Tuesday Night Open Mic for September 15, 2009

Open Mic 1Lots and lots of stuff floating around out there these days. The news cycles are constantly running and it puts out so much information to wade through that I could literally do nothing but work on the blog 24 hours a day and still not cover it all. But I will try to hit some of the bigger stuff that I am seeing in the news today, or at least some of the more interesting stuff. I appreciate those of you who are offering up your own topics as well. It helps me to understand the types of things that you all want to talk about. In the upcoming days we have another contribution to the health care series and a discussion about the relevance and importance and legitimacy of the ACORN group. But for today, I have some interesting topics as well. I am especially interested in hearing any ideas on how we can deal with topic #1. Because it really, really annoys me, no matter which side does dumb stuff like this.

So I look forward to everyone’s thoughts!

Advertisements

Comments

  1. USWeapon Topic #1

    Important Legislative Business Afoot in the House of Representatives.

    The House of Representatives, on the heels of an impassioned and lively debate, voted Tuesday to formally admonish Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., for accusing the president of lying during a joint session of Congress a week ago.

    The vote was 240-179. Five lawmakers voted “present.” Ahead of the tally, lawmakers hurled an arsenal of accusations at each other over the issue, with Republicans calling the effort a “partisan stunt” and Democrats stepping up their condemnation of Wilson’s original offense.

    Read the rest of the article at Fox News here: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/15/house-disciplines-wilson-outburst/

    OK, I have a serious problem with this happening just a few days after the President forcefully stated, in this very chamber, that “the time for games is over!” Yet here we sit 6 days later with hours of debates in the House and the time taken to write a resolution to do nothing more than to say “We don’t like Joe Wilson’s actions.” This is the VERY DEFINITION of partisan games. And this resolution was written and offered by the House Majority Leadern Steny Hoyer, and the House Majority Whip James Clyburn. Two majority leaders in the House of Representatives. Men who are supposed to lead by example, yet chose to continue the partisan games the President claimed to oppose.

    This certainly was one of the low points in the House of Representatives of the 111th Congress. And that is saying something given the actions thus far taken this year by this Congress. It is stuff like this that shows me that today’s members of Congress would get shut out in a game of “Are you more mature than a 5th Grader.” Wilson made his mistake. He apologized to the White House and again through a public statement. So what was the point of this nonsense?

    But what it should show us is that the United States Congress has truly lost its way. In a time where thenation is in great peril, they cannot stop with the lies, the deceptions, the agenda driven legislation, and the partisan childlike behavior that has become the hallmark of the modern day representative. Obviously, many of us agree that the entire Congress needs thrown out. Both sides suck. But beyond that, what can we do to start getting these jackasses to understand that we expect better. I know you liberals out there can’t be any happier with this immature bullshit any more than you conservatives are happy with Wilson’s out of order comment.

    Are there any steps we can take to begin making this Congress into a group of actual statesmen?

    • bottom line says:

      Q: Are there any steps we can take to begin making this Congress into a group of actual statesmen?

      A: No, but we can replace them. I’ve said it before, and I will reiterate… What we need to do as a voting populace is vote in mass against encumbents and parties. If they’re a Republicrat or a Demomopublican or are currently in office, vote for the other guy…and if there isn’t another guy, run for the office yourself, or just don’t vote. It’s time to clean house. What we need is a new set of 545.

    • Nope. No matter who we vote in, they will still play the same partisan politics. Even I can see that there is no “change” in Washington. There is nothing new under the sun!

      • bottom line says:

        Prove me wrong. Go tell everyone the new set of 545 idea and tell them to tell everyone else. Maybe it’ll catch on and we can actually see our theories tested. I’d love to see it. Really, I would.

        • Bottom Line

          Proof is too easy.

          Are the same politicians in power today the same politicians in power during FDR?

          Truman?

          Carter?

          Nixon?

          Reagan?

          Answer: No. They are different people.

          Have these different people changed anything about government.

          Answer: No.

          Thus, your claim of a “new set” will make a difference is wholly false.

          • bottom line says:

            Hey BF, Go tell everyone you know how stupid my idea is. Tell them to tell their friends how stupid it is too. lol

            • Bottom Line,

              I have no need to prove to myself that people do not understand futility of voting.

              100 million did so last election and got exactly want they wanted – their masters and slaveholders dictating upon them.

              • BF,

                If not a single vote had been cast last election, what would the result be now?

                We would be stuck with the incumbents, and if so what would that solve?

          • bottom line says:

            Trueman-Democrat
            Carter-Democrat
            Nixon-Republican
            Reagan-Republican

            Same people? No. Same two parties? Yes. What’s option C? Because A and B aren’t working. Or considering they are the same party, maybe I should rephrase that to… what’s option B? Because A(1) and A(2) aren’t working.

            • There is no option “C”.

              There will never be an option “C”, because that requires either Option A(1) or A(2) to agree to it.

              They are not stupid.

              They will say “No”.

              • bottom line says:

                It’s not their choice. They have nothing to say. Their agreement is irrelevant.

              • You, therefore, cannot change the system.

                You are outside of the system.

                (Don’t stop now…!)

              • bottom line says:

                I disagree. Doing so is a use of the system in the way it was intended. If they’re doing a crappy job representing, then fire them and try someone new. Great concept if it doesn’t mean a new person from the same club with the same agenda. THEY are the ones outside the system. THEY are the ones eroding it, and WE are the ones allowing it to happen.

    • USW……pass my best to the missus………as to Congress…the military training cannot leave me….every time we wanted to disguise an attack, we create a diversion. If ACORN was not getting hammered, there would be no sanction. If Jones did hot get hammered, there would be no sanction. I see it that this is the one thing that can show the left that Congress has some backbone. It is nothing and who gives a rats ass about this side show. We need to keep our eye on the ball..not misdirection, which is what we are going to see until 2010 is over. So, nothing will get done and we should, as I so eloquently stated yesterday….vote the bastards out. I hope that the cables and individuals keep the pressure on and expose little things.

      My little group, which is not so little now, is really stirring a hornets nest down here. We have actually had an impact on the emergency rooms, especially the county emergency. I have no way of calculating the impact as yet but there are fewer illegals seeking medical treatment and they are going to other towns. We do know that the wait time has dropped significantly at county and we are told that the real emergencies are being tended to much quicker and we are told not just minutes but by hours. There is nothing that we can do nor will do about private practice but where our tax money goes, we are watching and will watch.

      We are trying to recruit individuals to run for the lower offices in the local races and we are beginning to organize in one other city. Like BF says, one step at a time. I think this is how we get them out. BUT, I still worry about Potomac Fever. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        D13 – curious what type of jobs are filled or industries supported in your neck of the woods by ‘illegals’? Up this way – it is well known that many of the mushroom farms (I live 10 mins from the ‘mushroom capital of the world – thankfully I am not downwind) employ a mix of legals and illegals. The surrounding communities, shooting off into Lancaster County (Amish Country) also employ many illegals in pure blue collar jobs and some manufacturing. I’ve always been conflicted as to how I should enjoy the fruits of a mans labor but deny him access to the same resources I have access to.

        • Hi Ray….good question. We don’t have factories here and the auto industry does not employ them….union workers there and to work, they must have a certified copy of a birth certificate. Texas does not accept driver’s license or ssn card as id, anymore. Better have a passport or certified copy of BC. Lockheed is equally tough. Most jobs available here are construction jobs, waiters, floor maintenance, things like that. no farming around here and the ranchers do not hire them. Dallas may be a little different.

          I can somewhat share your thoughts but they are here illegally and the companies that are hiring them should be sanctioned and we are beginning to have an impact. The biggest impact we are having is exposing the apartments that are renting to four and five families per apartment. talk about squalor. 9 and 10 people in a 2 bedroom apartment, theft rates are high, drug rates are high, in those areas. The biggest thing we see are the gangs but Fort Worth has adopted a zero tolerance policy all around. You can walk our streets downtown and in 80% of the areas without being accosted by panhandlers and homeless and such. Graffiti and gang signs are becoming non existent. Not due to my little group but the citizens here are very vigilant and the mayor and city council are very cognizant of the citizens. We have a pretty good history of voting people out. Our mayor has now been in for awhile and he is very good.

          The one thing that has been happening is that the Latino community also does not want the illegals here and they are helping as well. I do not know of any cost impact we have had yet, but I do know that the yard men, ditch diggers, construction companies are hiring citizens. the cost to us may be a little higher for now, but the impact on the social services will probably save more money than the increase in maintenance services and such.

          But, as BF says, start somewhere and here is where we are starting. It has caught some attention of the surrounding suburbs as well. I do not know if we are right or wrong. I have empathy but not much sympathy. Perhaps they need to stay in their own country and fight their government. Who knows but one thing is for sure and the stats whow it…large immigration population, the greater the crime.

          Sorry long answer.

          Side note…thought I would be through compiling my data…there is a lot and will have it finished by tomorrow, I think. Will be interested in your input.

          D13

      • Where do you live D13? I might want to go there!

        Ellen

      • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

        If we could vote the bastards out while simultaneously getting rid of the requirement that we had to VOTE OTHER BASTARDS IN TO REPLACE THEM, you would be on to something.

        Unfortunately, the requirement of voting replacement bastards in still stands as far as I can tell, so….

    • BF is right. There is no difference between the two parties but the color of their shirt. And I’m also beginning to think that immaturity is another prerequisite of Federal Office.

      I thought that, although kind of funny, Wilson’s comment was unnecessary and childish and that the resolution passed along Party lines was like an schoolyard scrap between two rival groups of elementary age boys.

      The Democrats won only because while they played the chastisement game, no one was talking about the Universal Health Care. They need the time away from the issue to formulate more lies and deceits to try and get it passed.

      I am almost amazed that the Dems are threatening to pass a purely Partisan bill. I say ALMOST amazed.

      • Oh, did anyone notice the stupid Rep from Georgia, Johnson, who accused whitey of bringing back out the hoods and robes?

        What was his malfunction? Before I say anything funny about the way he acted, and I am oh so close, is there something physically wrong with him?

        • Richmond Spitfire says:

          Hi Esom…

          Dude…listen, I love you…but what on earth is up with Georgia?????

          Jimmy Carter is now playing the race card over Joe Wilson??????

          Best Regards,
          RS

          P.S. If you want to friend me on Facebook, you can find me via richmond_spitfire@msn.com

        • Ex president Carter just played the race card too….makes me very very ill that the Democrates insist upon making everything a race issue. Why are they so bent on dividing this country? I think we are all above this and anyone playing a race card needs to be chastised very heavily. It is pure madness to try and divide a group of people by their race or gender or religious beliefs. This issue makes me so ill.

          • Richmond Spitfire says:

            Hi all,

            Okay…here is my take on race and cultural differences (by the way, I think it is a “pretty normal” opinion.

            I admire (and like) any person regardless of their color or culture who is able to act responsibly and be as self-sufficient as possible.

            I do not admire (and resent) any person regardless of their color or culture who is UNWILLING to act responsibly and be as self-sufficient as possible.

            Best Regards to all,
            RS

    • USW,

      One point, Wilson violated the House rules. The House should act on that no matter if its a Rep. or a Dem.. That said, yes, I agree, they are playing their party games at taxpayers expense. Wilson is using his exposure as a fund raising bonanza, which does not bother me. If the left would shut up about it, it would die down.

    • I'm learning! says:

      Glen Beck called out in the 9/12 project for 56 people in Washington to come forward and be “re-founders” of America. If you did wrong, admit it, pay the price if that is needed. Then step up the plate and work to move the country forward. Stand up for the people and put an end to the corruption in government. But is there really 56 people in Congress that could possibly do that? And if they even signed up, could we trust they are not just still trying to con us and make themselves look good? Some college (I don’t remember which one) that uses a crowd counting algorithm estimated the head count in Washington DC on Saturday at 1.7 million. Meanwhile the people that represent this peaceful crowd is bickering like a bunch of toddlers in day care over who said what! Just shut up and move on already. I wouldn’t put up with that from a bunch of little kids!

    • I have remained silent on this but it is time.

      Wilson broke the decorum rules of the House and Senate (joint session remember), flat out. He violated the FAMILY rules. He knew it when it popped out of his mouth.

      Everyone, on both sides, had a right and were correct in chastizing him for it immediately afterward. Those talking heads criticizing the Republicans for this are STUPID CLAP TRAPS on this issue.

      Wilson owed three parties a formal apology.

      First, the President. Now here is something telling. He called to apologize but the Chief of Staff took the apology. Excuse me? An elected Congressman calls you a Lier on the floor of congress and you DON’T take the call personally? Assessment of Part I.

      Wilson did the right thing. Mr. Obama showed his arrogance, he should have personally taken the call and put the issue to bed, at that level.

      Second, the House. Wilson owed them a formal apology. That means on the floor. He refused and they escalated into a big stink. Assessment of Part II.

      Wilson should of manned up. Wilson showed his arrogance. Pelosi tried to put it to bed, but not really. She lied but didn’t show her arrogance. The Republicans defending Wilson’s refusal to apologize on the floor are WRONG. They are STUPID and arrogant and are more guilty of playing politics than the Dems. The House had the right and obligation, given Wilson’s obstinance, to pass a resolution condemning his outburst. The vote should have been unanimous.

      (Special note to Colonel DK13; A STATESMAN would have made the formal apology and it would have all ended. Any further whining by the Dems would then have been proof of petty behavior. This is what I learned from the Senator who taught me politics.)

      Third, the Senate. This is my own opinion and not covered by decorum. It was a joint session and such are hosted by the House. However, the outburst reflects on all of congress. Wilson should have issued a formal written apology to the pres. and majority leader of the senate. If they had brass they would have invited him to speak before the senate to apologize.

      An then, after an appropriate waiting period (say a week), Mr. Wilson should have held a press conference on the steps of the Capitol and concisely explained why he thinks President Obama is a Liar.

      Instead he decided his arrogance and ego was more important than the primary issue itself.

      Please note than in my comments I am careful to use arrogance where many would simply view it as their ego. I strongly disagree. I have known many men and women with tremendous egos. They move the world and are a positive influence on all around them. They have gravitas and a sense of self worth that is praisworthy.

      It is those who allow that ego to develop into arrogance that poison the world. It was arrogance we saw demonstrated by ELECTEDS at town hall meetings. It was arrogance that we saw played out in this matter, from Mr. Wilson, Mr. Obama, and the Republican leadership.

      Now that ought to make a few folks pause this morning.

      Hope you are all thinking hard today.
      Best Wishes
      JAC

      • JAC,

        It kinda matches my thinking on this. I also think some of the Dem’s are trying to spin this into a racial issue, and then combine it with the Tea Parties, and then they can discredit all because its all about racism. They are just trying to generate enough attention that the issues are put aside and the emotions are the focus.

        Why is there almost no reporting on how accurate was Obama’s statement? Wilson would win a court case on slander if he could prove the statements were lies. Obama does not want that and is re-positioning himself.

        • LOI

          It is all becasue Wilson didn’t have the brass to apologize on the floor.

          He does that and the rest look like the IDIOTS they are.

          • I cannot agree with that. I am not The SHADOW, to know what lurks in the hearts of men, but don’t believe he is refusing to apologize out of fear or reluctance. More likely he is using this for the exposure, or he might think ethically he owes the house nothing. Its fair to say the Democrats have not treated the Rep’s with respect, Wilson may have a chip on his shoulder and be returning the disrespect.

        • You know, if there were really all those racists out there, Obama would not have been elected.

      • Very well said, JAC. I particularly liked the differentiation of arrogance and ego, I’ve never seen it so concisely stated. all is quiet here, hope the same is true there. c

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      This is exactly the kind of crap that Congress SHOULD be wasting six days on. I hope that they waste another 13 months or so on exactly this kind of crap so that they don’t have any time to pass any “meaningful legislation”.

      The absolute best that we can hope for is that they get completely bogged down in partisan gamesmanship and forget about everything else. That would be GREAT!

      If they stop their petty bickering, they might actually pass some “real” legislation, and that could be disasterous.

  2. USWeapon Topic #2

    Democrats Push to Repeal Federal Marriage Law

    A group of House Democrats introduced legislation Tuesday that would overturn a federal marriage law that denies recognition of gay marriage and gives states the right to refuse recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

    Same-sex marriages are now legal in six states.

    The Respect for Marriage Act, unveiled by Reps. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., and Jared Polis, D-Colo, has the support of more than 90 lawmakers.

    Read the Rest of the Article at Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/15/democrats-push-repeal-federal-marriage-law/

    I am torn on this subject. On one hand, I don’t like that the federal government is involved in marriage in any way at all. For that matter I don’t want to see government involved in marriage in the first place, state, local or otherwise. I don’t recognize the government’s right to have any say what-so-ever in the choice of two people to commit to each other. And that means I don’t care what sex they are. I don’t even care if someone wants to declare their love for pet snake and marry it. What do I care? So I would prefer that the government does only one thing at the federal level: pass a law saying they don’t have theright ot pass any legislation regarding marriage. None. Zero. Zilch.

    On the other hand I see that the entire system is so perverted as it stands right now, that there are steps to improve it that the government has set themselves up as the only entity able to correct them. So if the law makes things better in terms of marriage rights for same sex couples, I feel like I have to support it as the alternative is to allow things to remain how they are, which is not good for same sex couples.

    • bottom line says:

      U.S. Constitution – 10th Amendment – The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

      • Yes the states have the power by default to regulate marriage per the 10th amendment. There are two Federal issues, first Article IV Section 1: Each State to Honor all others

        Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

        Must gay marriage legalized in one state be recognized in all states? If so, then it becomes legal (recognized) in all once it is legalized in one state. This needs clarification at the Federal level. However, I would argue that the Federal government does not have the right to legalize same sex marriage, that is a state province.

        The second Federal issue is taxes. Will the Federal government recognize same sex unions the same as hetero unions for tax purposes?

        Here in CA we just struck down gay marriage and had it upheld in the courts. I will not argue if it was right or wrong. I will state that the reaction of the gay community to the vote was way out-of-line.

        I try to look at the unintended consequences of legislative actions. One aspect that has not gotten any discussion is what impact gay marriage has on the family court system?

    • This bill was going to happen. It will not pass this time. But it will in the future.

      To me this issue is definitely better left to the states. The federal government will stick its nose into anywhere it can. It will then proceed to screw the whole thing up.

    • Feds need to stay out of it.

    • This is AT MOST a state issue. The Feds need to slide their camel nose out from under the tent.

    • The federal government needs to enact an amendment allowing same sex marriages, end of story. It is the only way to provide same sex couples with full equal rights.

      • Richmond Spitfire says:

        Hi Charlie!

        Welcome to the site.

        Sorry, but I totally disagree with you. Federal Government needs to stay the heck out of it.

        States need to stay out of defining what a “marriage” is between two consenting adults. I say, if you are an adult and are not currently in a legal relationship contract with another adult, then you should be able to go to your local courthouse, obtain your civil union certificate (for legal purposes) and then “marry” in whatever type of ceremony that you want…could be a religious, cultural, before a judge, whatever, I don’t care.

        Best Regards,
        RS

        • Charlie I will also disagree.
          The only good solution is for all government to be removed from marriage. When something is done through the government it is (or should be) a representation of the people it governs. If recognition of gay marriage is mandated then there are several people who will no longer be represented because of the fact that they do not believe gay marriage to be acceptable. Likewise the rejection of gay marriage alienates those who wish for it. Either way one group is forcing their will on another. The only solution is to remove marriage from government. Governments involvement only lead to a conflict of rights.

        • The problem is if state alone make these judgments, we can have worse situations (i.e., slavery, woman’s right to vote, etc.). It took us an awful long time to figure it out and we are a union.

          I understand the fear of the government (they are retarded) but without it, we have no enforceable rights.

          • Charlie

            Government does not enforce rights – it destroys them.

            Think bigger, friend! The answer is right in front of you every morning!

          • Charlie Im not sure if the comment about states is directed at me or not. Just in case I will clarify my position. I dont believe any form of government state, local, or fedral should be involved in marriage.

            Black Flag is right Government does not enforce rights. However the common conception is that government grants rights. That conception is false all laws can do is place restrictions and provide privileges. I think this misconception is brought on by how we are taught about the Bill of Rights. The Bill of rights does not grant us rights, like many of us are taught. It restricts the government from interfering with those rights. A more accurate name would be Bill of government restrictions.

            If you do not believe me look at how the amendments are worded. Phrases like: “congress shall not,” ” shall not be infringed,” “shall not be violated.” are meant to restrict the government, not grant rights. The people already have the rights (just like the right of marriage). Government (all government) cannot provide an acceptable solution to this issue except to get out of the marriage business all together. A government solution would mean somebody’s rights are going to be violated.

            • Seed, the bill of rights was drafted by people. People make up the government (i.e., we vote the gov’t to represent us and can amend our rights as we see fit).

              Or am I not understanding you?

              • I think the problem is with our definitions of what a right is and where they come from. Rights always exsist, always have always will. What we amend is the restrictions placed on our rights, but the right still exsists.

                A government is made up of more than people it is also made up by Laws. The laws determine what and how much the people in the government can restrict and impose their will upon.

                No matter how the government defines marriage it will be imposing its will upon the people. I get that you believe that people should be free to marry whomever they decide (straight or gay). If the government defines marriage no matter how they do it, they will be limiting your right, my right, and anyone elses right. Laws cannot grant rights, the right was either there already or not. Laws limit actions whether by people or government.

              • I hope that explains things a bit better.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Or further clarify the 14th Amendment

        • Ray:

          On this issue I do not think the 14th is a problem. However you are getting close to one of the fundamental issues with the constitution and which must be addressed if we are to progress towards freedom and liberty.

          Can you identify the issue? Hint: chicken or egg?

          Curious to see what you come up with.
          JAC

      • Charlie Stella:

        NOT TRUE

        See below

    • Absolutely no action by the Federal Govt is required nor is it authorized in either direction. With the exception that congress can establish the criteria or “manner” for proving marriage exists in one state and thus must be recognized by others. Congress does not have the authority to simply say, you do not have to recognize. It has the power to prescribe the “manner”, which should mean process for determining.

      While States establish rules for marriage, I think the Supreme Court will eventually have to rule that marriage from one state must be recognized by other states. I think the existing federal law would eventually be found un-constitutional.

      At least that is my non-lawyer legal opinion of the matter based on the following:

      Article. IV.; Section. 1.: “Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.”

      Section. 2.: “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Priveleges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”

      Marriage is viewed as a “privelege” because the govt licenses or sanctions it.

      BF/KENT/PETER/GMAN, etc: I know that it is a RIGHT in actuality. I am talking here about the meaning within the writen law as interpreted by the Courts today.

    • OK, I might be wrong. I think its wrong to tax a gay couple differently than a strait couple.

      Domestic partner benefits may be taxed differently than married couples benefits. In general, no tax consequence follows for the family when an employer provides health insurance for the employee’s spouse and legal dependents. However, an employee whose domestic partner receives health benefits would normally include the cost of those benefits as taxable income.

      http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/142648/unbelievable%3A_as_a_lesbian_mother%2C_i_have_to_pay_more_for_health_care

      • Why not.

        We are going to tax cows differently than steers and those differently from horses, and those differently from sheep, and those differently from people.

        Once we allow tax for different people why stop at “income” as the criteria.

        You get the govt. you deserve.

  3. USWeapon Topic #3

    Bernanke: Recession Is Very Likely Over

    Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Tuesday the worst recession since the 1930s is probably over, although he cautioned that pain – especially for the nearly 15 million unemployed Americans – will persist.

    Bernanke said the economy likely is growing now, but he warned that won’t be sufficient to prevent the unemployment rate, now at a 26-year high of 9.7 percent, from rising.

    “From a technical perspective, the recession is very likely over at this point,” Bernanke said in responding to questions at the Brookings Institution. “It’s still going to feel like a very weak economy for some time because many people will still find that their job security and their employment status is not what they wish it was.”

    Read the rest of the article at the Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/15/bernanke-recession-is-ver_n_287231.html

    I began reading this article thinking to myself, “Self, why would an article that says things are going to get worse have a headline that clearly states the worst is over?” The only answer that I can come up with is that the federal government feels like what they need right now is a positive shot in the arm. Things are not going well. The Democrats in power are losing their grip during the health care reform debate. The last thing they want out there is a feeling that the economic spendulus bill was a mistake and waste of taxpayer dollars.

    So the answer is to attempt to make everyone think that things are getting better. Let’s face it, not a lot of people read articles they perceive to be about economics. So all the “headline skimmers” out there simply see that the big guy says the recession is over. They feel better, but failed to click on that headline and see that things are not going to be better. To be honest I first have to say that Bernanke is making questionable statements, and operating from the wrong theory of economics. Second I say the media is willing to bend whatever data they can to support the Messiah.

    But I am interested in hearing some of you economic folks weigh in on what Bernanke says in the article. Do you think that the recession is likely over. Don’t go into semantics about it will never be over or it only delayed the inevitable. We all know to expect that reaction from some folks. But how is everyone feeling about the economy at this point. Does anyone believe that the recession is very likely over?

    • bottom line says:

      Bernanke says that the recession is likely over. Bernanke is a liar. Therefore, the recession is likely NOT over.

      • Be careful with that liar word. Remember, it’s now “Bernanke is naked”

      • He’s saying exactly what he’s being told to say, nothing more. I would ask, “When the government’s opinion of anything Obama related is absolute elation and 2010 coming up fast weighing heavily upon the minds of those in power, why was that limp response all Bernanke was willing to put forward?” The obvious answer is indeed the truth.

        Also why no word on the commercial real estate defaults? Because it negates what he’s already said?

        New York Post 05/19/09:

        And the most dangerous time for banks will be 2010 to 2013 when $1 trillion in commercial real estate loans will mature and — like homeowners before them — owners of commercial properties will need to refinance.

        Blumberg estimates that $236 billion in commercial real estate loans that were turned into securities will need to be refinanced in this period and that $67 billion of that amount “will be lost.”

        “We are on the brink of one of the worst commercial real estate financing markets ever,” he said.

        Fox Business 08/31/09:

        Federal Reserve and Treasury officials fear the shaky commercial real estate sector could stall an economic recovery, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal.

        Specifically, the government officