I don’t see ideas from Nathaniel about just WHY it is that he and his are somehow elevated above me and other Americans and how we would go about addressing that.
Meanwhile?
My great aunt who is on Medicare is recovering from hip surgery. A month ago, her Medicare coverage got her through congestive heart failure AND pneumonia(the doctor told family, “That little lady should not be alive”) SO well that she was up and around enough in just three weeks to fall and break her hip.
Government WORKS.
Business calculates and exploits.
Nathaniels’ father posted,
HLP posted July 1, 2009 at 3:54 pm
All you need to know about global warming:
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime-images.html
———————–
Then Hank later seemed to claim that he did not really mean to say,
All you need to know about global warming:
[the solar link above]
Business would have given up on my great aunt as a bad investment. I can’t imagine ANY insurance company covering surgery and care for a 91 year old woman. She’s given much and all that she COULD give. She is of no further use to commerce.
FORTUNATELY, society values her. I’m grateful for that.
We are going to need more of that as the population ages.
MHawk–
I was hoping you got to catch this latest interchange.
We got the classic Nathan:
1. Refuse to acknowledge that Fox News, Glenn Beck or his guests in any way represent a CON world view.
In other words, call night day.
2. When a CON says that “America needs another terrorist attack,” say, “that’s just one person’s opinion.”
3. When asked how Nathan would react if a Liberal guest on a Liberal show said that “America needs to have its soldiers DIE in Iraq to teach America a lesson,” Nathan responds by “you LIBS are not nice.”
4. When returned to the issue at hand by pointing out that civility isn’t the question, he whines even MORE about civility.
This guy’s funnier than a Monty Python skit. “This isn’t an argument.” “Yes, it is.” “No, it’s not.”
“Well, I’ve had enough of this!”
“No, you haven’t.”
Not all CONs are stupid people, but all stupid people are CONs.
Cosmos–
Hank has posted publicly that
1. The Democrats would have a net loss of seats in Congress in 2006.
In fact the Democrats didn’t lose a single contested seat, and they took back both the House and Senate.
2. McCain would win in 2008.
Obama not only got more votes than McCain, he got more votes than Bush in both elections.
3. The choice of Sarah Palin was brilliant.
Most election watchers now feel that Sarah Palin was a stake through the heart of the campaign. It showed McCain’s judgment was not sound.
4. the Democrats would lose seats in 2008. In fact, the Democrats gained a super majority of 60 in the Senate, thanks to Senator Al Franken who will finally be seated.
So, Cosmo, when Hank predicts something, just assume the opposite. It’s much more likely to be true based on past experience.
Talk to anyone over 65 and ask if they want to get rid of Medicare.
As Alcoholic Anonymous teaches: “Half-steps achieved us nothing.”
So, for political reasons, Medicare is stuck with covering the health care of the people who, because of age, are the most likely to incur the most expensive medical response.
Now, if (using the commercial insurance actuarial tables, the wrongest thing in the world is to insure those clients most likely to rack up claims.
Enlarge the risk pool and the math changes. Yeah, a strapping healthy 24-year-old isn’t likely to need treatment for glaucoma. But a 90-year-old is less likely to become a quadriplegic from wrapping his Camero around a telephone pole.
(Historical note: A Camero wrapped around a telephone pole is Oklahoma’s Official State Tree. But I digress….)
CapnAmerica
“For all your judging needs.”
Not only will CapnAmerica tell you what your thoughts are, he will judge who you agree with and group you accordingly! And, as a bonus he will judge by telling you what he thinks of the words he put in your mouth and the group he put you in. And do it it in fine insult form! What a value!
So, if you feel the need to be judged, stand back and let the Capn at it. He requires no input from you. He is self-contained judging unit and HIPPO-CRYT endorsed.
Includes BlueJay. MonkeyHawk sold separately.
Capn tries with: “1. Refuse to acknowledge that Fox News, Glenn Beck or his guests in any way represent a CON world view.”
_____
If you ever actually watched Beck interview Scheurer…you know the guy Clinton hired & who CREATED the “Rendition” program under Clinton…you’d be intellectually honest enough to admit that Beck introduces him as somebody he disagrees with on all his policy thoughts…
Scheurer also routinely chastises the US for supporting Israel…huh…which party/Admin wholeheartedly agree with that position…just pure coinkidink that Obama’s inner circle included Edward Said & Rashid Khalidi…
But again, who could expect you to acknowledge a full story, just grab tidbits that can be spun into propaganda. I’m sure MSNBC or Huffington Puke or wherever you cut & paste from must share Obama’s “guests views” then….his list of “guests” has such a rosy “worldview”…Rev Wright, Ayers, Khalidi, Said, Farakhan…and he’s trying hard to add A-jad, KJ Il, Chavez, The Brothers Castro, Ortega…
It’s a silly game you’re trying to play there Capn…you know rocks..and glass houses…
Cool.
In the old days, you couldn’t get CONs to shut up about “what we believe, dammit!”
Now, none of them seem to agree on anything.
Yup.
It’s an improvement.
Not only will CapnAmerica Rush Limbaugh tell you Libs what your thoughts are, he will judge who you agree with and group you accordingly! And, as a bonus he will judge by telling you what he thinks of the words he put in your mouth and the group he put you in. And do it it in fine insult form! What a value!
There, I fixed it for you, Outlander.
Remember when Rush said that “Liberals want our American troops to die in Iraq” or that “Liberals love terrorists more than they love their fellow Americans”?
Yeah.