Tuesday Night Open Mic for July 14, 2009

Open Mic 1It felt good to get back to the political discussions yesterday. I can’t tell you how much it pained me to not be able to participate in the discussions over the last week and a half. But I certainly cannot complain about the vacation that made that happen. It was a nice relaxing time where I didn’t have to worry about much of anything. I only regretted that I was not able to pre-write articles as I had intended so that you would all still get something new each night. Ah, but lessons learned. Here we are again at a Tuesday night open mic. I missed being a part of last week’s which ended up with an astounding almost 900 responses. I certainly realize that was helped by no new articles for several days afterwards. But it was good to see so much discussion and participation happening. I have been out of the loop for a bit, so I am looking forward to discussing the massive amounts of catching up I have been doing while reading news the last two days.


  1. USWeapon says:

    USWeapon Topic #1

    There is a battle going on in Virginia as an Islamic school looks to expand and religious groups are looking to stop it. From the article:

    A holy war is brewing in Virginia, where a controversial Islamic school is seeking permission to expand its campus and a group of residents is going all out to stop it. The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing Monday night to consider a proposal to expand the campus of the Islamic Saudi Academy, a Saudi-owned college preparatory school.

    Critics of the plan point to former students of the school who have been convicted in a plot to assassinate former President Bush, and more recently, arrested for trying to board an airplane with a seven-inch kitchen knife.

    And others say they oppose the move to expand the school for one reason only:

    “We’re opposed to the operation of the Islamic Saudi Academy because it teaches and practices Shariah law,” said James Lafferty, chairman of the Virginia Anti-Shariah Task Force (VAST). “Shariah law is anti-constitutional and we feel that it is the ultimate improper land use here in the state where the Constitution was created.”

    So what do you guys think? Read the article and then discuss. In a country that has made its supposed core principle religious freedom, is this out of line for christian groups? Is it really unconstitutional? Or are they correct to fight it since so many rights have been taken away from christians over the last 50 years?

    Read the entire article from Fox News Here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,532365,00.html

    • Okay folks, blast away at me if you will as I will not change my opinion on this until Islam itself changes . . .

      Islam is nothing more than a murderous cult hiding behind the cloak of a phony religion and should not be allowed anywhere on United States soil!

      • The exact same thing could be said about Christianity, dont judge a religion or group of people by a very small percentage of extremists.

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          The key point that some people seem to willfully miss is that the “small percentage” of extremist Muslims are currently pretty darn active in killing both other Muslims of different sects and non-Muslims.

          History is a great tool, and it should be learned from, but current events are current events and you also have to pay attention to them as well.

          • So what should be done then Peter? Kill them all due to the extremists?

            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


              I do not believe that anywhere in any of my posts I advocated that particular position.

              What do you think the solution is?

      • Kristian Stout says:


        I’m with you on this one. Bob, you can say what you want about Christianity, but Christianity does not preach murder to non-believers. There is no comparison.

        • I know and am friends with many muslims, I am a Christian and they have not murdered me yet. If you are talking about some dodgy verses in the Qur’an I would like to ask if you have ever read the Old Testament?

          • Kristian Stout says:

            Both of you have a point but can either of you tell me of an incident in the last 100 years that someone has been killed in the name of Christianity?

            • Bama Dad says:

              In the last 100 years the Protestants and the Catholics were murdering each other.

              • But that’s not a fight or killing over God, but the proper religion they should be in.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


                I believe that that is a technicallity.

                The Northern Ireland situation is at least similar on its fact to Shiites and Sunnis murdering each other.

                However, I didn’t see the Protestants or the Catholics in Belfast intentionally killing Muslims, Jews, Hindus, etc. in the name of God….

                Oh yeah, the Muslims kill each other, plus they kill Christians, and Jews, and Hindus… yeah that is what I was thinking of… yeah.

              • Barberian says:

                The Killing has not been over religion, but sovereignty. The protestant north= allegience with GB, the catholic north=independance. Religious sect was just a way of further identifying the combatants.

                As for the faith of Islam. Those that truly follow the teachings are fanatics, those that do not would be happy for their own verson of Martin Luther (not the Civil Right Leader).

                I have “worked” in North Africa and the Middle East for many years and have formed my own oppinion. It is not pretty!

              • Alan F. says:

                Its not religion its one part believing themselves of the Empire and the other believing they’re not. It just so happens they’re of two different sects of the same religion. Might as well fight over soccer… oh wait they do.

            • How about the abortion doctor killing?

              How about the holocaust museum killing?

              • Alan F. says:

                To many late term abortion is murder itself and to the guy who dropped the abortion doctor, he likely thought he was saving multiple lives by taking one. As for the Holocaust museum killing, it was an old hater trying to become relevant before dieing as his writings sure weren’t getting him into the history books.

                You have anything better?

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


                The holocaust museum killing was done by an Aryan Supremacist and had nothing to do with God in any way, so I totally miss any point you were trying to make there.

                The abortion doctor killing was done by some wacko who thought he was protecting the sanctity of human life by taking a human life, but it had nothing to do with a member of one religion killing a member of another religion in the name of God either….

              • Kristian asked for an incident in the last 100 years that someone has been killed in the name of Christianity. That’s what both of these are. Not mainstream Christianity, but Christianity no less.

        • Bama dad says:

          Check on crusades and the inquisitions carried out in the name of Christianity.

          • Check out the century those instances occurred in and how far back you just had to go for them. Comparing to now is grasping without hope of a single straw in your fist. Might as well wax on about how 1200 years ago Arab Muslims in Africa believed in slavery, kept such and were active traders in humans where today in the Sudan they merely keep all the Dinka they capture, work the men without pay, in many cases include rape for the women and keep any offspring without chance of release but are willing to “swap” them for cash, goods or specifically cattle vaccinations. You have example of those evil Christians employing similar this day while jabbering about how great god is in the same breathe a deal for human trading is made?

          • Bama Dad,

            Christianity, has evolved far beyond the slaughter, torture, and barbarian behavior we see in Islam controlled countries yet today.

            I know someone that lived in the middle east for awhile, and I can assure you he saw plenty of what they do in the name of “Allah”. And NO it isn’t just the radical few, it is everywhere.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        I would say that CURRENTLY, there are no active Christian sects advocating going out and killing people in the name of God, whereas there are currently active Muslim sects advocating going out and killing people in the name of God.

        Also, in Christianity, if you are a non-believer you are a non-believer. In Islam, if you are a non-believer, you are a second-class citizen and a heretic.

        Overall, Christianity seems to have become more tolerant over time at a faster pace than Islam.

        Obviously, over the history of man on earth, more people have been killed in the name of God than for any other reason, and Christianity and Islam are just two examples of many religions that have killed in the name of God or The Gods.

        Out of all religions CURRENTLY, I would say that Islam is the only one that poses the threat of death on a daily basis both within (Shiites killing Sunnis, etc.) and without (Muslims killing non-believers) its own religion.

        So yes, Christianity was horrible in the past, and yes, not ALL Muslims are out to kill people, but overall, Islam is a much bigger threat to anyone’s well-being RIGHT NOW than Christianity.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


            I am sure that you can come up with the individual example here and there of Christians killing people in the name of God currently, but I would be willing to bet it would be a very small fraction of the examples I could come up with of Muslims killing both other Muslims and killing non-Muslims in the name of God.

            Good luck if you think you can keep up.

            • So there are currently Christians going out and killing people on the name of God then?
              Again I do not judge a religion or group of people by a small group of extremists.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


                You miss the point. Yes, there are people of all stripes going out and killing people in the name of God throughout history.

                Currently, the most active and the most threatening killers using God as their excuse happen to be Muslims.

                The fact that the “non-extremists” of that faith are not actively and vocally saying that they do not support these extremists is, in my opinion, a tacit admission on their part that they DO in fact support what these extremists are doing.

                If you can provide examples of high-profile Islamic Clerics that are, in fact, actively calling the “extremists” extreme and actively telling them to STOP, then I might say that you had an argument here.

              • The internet is your friend.


              • Do you know any muslims by any chance? Have you spoken to any?

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                See #5

              • ok

              • Bob, yes, I have spoken to three mosques in the DFW area and posted what they said to me. Frightening….I will enlighten you shortly. Trying to find my post in the archives.

              • Well the views at those 3 mosques must represent the entire religion of Islam and its followers, I have also heard frightening things from so called Christians.

              • v. Holland says:

                The main thing I wonder about is if we are attacked by the extreme Muslims and they are forced to make a decision will the American muslims fight with us or against us.

            • Peter,
              Lets see your examples of Muslims killing both other Muslims and killing non-Muslims in the name of God.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


                Lets start with the Iran/Iraq war, and continue with Saddam and the Sunni killing Shiites and Kurds in Iraq, then continue with Palestinians and members of Hammas and Hezbollah killing Jews, then continue with Muslims killing Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, and others in India, then let us continue with Muslims killing over 3000 Americans on 9/11/01… Shall I go on?

          • Care to openly doubt tribal or sectarian hatred vying for a hiding place under the garb of “religion”? The Sudanese government denies slavery itself and explains it off as that accepted old custom of “ransom” blaming outsiders for raising the ransoms beyond what can be paid for by the families. Africa continent wide this decade has shown degrees of torture and murder not seen in centuries. That the number of atrocities committed by those who would put their faith as Muslim is in the millions, would that be proof of all Muslims being capable of the same? Find yourself a better example.

        • PeterB: I agree with you.

          I have heard and read some interesting things on Islam. It is not just a religion but a way of life (like communism). The goal is to take over society and change it.

          • Birdman,
            It’s Christianity a way of life (like communism)??

            Isn’t the goal of Chritian missionaries to convert people to Christianity (take over society and change it)?

            • Even I know Todd that the answers to your two separate questions are;

              Yes their goal is to convert.

              No, their goal is not to take over society and change it.

              Their goal is to spread the word and they believe that by doing so more will be saved.

              However, they don’t go to some remote Island and tell the natives to convert or we will cut your head off.

              All day I have watched this debate with many here confusing the difference between small groups who may or may not Truly be using religion to justify violence as opposed to recognized and authorized segments of the religion. In short, a church or sect of the broader religion.

              And some folks here had better get a reality check about how many folks are involved in those sects/segments/churches or whatever you want to call them. They are not a “few individuals”.

              The million dollar question is whether if we left their lands and stopped messing with their lives if they would just leave us alone and go home, or would they continue their jihad. That is the gamble, pure and simple.

            • Alan F. says:

              Yup but we’ve dumped “stoning” for paintball.

      • GA Rowe,
        So apparently you don’t really believe in any of this freedom crap. If you don’t like someone, kick them out of the country! And are you the one who gets to decide who stays and who goes?

        Since Democrats are in the majority, maybe we’ll vote to kick all the conservatives out. Sure would improve things!

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          In your mind I am sure that it would 🙂

          By the way, please DO kick all of the conservatives out. We do not WANT to pay 60-70% of our income in taxes. If you kick all of us out, you will likely end up paying 80% in taxes.

          It sounds like you would enjoy that, so PLEASE, YES, kick the conservatives out!

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          As far as the “freedom crap” (and yes, I know Todd, you think freedom IS crap), this school in Virginia is free to exist, and free to expand, provided they abide by the rules of this country.

          If it can be shown that they are actively teaching things which are a threat to this country, then they have crossed the line and given up their right to exist here. If that cannot be shown, then the people of Virginia need to allow them to exist and to expand.

          • Peter,
            I was responding to GA Rowe’s comment:

            Islam is nothing more than a murderous cult hiding behind the cloak of a phony religion and should not be allowed anywhere on United States soil!

            I consider that an extreme view and not in line with the idea of freedom usually expressed here.

            I too am troubled by this school, but condemning all of Islam is not my answer.

    • All;

      Freedom of religon is a constitutional right. If an ofganization wants to expand it’s operation to support it’s teachings, and that organization follows the local laws to do so, then we should respect that effort. Religon is religon and as we have discussed these past few days “Do onto others as you would have them do onto you”.

      If, however a properly executed investigation can prove that this particular organization is teaching it’s followers/students to plot and execute violence against the US and it’s citizens, then the proper authorities should envoke proper legal action.

      Juat like it is illegal to threaten the President it is also an act of terrorisum to threaten the US and it’s citizens. It’s called being a traitor.

      If the local authoriites can prove this is taking place at this so-called school, then shut them down and deport their administrators.


      • I think it is also relevant that assimilation is proper and necessary
        for the US to continue as a society. By allowing any immigrants to put their culture before America’s means they will not be American’s first, and their loyalty lies elsewhere. If that is the case, they need to stay elsewhere. I believe the founding fathers indicated similar thoughts.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      What do you mean by “…..so many rights have been taken away from Christians in the last 50 years”?

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        As BF would point out, you cannot take away a right, you can only surpress the ability of someone to exercise their rights. People also regularly confuse rights and priveledges.

    • Good Morning, USW. I think that I will respond to this post. (I chose not to respond to yesterday’s post as I had made my position very clear all week and did not wish to be redundant).

      This is going to be my view as a realist. I am not a constitutional scholar nor do I plan to be. I am not a philosopher, nor do I plan to be. I choose to not run for political office because I am not politically correct. I am a realist and I am honest.

      We are a Nation. We are a republic. We are a democracy. ( Please, all, no ideological diatribe on semantics, I am quite sure that you get my point in lumping them all together).

      As a Nation, we have laws. Good or bad, we have laws. More important, we have a way of life to which we aspire. Religion is a more dangerous weapon than a government (religion is a government anyway), a more dangerous weapon than nuclear weaponry, a more dangerous weapon than anything Mother Nature can throw at us. It is a mind numbing belief that will over rule everything else out there…. for in this I am convinced. Before any of you get your panties in a wad, I truly believe that everyone has a right…yes, a RIGHT…to believe in any type of religion that they wish but they do not have a right nor a privilege to enforce that religion on me uninvited.

      I do not subscribe to the theory of mission work (in the name of any religion)in foreign countries to “convert” non-believers. Religion should be spiritual in the breast of the individual. It is with me and I keep it private. I do not put my faith in the written books and the teachings and interpretations of man. Having said this, then I also believe that any “religion” that says theirs is the only one is wrong. I also believe that any religion that advocates violence to indoctrinate is also wrong. I further believe that the word freedom can be taken out of context. If a doctrine or religion violates the principles of MY country on my soil and advocates the over throw of government or people or beliefs, then I do not think that the word freedom is the controlling factor here. It is our way of life. I, too, know several Islamic people. But there is one factor that I cannot ignore. If Islam is so peace loving, then ask the peace loving Muslims to publicly denounce Shariah Law and to publicly denounce that their religion is the only one and that it’s destiny is to become the only one. Ask them to do that and see what your response will be. Ask this question of your Islamic friends and the key word is publicly, for they will pay quiet homage to your question in private. If their answer is they cannot do that, then I submit that they do NOT support the peaceful side. For, I surmise, they would be afraid of reprisal and, therefore, makes my point.

      So, in this light, I would support the closing and expulsion of the teachings of the Islamic Saudi Academy. Again, please do not tell me how many serial killers have come from our schools, etc. There is one main difference….We do not teach this. I think that we have a right, and not only a right, but a responsibility to our Nation to eradicate, yes…eradicate, any teaching that advocates the violent overthrow, killing of innocent people in the name of Religion, and the teachings of Shariah Law within our borders. Again, please, no philosophical liberty or freedom platitudes here. This is realism and to take the semantic definitions of specific words simply, in my opinion, does not apply here. And, this applies to the US as well. We, as a sovereign Nation, have no right to interfere in the religious applications in another country. If they wish to chop heads off or stone people..that is their belief and their privilege and their right to do so within their own country and theirs alone. They cannot export their beliefs and use the freedoms we provide to do the same here…even among their own… for here our laws apply.

      So, USW…long answer to your post. In short….not only stop expansion…close it down.


      • D13 – You’ve said it better than I ever could. I’ve also wondered why the “peace loving” Muslims do not come out in force against the “small number of extremists” who are damaging the name of their religion, unless, as you point out, they are not really peace loving after all, or are afraid of retribution.

      • You and I think extremely alike…

      • D13

        I really, really would like the address of your web site. You have a very good grasp of these topics.
        I agree with you completely.

      • Murphy's Law says:


        Daaaaang. You’ve done it again. Your ability to discern and articulate the realities within an issue amaze me.

        Obviously, I agree with you concerning this school. No PC crap….shut it down.

      • How about erradicating all teaching “that advocates the violent overthrow, killing of innocent people in the name of” GOVERNMENT?

        After all, it appears government and religion are essentially the same for many people.

      • Alan F. says:

        Religion is a state of mind… like content or crazy.

    • Wasn’t there an article a few weeks ago called “The Death of Whiners and CryBabies”? Does that apply to Conversatives/Republicans? Or only Liberals/Democrats?

      It seems to me there’s an awful lot of whining and crying about how Sarah Palin was treated so unfairly by the media, the Liberals, the Democrats, the Left-wing…

      Time to grow up – if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen – as Palin did…

      • Why Todd, of course it only applies to Liberals/Democrats:)

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


        I suppose there have been people on the conservative side who have “whined and cried” about the way that Palin and her family have been (and are being) treated.

        There have also been legitimate complaints using calm and measured tones about the way that she and her family have been treated.

        Sometimes there is a fine line between legitimate complaint vs. whining and crying; and although I would agree that SOME of the comments cross that line, many do not.

      • Todd

        I won’t for a minute whine about the way Palin was treated.

        But, I don’t think she couldn’t stand the heat and got out of the kitchen either.

        With all the bulldookey going on because of her VP run, she could not be an effective Governor for her state. Sounds to me like a very responsible person for her citizens to resign.

        Maybe if the whining and crying, pissing and moaning liberals would have gotten off her legal ass long enough for her to be the Governor of her state, she would not have felt the need to resign.

      • Alan F. says:

        And if you don’t want people to pay attention the goings on of Barry, there’s always talking about Sarah.

    • JayDickB says:

      I think its dangerous to allow the government to decide which religions are “good” and which are “bad”. The only valid reasons I see for not allowing the expansion are:

      1. The local environment (zoning, traffic, parking, etc.) make the location unsuitable, in which case they would be allowed to build in a better location.

      2. The school has been proven to be encouraging violence, e.g. terrorism against the U.S. If the school is teaching that nonbelievers are evil and should be killed, the school should be shut down entirely. In fact, teaching that anyone should be killed for any reason other than self-defense would warrant shutting down the school. If it is just teaching that nonbelievers are evil, that seems allowable to me.

      Look, we either have freedom of religion or we don’t. If we can persecute muslims for their beliefs, why couldn’t we persecute baptists (some on the left might even approve of that idea).

      • JayDickB says: 2. The school has been proven to be encouraging violence, e.g. terrorism against the U.S. If the school is teaching that nonbelievers are evil and should be killed, the school should be shut down entirely. In fact, teaching that anyone should be killed for any reason other than self-defense would warrant shutting down the school. If it is just teaching that nonbelievers are evil, that seems allowable to me.

        Thus lies the crux of it. It has been proven already that the teaching of Shariah Law is done there. The text book shows it.

        • JayDickB says:

          The school should either be shut down or allowed to expand.

        • Amazed1 says:

          It isn’t just the violence against non-believers. How about the force of marriage and wearing special garb, and not allowing education freely ect. There are alot of thing aout Shariah laws that go against the grain of American culture.

    • Vinnster says:

      If you believe in God and Satan and have read both religions’ religious books (Islam has several)you come to understand God is Christianities’ God And Allah is Satan masquerading as God.

      If you do not see that Islam is an evil religion, then you have not read enough of its texts. They are full of guidance to commit all forms of evil. I encourage everyone to go and learn as much as you can about Islam because it will be the major cause of the world’s troubles in the future.

      Read the actual text, do not believe what Muslims say, because Islam teaches it is OK to lie and deceive the non-believers to advance Islam.

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:
    • Bama Dad says:

      Well folks for the last several months we have been discussing core beliefs and freedom. A lot has been said about good religion and bad religion and that if it looks to us or government like it is a bad religion, then get rid of it. I am not debating whether Islam is good or bad, I’ll let each of you make your own choice, as I have made mine. Now my question is if we desire to be free, do we have the right to impose our will on these people. If we do are we not straying from our core belief? Do we want “our” government deciding what religion is right or wrong? Would it fall in the area of self defense as we are unbelievers? I don’t have all the answers so what do ya’ll think? Where are you JAC?

      • USWeapon says:

        Music to my ears Bama…. because that is the real question that we have to ask ourselves. As BF is so fond of saying, whatever I give them the right to do to you, I give them the right to do to me. If we give government the right to ban or close a school that teaches Islam, how long before they use that same right to start closing Catholic schools?

        • Amazed1 says:

          What you say would be true if…..we were not under a government that already enforces laws. Under the current circumstances one person is no better to adhere to the law than another. So if it is unlawful for me to preach or teach hatred…it is for them to. If it is unlawful for me to treat women as second class citizens than it is for them to. I could go on and on but I think you get the point.
          Our dream is that we live free….in reality we do not. I am all for protecting their rights as long as mine are protected to. Now if we are suggesting that only Muslims have the right to teach hatred and supress womens than I have a problem with their special rights and treatments.

      • TexasChem says:

        Why has this become a religious debate rather than moral?The school should be shut down for the teaching of harmful moral and societal ethics and condoning the breaking of our criminal laws; versus being shut down for religious reasons.They are promoting Shariah law which condones murder ie… honor killings, physical mutilation, pedophillia and supressing womens civil rights.

        Your arguement of freedom of religion holds no water.If I instituted a religion that morally allowed me to rob banks and eat babies should I have that right under freedom of religion?Jeesh people think.

      • You have the answers, you are just letting the noise confuse you.

        Lets assume our government and thus the laws of the land were based on the prime morality of:

        “Non initiation of force against others.”

        Now ask yourself the question again relative to the issue at hand.

        What answer do you get?

        • Bama dad says:

          “Do we want “our” government deciding what religion is right or wrong?”


          If they initiate force against us it then becomes an issue of self defense.

          All this deep thought hurts my shallow mind.

          • If they initiate force against “anyone” it is against the law and retaliation is authorized.

            But now we haven’t discussed retaliation yet.

            So to save a few brain cells for late I will just say this would be a police matter. And of course “force” does not require only physical violence.

  2. USWeapon says:

    USWeapon Topic #2

    Sarah Palin’s recent resignation announcement was another opportunity for Democrats with no morals to go on the attack and run stories with strings of falsehoods and supposed reasons for her decision. When she came out and stated that the cost of defending herself from false ethics complaints and such were a major reason for her decision, she put front and center the Democrats and their plan to discredit Republican candidates using these vile tactics. From the article:

    Sarah Palin walked right into the new world of Democrat child abuse. As soon as Sarah was announced as the Veep choice, the Obama Campaign, Democrats and their media Igor sidekicks floated every rumor and joke they could think of about the Palin family, from Sarah’s baby being her daughter’s right up to Letterman’s rape joke about 14 year old Willow Palin.

    Don’t think of Sarah when you hear these jokes. Think of the two teenage girls who have to take it from Democrat adults, who are forced to suffer public abuse they may not be mentally ready to take, for no other reason than their mother wished to serve her country.

    In the next Presidential election Malia Obama will be 14 like Willow Palin. Should conservatives go at her with both barrels, tease her, ridicule her and hurt her every time she turns on the television? Hell no. Conservatives wince at the thought, even while knowing Democrats have positioned our children as “fair game.” It is the burden of those who set the high moral bar to live by it, even has Democrats pass underneath the bar in an effort to hurt our families.

    I don’t see this as a tactic that NO Republicans have used. But it does seem, to the best of my recollection, that this is a tactic far more used my the Democrats and the very liberal MSM. Is there any way to reverse course and take this disgusting and amoral tactic out of play?

    Read the entire article from the Fox News Forums here: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/07/13/palin-proves-problem-journalism-maureen-dowd/

    • Mrs. Palin appears to me to be a woman of integrity and honesty.

      I, for one, hope she runs for the Presidency in 2012.

      • HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA integrity and honesty from a politician!
        Palin is the same as all the other politicians around the world, except she quit her post mid term when the going got tough.


        • Bob, you are the one from England, Right?

        • You should know Bob, since you’re from England. I though OUR politicians were bad.

          • Exactly to be a politician you have to be slime. I would not trust any politician as far as I could throw them. Thats what makes me laugh when people say any politician has attributes like honesty and integrity. I think thats the difference between the UK and US, we realise all politicians are scum and only concerned about themselves you guys have not come to that realisation yet.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Sarah Palin is a liar, plain and simple. Quit being hoodwinked by the fancy hair, $10,000 suits, make-up, fancy glasses and . She was a pimple on the ass of America that was finally popped.

        • Richmond Spitfire says:

          There you go again Ray… I think you do this to be “inflammatory” on purpose to get a rise. From now on, I’m going to simply laugh at your lame attempts because you sure can’t be taken seriously…LOL right now!

          I guess you simply can’t show any reason whatsoever when it comes to Ms. Palin.

          Best regards and I hope you have a wonderful day in knowing that you contribute to making a “hickey” woman in Virginia LOL throughout the day as she reads some of your posts! This ole hickey woman needs the many laughs that you can give her right now because when I think of the near future under this Administration with no checks and balances, I sober up very quickly.

          Richmond Spitfire

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            Karyn – as long as I made you laugh then I accomplished something right? I thought it was as funny and inflammatory as saying she is a woman of “integrity and honesty”. Here is something else funny – its funny that you’ll rarely call someone out from the right when they are inflammatory – hard to look in the mirror eh?

            • Richmond Spitfire says:

              Hi Ray,

              Not laughing right this second, because you said something true…You’ve accomplished something and that is a good thing!

              And yes, I have called conservative people out on this site for things I disagree with or if I think they are going to far.

              Yes, it’s hard to look in the mirror, but for the conservative woman’s “vapid” reasons (i.e. wrinkles where there was once smooth skin) not for the reasons that you are insinuating…Now, there I go again laughing! Thanks!

              Best Regards,

        • JayDickB says:

          Before, (several days ago) I asked you for examples of what you thought were Palin lies. I ask again, just to understand your thinking better.

          And, don’t get nitpicky; confine yourself to substantive lies. I agree that all politicians lie, but I believe some are worse than others. Although I don’t like Palin so far for other reasons, I have never found her to be especially untruthful by politician standards.

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            Well – I don’t know what it means to be truthful or untruthful by politician’s standards – I suppose that means ‘show me what ya got’ and you’ll decide if they are lies, really big lies, really really big lies, or just little tiny eye-winkers.

            Here is a good summary that hits most of the common points: http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/the-twelve-odd.html

            and more lies: http://www.examiner.com/x-9372-Federal-Way-Independent-Examiner~y2009m7d14-Sarah-Palins-growing-trail-of-lies-as-she-takes-aim-at-White-House

            And lets not forget – she was less than honest regarding the frivolous ethics charges against her (time, cost, who has the bill, etc)

            Less murky but concerting is her ignorance of facts which is on the “its a lie” border: where New Hampshire is (she thinks it in the Pacific NW or did), where Afghanistan is (our next door neighbor), what she reads (I read everything (or nothing?)), the role of Alaska in National Security (you know, bein all next door to Russia and what-not).

            Do I need to continue or not?

            • Just a couple of the comments about the article to which you link:
              Gerald Manuel says:
              Coker, you are clearly a hopeless idiot, as well as a liar.
              July 15, 1:11 AM
              clifford says:
              I’m sorry – qute a bit of clutching at straws here. Too many flimsy, questionable sources of evidence. Also, the author relies on personal interpretation of a situation rather than facts. Shoddy work. The first Harry Potter book was published in June 1997, not 1998 as stated by the author. Does this make him a liar?
              July 15, 12:55 AM

            • Bama Dad says:

              When you stack 57 states in America, New Hampshire is in the Pacific NW.

            • Ray,

              Just for perspective, what lies do you believe Obama has made to date?

              Has there been transparency?
              Have all bills been put before the public for 48 hours for examination?
              Were millions of jobs saved/created?
              Did un-employment reach 9%?

              AND HE THROWS LIKE A GIRL!

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                LOI – think you made a boo boo – you probably meant to say “I have nothing to add to the debate over Ms. Palin so let me redirect to Mr. Obama and blah blah blah”. No thanks. Go right a column and we’ll debate what he said and when he said it and what you/I think he meant rather than this tomfoolery

              • My question is where does all that extra campaign cash go to? For either candidate I don’t care but just where do all those extra millions head off to?

            • JayDickB says:

              I don’t trust either of the sources you linked to. They may be correct, but I am not sure that they are.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                You not sure if they are correct so you’ll err on the side of not trusting anything contrary to your beliefs. Fair enough.

              • JayDickB says:

                I will err on the side of not believing anything I think is unreliable. You directed ust to opinion pieces, not hard news reports. I find all opinion pieces unreliable on facts.

              • JayDickB,
                So that would include not believing Palin’s Op-Ed on “Cap & Tax”?

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            Jay – just FYI my reply to you is awaiting moderation

          • USWeapon says:


            Tonight’s post is on Sarah Palin…. So we can get into dissecting her more tomorrow. I will be interested to see Ray’s response to what I write about her tonight.

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              Oh Lord – this ought to be fun. 😉

              • USWeapon says:

                Shouldn’t be too bad Ray. I will be talking about my view on her and trying to understand why the left hates her so much.

              • Kristian Stout says:

                That’s what I want to know. Why such intense hatred for this woman? It has never made much sense to me. I’m looking forward to this one.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            Whether Sarah Palin is honest or not does not excuse the media and popular celebrities from taking constant pot-shots at her family.

            Michelle Obama said, on the Ellen Degeneres show, that Palin’s children were clearly and strictly off limits, yet Michelle Obama was curiously silent any time a media figure or an entertainer attacked Palin via her children.

            Why do you suppose that was?

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              Are you referring to Letterman as “the constant pot shot at her family”? What else is there?

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


                Later I may take some time to pull up the many other examples of derision towards her children. For now, here is one: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Palin_blasts_Alaska_blogger_over_Trig_photo.html?showall

                Now, I like the fact that the Democrat Blogger claims that she was only trying to make fun of Burke, and not make fun of Trig Palin… so I guess the Democrat Blogger is saying that it is ok to use the picture of a down syndrome baby to blast a conservative talk show host, and the fact that the baby used for the shot was Sarah Palin’s child had NOTHING to do with anything… yeah, sure.

                That is just the latest of many examples….

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Oh that’s real good Peter – a poorly photoshopped picture of Eddie Burke’s face onto Trig Palin’s body – done intentionally to show poke fun at the relationship b/n Sarah and Eddie? Are you effing shitting me? This was an attack on the kid? Bullshit pal. Pure bullshit.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                Todd and Ray, please send me pictures of your kids so that I can poorly doctor them using photoshop and post them on a Blog which is critical of the two of you in some way, since you think this practice is OK.


              • Ray Hawkins says:

                No Peter – but I will send some cookies and milk so you stop whining and crying about this.

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

                Ray, it is your choice to percieve honest debate as whining and crying.. .if you feel that is what it is, then iIO feel sorry for you.

              • Peter,
                Where should I send them?

              • Peter,
                It was a joke about how close Palin is with Burke. More whining from Palin.

    • Sarah Palin possibly could be ahead of the game…or not. She is either brilliant, or she is plain stupid for resigning her position. Only time can tell.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      This is wrong on so many levels and is shaping to be the 3rd time in a week that this horse gets beaten. Hate in politics is nothing new – and to suggest Democrats or the media have a monopoly is unjustified. For every hate-filled left-wing blogger or Letterman joke writer there is a Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly-type lurking about.

      So let’s assess this piece from the Full Of Xenophobia (FOX) News OpEd website:

      “Sarah Palin walked right into the new world of Democrat child abuse. As soon as Sarah was announced as the Veep choice, the Obama Campaign, Democrats and their media Igor sidekicks floated every rumor and joke they could think of about the Palin family, from Sarah’s baby being her daughter’s right up to Letterman’s rape joke about 14 year old Willow Palin.”

      – Child abuse eh? Nice name calling you hypocrites – that gets you zero points;
      – “Floated every rumor……” – care to share? Let’s lump every accusation we can think of into one steaming pile of supposed credibility – that makes it more believable. Number one – if you’re going to preach and pontificate about family values you may think twice about running for high office – you know there is going to be scrutiny – be it the dog you decide to adopt (where did it come from? is it from a puppy mill?) or how your young daughter (whom you proudly display on teh campaign trail) was impregnated. Now – for the scruntiny part. Maybe I am blind and missed the pervasive nasty pickin’ on Sarah’s family but there is a line here somewhere. If you say the family is off limits they should be off limits. If you run them out in front of your campaign to prove a point (or even have them campaign for you a la Chelsea) then there is some fair game there. If the paparazzi or some blogger is making light of you having a Down’s baby then their camera/computer should be crammed in the smallest orifice on the person’s body. But to characterize an entire political group or the entire media as child abusers because a handful of idiots think rape jokes are funny or think that interviewing the ex-son-in-law-to-be is news is just WEAK.

      “Don’t think of Sarah when you hear these jokes. Think of the two teenage girls who have to take it from Democrat adults, who are forced to suffer public abuse they may not be mentally ready to take, for no other reason than their mother wished to serve her country.”

      – Again – Sarah is no different than most other politicians – she loves the glare of the lights when they are flaterring but hates it when they start to feel hot. If you don’t want anyone saying anything about your family (good or bad) then why would you accept the offer to run? Her own narcissism got in the way.

      “In the next Presidential election Malia Obama will be 14 like Willow Palin. Should conservatives go at her with both barrels, tease her, ridicule her and hurt her every time she turns on the television? Hell no. Conservatives wince at the thought, even while knowing Democrats have positioned our children as “fair game.” It is the burden of those who set the high moral bar to live by it, even has Democrats pass underneath the bar in an effort to hurt our families.”

      – Again, complete rubbish. Democrats have not positioned anyone’s children as targets. Before any Republican/Conservative starts spouting off about the moral high bar they should look in the mirror first.

      “I don’t see this as a tactic that NO Republicans have used. But it does seem, to the best of my recollection, that this is a tactic far more used my the Democrats and the very liberal MSM. Is there any way to reverse course and take this disgusting and amoral tactic out of play?”

      – “…..far more used by Democrats and the very liberal MSM”? You have some explaining to do and I be curious to see your logic. It seems you’ve fallen into the Full Of Xenophobia News Channel philosophy of believing hate is ok only when directed at Dems and other media outlets by Full Of Xenophobia News – then it is “news”. Your statement is crass, invective and nothing short of right wing trash talking.

      How do you take it out of play? Either turn the station of censor the source.

      • Since censoring the source is not within my realm of power, I choose the latter…I turn the channel.

        I do, however, respectfully disagree with your assessment of the FOX news channel. For me, they seem to at least present both sides of the story where other news (and I use that term loosely) sources only present one side. Now we have to narrow this down a bit…I am speaking of the news, and not the commentary folks…Hannity, Beck, O’Reilly..etc.

      • Come on Ray….chill out here. I know you do not like Sarah Palin and that is ok. What seems to gall you, is that other people do like her…so let it be. There are plenty of people on here that cannot stand B.O. but you do.

        Anyway, how are things up there? Want some of our heat? I’m not in very good standing with the God Squad, but I will do what I can to send it there?


        • Ray Hawkins says:

          D13 – a trash piece from FOX OpEd gets posted with some opinion / analysis that gives the impression of supporting the misdirection of the OpEd and you expect me not to respond? Funny thing is this – this blog spends tremendous time bashing the current POTUS – some of it earned and deserved, some of it not. Under the guise of “equal treatment to all the political crooks” we get the occasional bone where honest criticism is brought forth on someone from the right. Fundamentally there are some sound ideas that get discoursed here – which is why I come back. But if I am to come back, I will not sit idly and not call bs when I see bs. This blog is chock full of Obama hate and I have taken it on the chin numerous times for having the gall to have voted for the guy – generally I try to respond to that reasonably and honestly. I don’t recall once that I have suggested to anyone, including John, that they should just shut up about POTUS. Have I? Any scent I give of supporting POTUS and I am labeled as (or as supporting) socialism, fascism, nazism, the end of the world, you-name-it.

          Missing frequently herein is obvious self-reflection – a trait shared by most conservatives is that admitting they’re wrong or even slightly wrong or even acknowledging that other valid and supported views exist is tantamount to a crime. Topic #3 was a hand grenade that I promptly picked up at tossed back over the fence – for that I am vilified. Fair enough.

          As for the heat? No thanks – it is oddly mild right now in Philadelphia and I will enjoy that for as long as it lasts. As a North Dakota boy I never was able to get used to the heat (Fort Huachuca, AZ; Fort McPherson, GA).

          I do like your recommendation and will enjoy chilling out. Probably best to re-charge some batteries. Good luck for now and adios!

          • Do not expect you to sit idly by at all. Just friendly advice..I would not sit idly by either but I do recognize that when one beats one’s head against a wall and the wall does not move, then I will go around it. ( That is, unless I can have my tank battalion behind me again ) and I will move that wall. By the way, for those of you who hate the military,…it was a metaphor.

            We, you and I, have our differences and I am sure that you, as I do, understand emotion and rhetoric. I have been to all the so called liberal sites, and the so called conservative sites and see no change in dialogue. Each has an agenda. I have learned in the short time here, the differing ideologies and it is quite insightful, if not entertaining. Even BF is entertaining and quite a philosopher and has the oracle gift of Obama. Actually, BF and friends gave me quite an idea on how to solve the illegal immigration crises in Texas without violence and without the interference of government and get rid of the little buggers at the same time. And it is catching on and working.

            So, I am learning to make my point once, grab a Dr. Pepper (Dublin type, of course) and watch the discourse….and learn.

            Adios, my friend, and catch you on the rebound.


            • Ray Hawkins says:

              Enjoy the DP!

              • Did I forget to mention the Jalapeno nachos that goes with it? Have to have a snack that eats the lining of your stomach, doncha know. Jalapenos to set it on fire…DP to cool it down….work and blog reading to stir it all up….what a life!!!


                D13 🙂

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Stop! I am stuck in my cube farm for the foreseeable future with countless conference calls and webexes. UGH

              • Ouch….cube farm, huh. OOO..

              • Ahhhhhh, NOW I see the problem.

                I heartily recommend that you get out of the cube farm (after all it IS bad for your health to remain stationary in one place for an extended period of time) and move to a place that has much open spaces like Alaska, Arizona, Texas, Colorado, Wyoming or Montana . . . You know, somewhere that you can actually breath REAL fresh air that has not been pushed through a carbon filter first!

                Learn to ride a horse (My niece could teach you that – she teaches horsemanship for a living)- and get a real job like herding cattle out here in our 113 degree dry heat.

                This kind of living has a tendency to clear ones mind of all the cobwebs that liberal living has a tendency to leave in the brain housing group . . . 🙂

                Seriously though, getting out of the cubicle farm would do you a world of good. I have always worked outside as much as I possibly could all my life and I highly recommend it.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Haha – that was a good laugh G.A.! I do from time to time work from home, drag the laptop out to the deck and enjoy a cool breeze and fresh air. Have worked outside years ago but that was in the concrete business – I do not miss that one bit!

          • GMAFBreak – you post links to who knows who but put down Fox? !!

            I have several times read AP articles on NPR.org that npr has changed the body of text or added to it without reference, which effectively changed the tone if not the accuracy.

            And of course the headlines are usually significantly skewed there also.

            I also posted comments there one day – and had them removed ! At least they indicate that they were removed. But my comment was no more anti-lib than your comments are here are anti-con.

            About a year ago, I posted a comment on the democratic underground (remember I WAS a dem apparatchik) but LOL – they banned me for making a comment to clarify a point that a previous poster made! Not even a real criticism !

            And there too, they had no problem saying that they ONLY wanted to communicate with people of like mindset !! UnBelievable !

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


        Please cite examples of where Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Lee Atwater, Ann Coulter, or any other conservative has attacked a liberal politicians CHILDREN as a means of gaining political advantage.

        Until you can bring up specific examples of this, people saying that this was a Democrat tactic used against Palin and that conservatives don’t do this cannot be called hypocrites… sorry.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            Ok, so Chelsea Clinton was called ugly and was called the White House dog, good example.

            Not sure it quite equates to repeatedly bringing up the fact that Mary Cheney is a lesbian (in spite of the fact that Democrats supposedly support homosexuals), and don’t think that it quite rises to the level of saying that a 14-year old girl was raped by Alex Rodriguez…

            Nonetheless, still a good example.


            Were these jibes about Chelsea during the campaign as a way to try to keep Clinton out of office, or were they after he became President?

            The stuff about Palin’s family started the minute her selection as a VP candidate was announced, and continues TO THIS DAY, well after the election has been over.

            So, while your Chelsea Clinton examples are good, and do make the point, would you call them equivalent to the political and mass-media smear campaign directed against Palin and her family?

            I only ask because all of your answers on this blog seem to lack any sense of degree of what is going on in the world.

            Two jokes about Chelsea = bad

            Constent bashing of Palin and her family = worse

            Tens of examples of a wacko Christian killing someone in the name of God recently = bad.

            Tens of thousands of examples of “extreme” Muslims killing other Muslims, Christians, Jews, and members of other religions recently = worse.

            • You wanted an example I gave it to you. If you dont want your family to get smeared dont put them in the firing line, I dont agree with what the media does but Palin has made herself one hell of a target. Easy solution for Palin, keep family out of the media spotlight and dont respond to the jibes inflicted by the media, simple.

              Its simple I do not see this as a religion V religion debate, people kill in the name of God no matter what religion they belong to.

              • Only one problem with your statement, Bob…any person that picks politics better be ready for the rough and tumble and that includes family…. on both sides. Getting into politics makes it all a target. That is the new target now…pick on the kids. Sad…but true. All is fair game now days and that includes the family dog and cat.

              • v. Holland says:

                The point in my mind is that people shouldn’t have to except anyone attacking their children. Society as a whole should condemn it. This discussion just proves the moral decline of this country and it’s citizenship. We shouldn’t argue that both sides do it or they brought it on themselves. We should all be condemning it not justifying it.

              • Look at the Letterman incident, do I agree with the joke, no but Palin went all out attacking Letterman. All Letterman does is make a half hearted apology and laugh as his ratings go up due to the controversy. All this does is open up Palin for even more attacks, its a classic bully situation, they quickly become bored when they dont get a response.

            • Peter,

              Not to defend Letterman, but I think he meant the 18-19 year old was having consentual sex with A-Rod. I say we let this one die.

              • Amazed1 says:

                The problem I have with all this kid stuff is….the parents are in politics not the kids. Grown ups can protect themselves…the kids can not. It is kind of like being a bully….why are grown ups bulling children and it is being found acceptable?

              • I agree with your thoughts, but Bristol became a spokesperson, so she entered public domain as an adult.

              • I agree with Bill Cosby on this one. If you have to go there to try and get a laugh face up to it, you’re just not funny.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          Peter – please go re-read my posting (at least the first part) – I referred specifically to hate in general – you have misconstrued my words and/or meaning.

          I’m still waiting for the other shoe to drop that demonstrates all the supposed liberal / democratic politicians that attacked her children. Quit whining and crying and show me some examples.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


            I never whine and cry when it comes to politics… I leave that to the liberals.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


        The scary thing is that I believe you would be in favor of censoring certain sources of information in this country. Hopefully I am wrong on that count.

        I do not agree with the majority of stuff I see and hear on CCCPNN or PMSNBC, but I have no desire to censor them.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          I despise most all cases of censorship. (my exceptions are the ‘yelling fire in movie theater variety’ before you jump to any conclusions).

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          Does PNN stand for Palin Network News? Wasn’t there some story about her burning books in a library? Hmmmmmm – you may be on to something Peter.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


            I am sure that you understood both the humor and the reference when I called it CCCPNN 🙂

            If not, think Cyrillic alphabet for the first 4 letters….

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              I did – I also took a stab (a bad one) at humor. 🙂

              • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


                Not really a bad stab, but CNN would NEVER want to be confused with the Palin News Network…

                That would be Fox, now wouldn’t it? 🙂

          • USWeapon says:

            I will be addressing the book banning thing in tonight’s post Ray.

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Stupid question, but why are we re-hashing the Sarah Palin thing yet again?

      The conservatives love her, the liberals hate her, the media trashed her every chance that they got, she resigned for whatever reasons she had, and she may or may not run for political office again in the future.

      End of line….

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Ask USW – he tossed the stink bomb in the room not me. I’m perfectly fine with tossing the Sarah Palin line back on the trash heap where it belongs.

    • No more comments on Palin; after witnessing Ray’s meltdown last week on this topic it would appear that some topics are not subject to intelligent discussion.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Meltdown? I’m still on fire! The gloves are still on, my cut man is present and I am ready for round 3. Fire away!

    • Myself, I almost feel this is not worth any futher discussion, until she is out of office, and she does something of interest. But she has done something of interest. Ray & Co., how about respond to her viewpoint, do you agree or dis-agree with her position. Weather you like or hate her, how about the issue?

      “Palin Stokes Debate Over Obama’s Energy Plan
      In an opinion article published by the Washington Post Tuesday, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called President Obama’s energy plan, also known as cap and trade, “an enormous threat to our economy.”

      PS, Bob, I cannot respect your opinion, because you like drinking your beer warm.


      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Ok – a bunch of unsupported op ed crap that is typical Palin-speak. I could offer the following as an equal counter:


        FTR – here is the text of her article – you sent me a Full Of Xenophobia (FOX) News link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/13/AR2009071302852_pf.html

        • Ray, Sarah said,

          By Sarah Palin
          Tuesday, July 14, 2009

          I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

          Andrew Sullivan says,

          I’m disappointed because Palin’s op-ed displays an ignorance for the subject so profound it’s almost gutsy. Almost. Let’s start with the big problem:

          There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.

          Still, in the case of pollution, there’s no denying that a price mechanism will make life more difficult for consumers and energy producers, at least in the medium run. But let’s treat this cost honestly.

          I asked you to respond to her viewpoint. Do you support Cap & Trade, or are against it for reasons different than hers?

          Or, does Mr. Sullivan express your thoughts completely, that the CBO has figured the cost, and we do not have reason to question them being accurate?
          After all, when has the government ever made a mistake on what something they do will cost?

          • John Kerry has a good rebuttal of Palin’s op-ed.


            • Of course to be a “good rebuttal” you would first have to accept Kerry’s view that global warming is caused my man, and that such warming will create the greatest economic crisis ever faced by this nation. At first I thought, this is a garbage argument. But….

              Upon deeper thought he is perhaps correct. After all it is global warming that has caused the “Cap and Trade” fiasco to be put on the people. And combined with our current situation it will most certainly create the greatest economic crisis in our history. So therefore global warming will create an economic crisis of a magnitude that makes armmagedon look like a cake walk. And therefore Palin is an idiot for not seeing the obvious connection.

              Oh darn, maybe that was the point of her editorial. OK…I got it.

              They were both right.

              • JAC,
                I know you and many here do not think any part of global climate change is caused by man.

                How about considering just the pollution our use of fossil fuels creates? Many here talk about future generations having to pay for the deficits that are being created. What about future generations having to deal with the pollution we’re creating?

                The cost of burning fossil fuels goes way beyond drilling, mining, building power plants and distribution systems, etc. It also includes environmental damage from the pollution (whether that pollution contributes to global climate change or not).

                Cap and Trade will encourage investment in new technologies to create new types of clean energy, and also reduce pollution from current fossil fuels.

                This is a win-win-win situation – jobs to build the new technologies, exports of the new technologies, and reduced dependence on foreign sources of energy (so we don’t have to worry about the middle east so much).

                Will there be some costs – yes. But if we are unwilling to pay those costs, future generations will have too.

                I see this as a challenge to the USA. I think we’re capable of winning that challenge. That’s what makes the USA great.

              • Todd,

                I have never said we have NO effect on climate. The science just doesn’t support the magnitude being used to destroy our economy.

                It does matter whether climate change or simple pollution is involved. Because the potential answers/solutions change. That is why the Greens started building the story of Global disaster so long ago. That carries with it the potential for global blackmail to force the USA into line.

                Cap and Trade will not result in any new technology that would not otherwise be developed. In fact there is work on real solutions going on today, with no extra tax or Cap and Trade.

                You have one solid point and that is under our govt controled systems the total costs of various decisions are hidden. The cost of pollution or bad health behavior are passed to the masses in order to hide the cost. Cap and Trade had potential to address this but the Govt got involved because it saw MONEY to be stolen.

                Did you all know the trade system already existed and was working for other pollutants? That it already existed for CO2? But the political special interests didn’t like it evolving without govt control. Because they couldn’t dictate the defintions and standards for validation.

                I also think you have to some extent accepted grossly overstated BAD EFFECTS of fossil fuels. Furthermore you have to include the benefits as well. Oil/gas still remains the most efficient source of energy and energy is equivalent to prosperity.

                The actual economics of GREEN TECH does not support the claims made by proponents. It can not be forced by Govt without significant distortions and bad results.

                And most of all, govt driven solutions is antithetical to freedom and liberty. It should be opposed.

                I am sure you or Ray will respond, at least I hope. When you do could you move up to current article? I am always forgetting to go back in time.


            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:



              Read some of the stuff there… almost ALL of it is current data from NOAA and NASA.

              If you think the earth is warming, you are in for a rough time in the next 20-30 years 🙂

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            LOI – we covered this before – most of the conservative position is sourced from a paid hack for Heritage who does not publicize his data so others can independently validate his conclusions.

            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

              There is indisputable scientific data (from NOAA and the National Weather Service, as well as NASA) that clearly demonstrates that for the past 10 years, the mean global temperature has been decreasing.

              We are also at the beginning of a Solar Minimum on a scale that we have not seen in hundreds of years.

              Hope all of you AGW types like the cold!

              Mother Nature trumps man all the time… always has, always will.

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                You’re confusing two things – the numbers quoted by many as to why CnT would kill our economy source from Heritage – you’re referring to the larger debate.

              • Peter,
                I live in northern Wisconsin for a reason – I’m a cross-country skier and snowshoer. I LOVE the COLD and Winter – even my skier friends think I’m nuts!

            • Whats that line from ” A Few Good Men”?
              “I want the truth! You can’t handle the truth!”, yada, yada, etc.

              I asked you to respond to her viewpoint. Do you support Cap & Trade, or are against it for reasons different than hers?

              Ray, your answer is pure evasion. I think you have spoke against Cap & Trade. Could it be that you and her think alike on this issue, and it is so painful to admit?

              • Ray Hawkins says:

                Okay LOI – since I mostly done on this Sarah bs I will take your bait.

                AS I have stated previously, in its current iteration and process I am against the cap and trade bill.

                The bill is over 1000 pages long – I am still reading it and marking all the areas I do not understand or want to research further. Anything so far reaching and encompassing, in my mind drives me to look for the devil in the details. I will not support it simply because I voted a straight ticket last year.

                The facts and figures regarding impact external to the bill are complex, messy and ill-supported. I am trying to wrap my head around both CBO and Heritage among others so I can understand how each arrived at their conclusions

                I cannot inherently support a bill that was slamdunked through the House w/o deep debate, analysis and understanding by those we elected to make decisions on our behalf.

                Now I would ask you – is your opinion ‘for’ or ‘against’ the bill due to your own objective analysis and assessment – or are you relying upon information and data that was produced by someone else that cannot be independently verified?

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        LOI – I have replied to you – it is awaiting moderation. (or, “Liberalation”)

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Attention LOI (and USW?)

        So, poor confused Sarah on cap n trade?

        As shown on this evening’s Rachel Maddow show (video that I have not searched You Tube for yet):

        1. During the Vice President debate with Joe Biden – Sarah said very plainly that she supports caps on carbon emissions

        2. During one of her Couric interviews (while Johnny Mac was re-writing their cap n trade policy position) Sarah stated pretty plainly that she supports a cap n trade policy that can help reduce carbon emissions (why Sarah? Because it was fashionable then to say you believe in climate change / global warming? What an a-hole)

        3. Oh – and here is the real gem – remember the McCain-Palin policy position on Global Warming and Climate Change? What? You don’t remember? Okay – here is a copy of it: http://www.seethroughthepodium.org/issues/climate/environment_mccain.pdf

        Still think I am full of shit when it comes to this?

        Her OpEd was just schlock – she could have at least disclosed that all the opinions espoused in the OpEd appear to run contrary to much of her position over at least the last year or so. (Or perhaps more appropriately, she had no goddamn idea what she thought about this policy area and simply wagged her head yes to anything the campaign told her to say – another reason she should have been kept far far away from the White House).

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          So, the fact that Obama blindly believes in Anthropogenic Global Warming in spite of 10 years of evidence (and counting) to the contrary means that he is perfectly qualified to be in the White House?

        • Ray,

          I have not yet viewed your pdf. I will agree that Palin lied or restated her position on AGW. I saw this during the campaign, that she was trying to position herself to support McCain. Likely due to pressure from “advisors” or “handlers”. That worked out real well. If she does re-enter the political scene, I hope she does not allow the Republican political machine in at all.

          Sorry, but I don’t see it as that big a deal. Will still ask her record of lies compared to Obama’s.

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            Are you looking for a checklist of Palin v Obama lies? Whats the purpose? If you have something then just share it. I’m not doing your research for you.

  3. USWeapon says:

    USWeapon Topic #3

    Banks are refusing to honor the IOU’s issued by the state of California, who thinks that it is OK to spend massive amounts of other people’s money on social programs that the rest of the country realizes is not the purpose of government. From the article:

    Thousands of California creditors were left Monday with fewer options for cashing IOUs issued by the state, as several major banks said they no longer will honor them.

    U.S. Bancorp became the latest to reject the pay-you-later warrants, joining Bank of America Corp., Wells Fargo & Co., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and other large institutions.

    The state began issuing IOUs at the beginning of the month as a way to save cash amid a $26.3 billion deficit.

    What should California be doing in order to get their act together? To be honest, at this point I am willing to do nothing for a state that blatantly espouses socialist principles and offers massive amounts of entitlements and government loot to people who aren’t even legal US residents. Screw California. Don’t wait for them to attempt to secede…. Kick ’em out. Or force them to balance their budget. And require that they do so by cutting health care and unemployment for illegal immigrants BEFORE they cut school budgets (yes, their first plan is to cut public education spending!)

    Read the Rest of the Article from MSNBC here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31896918/ns/us_news-life/

    • As a former CA resident I agree with you 100%. CA should be left to wallow in their own garbage.

      They can, however, correct the problem by dumping almost (if not) all of their ridiculous social programs and things like the study of the mating habits of the Deli Sands Flower Loving Fly – which is a native of the middle east and was brought to CA by a college professor about 50 years ago and “mistakenly” released into SoCal. This is a two and a half million dollar annual study that has been going on far too long. They can fix it with a fly swatter – cost $0.76 . . .

      • Since California has always been held out as a beacon for all other states with regards to its progressive programs, lets use them as a study for all the administrations programs ie, Cap & Trade, Health Care and Immigration Laws. If all goes well in CA we can implement them in all other states. If things go bad, they can tax all the rich people more. Those richies in the entertainment industry are always telling us about how we should have more social programs, so let’s heap the federal programs on them first.

        What right do I have to say anything! I was born and raised in California. I left because things were going south and there was no end in sight. Very hard to get Altruistic people to believe in the individual as other than a money source for the collective.

      • I too left CA for greener pastures…..CA’s new idea???? Legaize drugs and tax them to raise reveue. Great what a wonderful idea….idiots probaly think they can get everyone high and they will all forget they are suppose to be getting handouts and they will not notice all the taxes they are paying.

    • It is quite simple, really. Do not accept IOU’s and/or credits from California. There are some banks that are not and should not. I am sure that Obama (even though he says no) will bail out California.

      One way to change the landscape is to fire the architect firm that built it. And, it can be done. Fire them.

      Same thing for the US. We can still fire them.


    • All;

      I have a friend who owns a medium size company struggleing to make it through these tough times. He has squeezed every dime he can out of the budget to pay bills and make payroll. In the last effort he cut wages across the board by 30%, except for himself; he just stopped taking a paycheck entirely.

      It looks like they will pull it off and without reducing the employee count.

      Has anyone within the California government taken a 30% or more pay cut? I don’t think so. Have they stopped useless programs and environmental restrictions to garner funds from another area? I don’t think so, at least not to the degree they need too. Anybody heard about Polosi’s newest $18M special interest program to research and save the Salt water Marsh Field mouse

      CA needs to make it on their own or die trying. They built their empire and now it is crumbling, let them figure it out.


      • That appears to be the trend with states that employ entitlement programs that others do not (universal healthcare seems to be the killer)…most if not all of those states have been under Democratic governers for quite a while. Are the Democrates to blame…nope. Someone had to elect them, those can point the finger to nobody but themselves.

        Now the House has passed a universal healthcare bill…another bill that has not been completely read, and has been devised with total partisan input. It seems that California is the model that the current POTUS wants to follow…God help us all…

    • Bama dad says:

      As long as government does things like this in California they need to sink into the Pacific Ocean. Just think going green will create jobs and save us money.

      Off to work, be back tonight.


    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Anyone know what is the legal action if a State that size becomes completely insolvent? What a wreck. Nice leadership kudos to the Republican Governor that has guided this plane directly into the ground.

      • If I recall right The current Republican gov was elected because the previous Democrate Gov had the same problem with driving the state into the ground. The difference is it took a recession for the Republican Gov and the Democrate did it in a time of prosparity, but I may be remembering wrong.

        • Does that mean that Arnold ‘inherited’ that mess from the Dems??? Haven’t heard him whine about his inheritance, as folks in DC have. lol

      • It also has a lot to do with the freebies given to the illegal immigrant population that has greatly contributed to this mess in conjunction with the massive entitlement programs this state has. The enviro-nuts have driven this once great state to the brink of destruction…of course this is from an outsider looking in…

      • Let’s see, Ray. I think we all can put the Republican/Democrat mantles away now. They have ceased to exist. No one knows who is who anymore. In Republican areas, democrats lie to get elected and vice versa. You have the same thing that is happening this very day with the Supreme Court nominee….tell ’em what they want to hear and do your own thing afterward.

        Arnold S. is quite simple. He is a far left leaning socialist and that is his mantra. Does not matter what label to put on it. Vote his ass out. Until people rise up and get out and vote, then they get what they deserve. The non voters of that State is probably what put him into office but then again, was there any choice. If the majority of voters put him into office and agree with what is going on, then let them stew in their own pot. It is amazing how the Pelosi’s and the Boxer’s get elected, truly amazing, but they are.

        This is one reason Texas is so appealing. At least for the time being, we do not have social programs that bankrupt the State and we have a State constitution that does not allow budget deficits. Even our State debt has to fit the budget and we still have no state income tax nor corporate tax. We may not be “progressive” (what ever the hell that means) but we are not broke, either.

        Leave the State’s alone. They are a product of their environment.

        D13 BTW…good day to you.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


        “Kudos to the Republican Governor that has guided this State completely into the ground.”


        Didn’t have ANYTHING to do with the Democrats that control the State House and Senate that wouldn’t pass ANY legislation that cut spending in any way, now WOULD IT???

        Wouldn’t have ANYTHING to do with the previous Democrat Governors the spent the State into the ground even back when the economy seemed to be good, now WOULD IT???

        I don’t know if you write this stuff because you truly believe it or if it is just to stir the pot. If you truly believe it, I am sad for you. If you write it just to stir the pot, then BRAVO! You are doing a great job!

        The Republicans are only MARGINALLY better, and they certainly bear the blame as well, but ANYONE knows that California is an excessively “liberal” (under the current useage of the term liberal) State, and simply blaming the current Governor shows a tremendous amount of naievety on your part if you really believe what you wrote.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          Do you apply the same litmus test when criticizing POTUS? Or conveniently lump POTUS and Congress in the same bucket?

          • I will !!!

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            Well Ray,

            Currently the POTUS and the Congress are all controlled by the same party, so lumping them in the same bucket is easier, they are all idiots.

            During Bush II’s last 2 years, the House and Senate (both controlled by Democrats in 2007-2008) passed a myriad of whopper-sized spending bills, and Bush didn’t have the stones to veto any of it, so in my book they were all idiots.

            You seem to think that because I am a conservative I support the Republicans. I do not. I simply like Republican lies better than I like Democrat lies.

            One side lies and says they want smaller and less intrusive government, the other side lies and claims that the government knows what is best for everyone and can do it better than anyone else can.

            Both sides are full of $hit… The $hit just smells slightly sweeter on the right side of the aisle.

          • Even when Bush had the congress, he still had to govern, which means to include all Americans. And because (I think) that he needed democrats votes to keep Iraq funded. There are a zillion bills passed every week and deals are constantly made.

            But when you have a media that is so liberal, Bush (or any repub president) can’t just go off on their own.

            Remember Bush one? No more taxes? Did He increase taxes or did the dem controlled congress increase taxes? Then ‘they’ and the MSM turned around and used that as a mantra against Bush, because he believed in the rights of govt and wouldn’t ‘shut down’ the govt for his political gain !

            Oh but wait – WHO did shut down the govt for political gain when the majority (ie congress) went against the President? That’s right – Bubba Clinton. And hardly a peep in the MSM in the long haul- but FOX is baaaaaaaaad.

            As a political apparatchik for almost 20 yrs working in one of the most powerful machines in the country (dem), I realized that it would always be best to have a republican president. (This was after Carter) Why? easy – the media won’t let repub get away with their crap, while turning a blind eye to dems.

            And as a JFK time frame insider told me in my office after regaling about all the stories and tricks they did over the years. The real putdown was that they said it wasn’t what they (repubs) did, but that they were so STUPID to get caught !! So why would you want them to run the country! LOL And that’s the truth.

            Wish I had the talent to write better posts, but maybe you can get the jist.

        • Peter, you are also correct. In voting “his ass” out is actually a reference to trashing their whole state gov. Change it or live with it.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            With all of the asses and hot air that comprise government, you would think we would have enough natural gas to power the whole planet for many millenia to come…


            • The enviro-nuts would find some reason that it causes global warming and wouldn’t let us use it…unless we purchase it from Venezuela or some other USA hating nation!

      • Are you talking about the RINO Arnold the Terminator?

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


          If you haven’t figured it out already, a HUGE percentage of Republicans are RINOs.

          There are VERY FEW that actually believe in freedom, individual liberty, personal responsibility, and fiscal conservatism.

          Depressing, but there it is.

          • Peter,

            Got any names. Would be nice to know who.

            • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

              Mike Pence from Indiana seems to honestly be a strong fiscal conservative that really would prefer a much smaller government.

              There are several others in the House that work with him regularly, but the names are escaping me at this point. I think he has some info about it on his website though.

              I am sure there is tons of stuff there that Todd and Ray would vehemently disagree with 🙂

    • JayDickB says:

      The only solution to CA’s problems must come from CA. I say the rest of us should ignore them as much as possible. Yes, if they go bankrupt, there will be ripple effects, but the solutions will be worse.

      And, letting they fail will be a good lesson for other states that are similarly situated. New York comes to mind, Michigan, probably many others.

      • The ripple effect????/ Does that mean they will all leave CA…move to the midwest and try farming???? We are in trouble if that happens.

    • Perhaps a lesson from Texas. This happened about 2 hours ago. There are some 40,000 unemployed registered in Texas and they are now without the 13 week extended benefits. The answer from our governor was simple. There is no money and until the fund becomes solvent again, there will be no further payments. (This applied to the extended benefits only). The accounting process and constitution does not allow “peter to pay paul” either. No taking from one hand and giving to the other. Our Governor also had the foresight to turn down Federal Benefits in this area which required the State to adopt a future taxation policy to continue the funds after fed funds ran out.

      Call it what you want but it is sound fiscal management. If it ain’t there, don’t write the check. Don’t borrow from other areas to fund it because it will not get paid back. Texas changed that a long time ago. No IOU’s. No credit. No shifting of funds. The ONLY exception to shifting of funds is a “natural disaster” and unemployment isn’t it.


    • Naten53 says:

      The State government in Pennsylvania is also in danger of collapsing. It is projected that on

      “Friday about 33,000 state workers will get pay checks that contain only 70 percent of their normal pay because they won’t be paid for days worked after July 1, when the new fiscal year began. On July 24, another group of 44,000 state workers will get checks containing only 20 percent of their normal pay.

      If the budget stalemate drags into August, neither group will be paid until a budget is approved” http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09195/983717-454.stm

      I am sure a state that “clings to its guns and religion” will show their displeasure a lot faster then California.

  4. I am not sure what to think of Palin. I am not sure if this stepping will help or hurt her if she plans to go into a higher office. Time will only tell on that one. As far as the kids, no party should take part of making cracks at someone children. The fact they are minors still makes it even worse. Shame on anyone who decides to go down that road.

    California has put themselves into the jam that they are currently in. Point in case, how can a city pay for a memorial of a pop singer, when it cant pay its own bills. That pretty much sums up their issues out there. I lived in the Fresno area for about 3yrs, and they were in bad shape then. Until they make some wise decision concerning their socail programs, illegal immigration issues and out of control budget. Nothing will ever change there.

    • Ellen, great point on the hypocrisy of paying for memorial service but not their own bills.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        The fact that the Michael Jackson Idol-Worship-Fest completely drowned out anything and everything about Farrah Fawcett and her death to cancer says a LOT about the majority of American society currently, and none of it good 😦

    • is the illegal immigration a Cali issue or a federal issue?

      • Hi Frank,

        I just asked my husband that question, and he said it’s a federal, because the cities,and state don’t want to do anything about it. They want the federal government to handle it.

        Good Day to you.


      • I say federal because it is the borders.

  5. PeterB in Indianapolis says:


    Are all actions morally equivalent?
    You say the internet is my friend, and you point out one example of a few Muslim Clerics that condemn the actions of Muslim extremists. Ok, fine.

    Has the government of Saudi Arabia or the government of Iran issued statements condemn the actions of “extremist” Muslims? They have not, and they will not. Why? Because the governments of Iran and Saudi Arabia support what the extremists are doing, both tacitly and financially.

    Saudi Arabia and Iran are the leaders of the Muslim world. Until both Saudi Arabia and Iran condemn what the “extremist” Muslims are doing, tell them to stop doing it, and take action to stop them from doing it, I will take it as proof that they support it and want it to continue.

    As for individual Muslims, yes, I know several and talk to them regularly, and none of them (at least publicly) support what the “extremist” Muslims are doing. However, I haven’t heard a single one of them call on the leaders of the Muslim world to try to put a stop to it either.

    • “(at least publicly)” speaks volumes of your actual relationship with them.

      Religion is used by states to promote violence, killing in the name of God is just an excuse. Any religion can be twisted for any means. I have studied Islam, read through (not studied) the Qur’an and some of my best friends are Muslim Although I do not agree with everything it is essentially a peaceful religion that promotes people to better themselves. I have a problem with the people that promote the violence not with the religion itself. The thought that Islam is the cause of the violence in the middle east is absurd. Land and resources are the cause of the fighting and always have been, if muslims did not exist and everyone were Christian do you think we would see less fighting around the world?

      The only clerics who get press are the crazy ones you have to dig deeper to find the ones who oppose it.


      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:


        Once again, I submit that until the leaders of Iran and Saudi Arabia not only speak out AGAINST radical Islam, but also do something to put a stop to the violence, that is a tacit admission of support for radical Islam on their part.

        • What should they do to put a stop to extremists?

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            Well, I suppose they could behead them 🙂

            Seriously though, don’t you think they could AT LEAST come out and DIRECTLY say, “We, the leaders of the Islamic world, do not support what radical members of the Islamic faith are doing, and we decree by Fatwah that anyone who acts in a manner not consistent with the peaceful nature of Islam will be denied entry into (heaven, paradise, whatever they want to call it).”

            You won’t hear them say anything of the sort, because they DO support “radical Islam” and they also fund it.

  6. Morning All

    Topic #1.

    I don’t think it’s fair that they want to teach Islam in public schools. If they can’t teach Christianity in schools, then what makes that so special? I say no. That’s my opinion on that.

    Topic #2.

    Like I said before, all politicians kids should be off limits , doesn’t matter who they are. If you want to go after the candidate them self, fine, but leave their children alone.

    Topic #3.

    I was born and raised in California, and I don’t recall it ever being this bad. Maybe if they got rid of all the illegals, and quit squandering money away for those unnecessary studies, then maybe they might have some money, who knows. Sorry to say this, but let them sink if that’s what it takes.

    My sister lives in Calif., and she’s having a heck of time right now with the way things are. Since they are cutting more jobs, she just might be on the chopping block. So, she just has to wait and see what happens in the near future, and hopes her job doesn’t get cut.

    Hope all will have a good day.


    • Prepare your sister a room.

      Even if they get themselves out of the hole and sitting on the rim, fed programs are going to collapse the sides and down they will go again.

      Cannot believe that the Altruistic attitude of CA can be reversed.

      • Good Morning Garth

        I already told my sister, she’s more than welcome to come live with us if she has too. Our mother already lives with us, so what’s one more. She works for the Oakland Police department as a secretary for one of the captains in homicide, but her hours already got cut by half, which means half the pay. As it is, she has to rob Peter to pay Paul, just to balance out her payments on things.

        She told me if things really get bad for her, she just might take me up on the offer. She can’t sell her house because she owes more than it’s worth right now, same for us here in Reno, but she said if she can just stay there long enough to retire in another 2 years, she might, just might be able to make it. We told her, dump the house now, retire now, and move up here, but she is a very stubborn person, and no matter what you try and tell her, she won’t budge. We told her, retire now, because there might not be any retirement funds left in the next 2 years, at least that way, she would at least get something.

        We’ll just have to wait and see what she plans on doing. I told her that we would manage if she decided to move here with us, even if it’s just temporary until she can find maybe a one bedroom apartment and get a job here. We do have jobs here, but it’s getting harder and harder to land one. Not unless you’re into construction, then you have a choice. Either way, time will tell for her.

        Have a good day.


        • Judy,

          I was raised in Marin County – just across the bay from Oakland. Spent 35 years in the Bay Area.

          Just make her stay in NV until she can help vote Reid out.

          • Judy S. says:

            We’ve been working on her for the last year, but it’s like trying to get blood out of a turnip, ya know.

            You ever hear of a town called Pinole? That’s where I grew up at. Was born in Sacramento, then moved to Richmond for a while, then into Pinole when I was in 2nd grade. Lived there until I got married in 1969, then moved to Burbank, Calif, where my husband worked for Lockheed until he retired from there in 1990, then we moved up here. Been here since.

            As for Reid, well let’s hope. You know what they should do? Put term limits on senators, why don’t they do that like with the presidents term? Trouble here is, people are afraid ( No Pun here ) of change, they keep voting the same OLD people in all the time. I say, time for them to all go.


          • Bama Dad says:

            Latest poll has him in trouble. HOPE HOPE

          • This will bum you guys out, and it may not turn out to be true, but:

            I very good friend connected to the top of politics in NV told me that Reid will get re-elected. Why?

            Because in the end he can say “I stopped Yucca Mtn” and ” I brought home the cookies in the stimulus” and “I brought Mr. Obama to Vegas”.

            His future depends largely on what happens in Clark County and some of Washoe. Will those who fell in love w/Mr. Obama still be in love come November?

            And can any opponent in NV get through the election w/o discovery of a mistress.

            • Judy S. says:

              God, I hope so. They said on the news last night, that he already raised over 3 million dollars so far towards his campaign. Anybody would be better than him, that’s if anybody will run against him. I’d like to know just what cookies he brought home, we haven’t seen any yet. Maybe he can share some of them. As for Yucca, a lot of people weren’t too thrilled with that, because it put a lot of people out of work.

              Don’t know if he had any side fun, if you know what I’m getting at there. Besides, who’d want him. YUCK!. So, big deal, he brought Obama to Vegas, like that makes a difference. But then Southern Nevada is more blue then red for what I understand anyway.

              There are a LOT of people who are not too thrilled with Reid right now because of where he stands, on the left side of Obama. I think he’s just kissing arss to stay on Obama’s good side, for all I know.

              We’ll just have to wait and see what the voters have to say whether he stays or not, and I REALLY hoping he’s gone. But like I said, the people here don’t seem to want to get rid of him, why is beyond me. Personally, I can’t stand looking at him when they show him on TV.

  7. As to Ms. Palin…..I have read everything and listened to about everything that I wish to concerning this matter.

    I have only one question and I hope someone that is left of center would answer but answer truthfully and not a lot of BS, please.

    What is there to be worried about on Sarah Palin…I am an independent but lean to the right and I do not see anything that you should be worried about. I am not a Palin fan but I do not see the problems with so much attention. So, someone please (this is your chance) enlighten me?

  8. Change we can believe in?

    Obama Car Czar Abdicates After Brief Tenure, WaPo Places Story on Page A11


    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Always remember… Obama campaigned on “change we can believe in”… he never said ANYTHING about “change we can support”

  9. And if you ever run out of stuff to talk about, I’d love to hear what you have to say about todays editorial from: http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/110732.html

    Hit Man Politics

    By BDN Staff
    BDN Staff

    It’s a classic ethical question: If you had the opportunity, would you have killed Adolf Hitler in 1939? On one hand, murder is wrong. But on the other, if you had killed Hitler, you might have saved millions of lives.

    This hypothetical dilemma became real with the recent revelations that former Vice President Dick Cheney directed the CIA to create a secret squad of assassins who would travel the world, presumably, to assassinate al-Qaida leaders and operatives. Clearly, the former vice president saw, and continues to see, the Sept. 11 attacks as analogous to the Pearl Harbor attack that led to the United States entering World War II. He believes the U.S. is locked in a worldwide, to-the-death struggle with an extreme version of Islam. Most Americans no longer see the conflict in such stark and dramatic terms. In fact, in a CNN-Opinion Research Corp. poll in June on national priorities, just 5 percent identified terrorism as the most important issue facing the country.

    Setting aside Mr. Cheney’s perversely dark vision of the world for a moment, there are cogent arguments in support of using assassins to further political ends. Throughout history, men have relied on odd mixes of charisma, brutality and terror, manipulation, populism and paternalism to rule as despots. If some of those men — who may have been clinically insane — were suddenly dead, the entire character of their nations would have changed.

    And if the Cheney strike team would have targeted only leaders and operatives of organizations, and not nations, if might have been more effective and less disruptive to world politics.

    But history also shows that more often than not, such forays into this amoral realm, quietly killing agents of foreign powers or deposing dictators with behind-the-scenes forces, are not effective. Among the revelations that came out of Watergate, Congress learned that the CIA had strayed into rogue territory, attempting to assassinate Cuba’s Fidel Castro and other world leaders. A committee chaired by Sen. Frank Church led to President Ford signing an executive order forbidding the CIA from engaging in assassinations. Interestingly, Donald Rumsfeld, then director Mr. Ford’s transition to the White House, advised against revealing too much about the CIA to Congress.

    Covert operations probably have a place in the defense arsenal. But the parameters in which they are undertaken must be cleared with congressional leaders. Without such oversight, the executive branch begins to resemble the foreign dictators the U.S. would like to topple.

    And back to the Hitler question: There were several failed plots to kill Hitler, beginning in the late 1930s and continuing until late in the war. A recent movie, “Valkyrie,” accurately portrayed the last dramatic plot against the Fuhrer. Yet had it been successful, historians say, Heinrich Himmler and others would have seized power, and policies would have remained the same.

  10. A local priest was being honored at his retirement dinner after 25

    years in the parish.

    A leading local politician and member of the congregation was chosen

    to make the presentation and to give a little speech at the dinner.

    However, he was delayed so the priest decided to say his own few words

    while they waited:

    “I got my first impression of the parish from the first confession I heard

    here. I thought I had been assigned to a terrible place. The very first person

    who entered my confessional told me he had stolen a television set and,

    when questioned by the police, was able to lie his way out of it. He had also

    stolen money from his parents, embezzled from his employer, had an affair

    with his best friend’s wife, and taken illicit drugs. I was appalled.

    “But as the days went on I learned that my people were not all like that

    and I had, indeed, come to a fine parish full of good and loving people.”

    Just as the priest finished his talk, the politician arrived full of apologies

    for being late. He immediately began to make the presentation and said:

    “I’ll never forget the first day our parish priest arrived. In fact, I

    had the honor

    of being the first person to go to him for confession.”

    Moral: Never, never, NEVER-EVER be late.

  11. Judy S. says:

    I have to share this with all of you. My son sent this over to me, and I thought it was very funny.

    Drafting Guys over 60…this is funny & obviously written by a Former

    New Direction for any war:

    Send Service Vets over 60!

    I am over 60 and the Armed Forces thinks I’m too old to track down
    terrorists. You can’t be older than 42 to join the military. They’ve got the
    whole thing ass-backwards. Instead of sending 18-year olds off to fight,
    they ought to take us old guys. You shouldn’t be able to join a military
    unit until you’re at least 35.

    For starters: Researchers say 18-year-olds think about sex every 10 seconds.
    Old guys only think about sex a couple of times a day, leaving us more than
    28,000 additional seconds per day to concentrate on the enemy.

    Young guys haven’t lived long enough to be cranky, and a cranky soldier, is
    a dangerous soldier. ‘My back hurts! I can’t sleep, I’m tired and hungry’
    We are impatient and maybe letting us kill some asshole that desperately
    deserves it will make us feel better and shut us up for a while.

    An 18-year-old doesn’t even like to get up before 10 a.m. Old guys always
    get up early to pee so what the hell. Besides, like I said, ‘I’m tired and
    can’t sleep and since I’m already up, I may as well be up killing some
    fanatical SOB…

    If captured, we couldn’t spill the beans, because we’d forget where we put
    them. In fact, name, rank, and serial number would be a real stretch.

    Boot camp would be easier for old guys. We’re used to getting screamed and
    yelled at, and we’re used to soft food. We’ve also developed an appreciation
    for guns. We’ve been using them for years as an excuse to get out of the
    house, away from the screaming and yelling.

    They could lighten up on the obstacle course however. I’ve been in combat
    and didn’t see a single 20-foot wall with rope hanging over the side, nor
    did I ever do any push-ups after completing basic training.

    Actually, the running part is kind of a waste of energy, too. I’ve never
    seen anyone outrun a bullet.

    An 18-year-old has the whole world ahead of him. He’s still learning to
    shave, to start up a conversation with a pretty girl. He still hasn’t
    figured out that a baseball cap has a brim to shade his eyes,not the back of
    his head.

    These are all great reasons to keep our kids at home to learn a little more
    about life, before sending them off into harm’s way.

    Let us old guys track down those dirty rotten coward terrorists. The last
    thing an enemy would want to see is a couple of million pissed off old farts
    with attitudes and automatic weapons who know that their best years are
    already behind them.

    ***How about recruiting Women over 50…with PMS !!!

    You think Men have attitudes !!! Ohhhhhhhhhhhh my Lord!!! If nothing else,
    put them on border patrol…we will have it secured the first night !

    Share this with your senior friends. It’s purposely in big type so they can
    read it.

    • I’m going to turn 44 Friday, but I agree with everything in your post. And I would go!


  12. Judy S. says:

    Hey JAC

    What happened to that thing you were going to write about last night? You said you were going to put it at the bottom of the page, and I was looking for it, but nothing there. Just wondering, that’s all.


    • Sorry, got side tracked all day.

    • OK Judy, part of the answer to your HUH is that the meanings of liberal and conservative have been obscured, in fact changed in our lifetime. Liberals used to stand for Liberty (our founders were liberals). Conservatives were more in favor of maintaining the status quo. Back then that meant monarchy. In the 50’s it meant big time moral behavior, god and country, you get the idea. While patriotic it was easy to show conservatives weren’t the one in favor of civil rights, after all is was the liberal college kids, some with long hair in favor, and bunch of red neck, crew cut, white guys against. But few realized the supposed Liberals had been long controlled by the values of the progressive movement, which is not for liberty but for govt controlled society. In fact we now know they have pretty much been running govt for 100 years. Now conservatives scream for freedom and liberty and a return to our constitution.

      So now we have this little turn around where in the conservatives want change and the liberals want the status quo, although always piling on more.

      You may recall that originally left was the side of French legislature where the liberals or democracy folks sat and the right side was where the monarchists, aka conservatives sat. Somewhere along the line the Leftists also included the socialists and communists and perhaps progressives. Anyway they were the radicals wanting change. The Rigth were the “reactionaries” always wanting to stop change. But then the right went and stuck the Left label on the Liberals because they wanted to link them to socialism. The liberals want to tag Right on the conservatives because someone lied in school and convinced us that Hitler and fascism was a Right Wing ideology.

      But here is the clarity. Socialism, communism, fascism, monarchy, totalitarianism, etc are all forms of statism. They support STATE control of our lives. This included those who call themselves conservatives today. Those who think govt should contol certain moral and religious based issues, such as gay marriage. For the past few years the progressives seem to be happy calling themselves Left of center or leftists or on the left. Those who want freedom call themselves conservatives but it is the wrong use of the word. So I created by own definition to eliminate the confusion of who I am. It’s explanation is as follows and was posted on:

      April 16, 2009 at 9:33 am

      Does this mean there are a few more RADICAL RIGHT WING LIBERALS this morning????? I hope so, because it has been awfully lonely carrying around such a great label all alone. OK…..No one has offered up the answer, and it may be a slow day so I guess I will let you all in on it….

      RADICAL = “Fundamental, Extreme, Thoroughgoing; a person who favors rapid and sweeping changes in laws and methods of government” of course it
      is also “the indicated root of a mathematical expression”. I am not as set on “rapid” as I am on the rest. I like the implication
      that the mathematical term indicates the “root” of the expression, as in we RADICALS are the root of the solution.

      RIGHT WING = This has two parts so lets tackle first the word RIGHT. “Just, Proper; conforming to truth or fact: Correct; something that is
      correct, just, proper, or honorable; just action or decision; the casuse of justice; and (one of my faves) to relieve from wrong”.

      WING, obviously means one of two positions or sides (WINGS). So, I sit on the opposite side or the “right as in correct and just” side of the political scale, opposite the left. Which being the opposite is therefore by using logic, not correct and not just.

      LIBERAL = From Latin liberalis or “suitable for a freeman, generous”, from the root liber or “free”; “not narrow in opinion or judgment: tolerant
      also not orthodox”. The “not orthodox” is certainly me, according to my spousal unit leader.

      Now I must reveal, per the fair advertising rules of the land, that most dictionaris and political pundits use “conservative” as a synonym or at least a word associated with “right” and thus “right wing”. But then they define “liberal” as simply “not conservative”. This of course creates a contradiction for those of us who wish to be correct, just, proper and conforming to truth while at the same time supporting the concept of “freeman” and being “free”. So the whole conundrum is resolved by the first term. After all, everyone knows that we “Radicals” are not good at conforming to illogical arguments.
      And of course all Radical Right Wing Liberals will receive automatic membership in the VDLG coalition, soon to become political party. For those who missed it: VDLG = Very Damn Little Government.

      And that is why I frequently stick my nose in when someone is throwing liberal and conservative or left and right around in the conversation. The modern meaning of the terms is almost reversed from the original, but they are also mixed. Being a bit of a traditional type, and with my nostalgia and passion for history, I have decided I will not let the progressive, socialist, fascist and thus FASCIOLIST have the LIBERAL label. It belongs to the Patriots of Liberty and I will not give it up easily.

      I suppose at this late hour I now have you completely befuddled, but there it is.
      Sweet Dreams

      • Well I just want the colors back !!

        It used to be:
        Red = leftist = democrats
        Blue = Rightist = republicans

        What happened? It’s just another subtle hijacking by the MSM !! And downhill since for the right !

  13. Hi G-Man

    Well, a great big early HAPPY BIRTHDAY to you G. Geez, only 44, I wish I could be 44 again.

  14. TexasChem says:

    Any of you familliar with the issues regarding Major Stefan Frederick Cook being ordered to deploy to Afghanistan and his filing of a lawsuit based on him being an officer in the armed forces of the United States and questioning the authority of Obama as POTUS?Filed by Orly Taitz.

    It is his duty to gain clarification on any order he may believe illegal by being an officer. With that said, if President Obama is found not to be a ‘natural-born citizen,’ he is not eligible to be commander-in-chief.So therefore any order coming out of the presidency or his chain of command is illegal. Should he deploy, he would essentially be following an illegal [order]. If he happened to be captured by the enemy in a foreign land, he would not be privy to the Geneva Convention protections.

    The order for the hearing in the federal court for the Middle District of Georgia from U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land said the hearing on the request for a temporary restraining order will be held Thursday July 16th.

    What I find extremely interesting about this case is that his orders to deploy were revoked and Defendant Col. Wanda Good filed a motion to dismiss the Cooks’ action for a temporary restraining order “for lack of jurisdiction” today.

    “This case no longer presents a live case or controversy, nor does Major Cook have standing to pursue his claim,” it states, “therefore, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over his claims and they should be dismissed.”

    It continued, “The Commanding General of SOCCENT has determined that he does not want the services of Major Cook, and has revoked his deployment orders. .. Without mobilization orders, Major Cook lacks standing to pursue his claims.”

    Before news of the orders being revoked were reported, MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann tonight called Cook a “jackass” and Taitz a “conwoman,” as he labeled both of them the “worst persons in the world.” He flayed the soldier as “an embarrassment to all those who have served without cowardice.”

    • TexasChem says:

      Hate to beat a dead horse so much but by golly why the secrecy with Obamas past if there’s nothing there?Why doesn’t he release his scholastic and birth records?Why spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees if there’s nothing to hide?I just don’t get it.Secrecy just leads people to further question the eligibility question.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Kind of like C Street huh TexasChem?

      • TexasChem,
        Do you have links to the information you’re referring too?

        Aren’t these just ‘nuisance’ lawsuits, like the ethics complaints against Sarah Palin?

        My general response is – his birth certificate was posted online. What else could Obama provide that would satisfy this question? Should he send his original birth certificate and other documents to Rush Limbaugh? He can verify them and send them on to others to verify? Do you think it might get lost in the mail?

        If you don’t believe he was born in Hawaii, his mother was a US Citizen, so that makes Obama a US Citizen. It doesn’t matter were he was born.

        • Ray and Todd:

          I have a hypothetical for you and it is just that, pure and simple.

          If “authenticated” documents were found to show Mr. Obama’s mother was no longer a citizen before his birth and he was not born on U.S. soil, what would you do then?

          Would you support his removal?

          And please just stick with answering the question and don’t answer with more questions or links. It is a simple question and requires only a simple answer.


        • Todd, my nephew was born overseas, to parents that are U.S. citizens. My nephew is a U.S. citizen, but can never be president.

          • I find this subject interesting, so I did some further research. From what I can find, you must:

            1.) Be born in the USA


            2.) BOTH parents must be US citizens if you are born abroad

            3.)Be 35 years old

            4.)live in the USA for 14 years.

            So…To be eligible to be President, you could be born abroad of U.S. citizens (plural!!!!), move to the USA when you are 21, and run for President when you turn 35…in theory, anyway.

            Guess my nephew is good to go, and I have been misinformed about that.

            • Dee,
              It has never been clearly defined that “BOTH parents must be US citizens if you are born abroad”.

        • I don’t think the birth certificate was ever produced, but rather a “Certificate of Live Birth”, which I understand is a completely different document.

          Sort of like producing a vehicle registration when you are asked for the title of ownership. Only analogy I could come up with…lol

      • TexasChem,

        Another interesting thing, McCain’s eligibility was called into question as he was born in Panama. Both his parents were U.S citizens, but there were other issues that existed at the time of his birth, and interpretation of the eligibility requirements at that time.

        Maybe that is why McCain didn’t push the issue about Obama?

    • TexasChem,

      Major Stefan Frederick Cook (US Army Reserves) was not ORDERED to deploy to Afghanistan. He volunteered. If he changed his mind, he could have simply notified the Pentagon he no longer wanted to volunteer and he’d be out.

      His attorney Orly Taitz – a leading Obama “birther”…

      The kicker – in his civilian job, Major Stefan Frederick Cook was a contractor for the Pentagon. Seems the Pentagon wasn’t too thrilled about his little stunt, so he’s been fired.

      I think Olbermann had it right – they’re both an embarrassment.

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        Orly Taitz is a leading Obama birther? Wow! I didn’t know that Orly could become pregnant, let alone give birth to Obama… that is fascinating!

  15. Black Flag says:

    Click to access House-Democrats-Health-Plan.pdf

    Look at that picture.

    If you think the government understands their own flowchart….what a mess.

    • Black Flag,

      At least the Republicans are good for something. Hard to choke that out, everything considered.

%d bloggers like this: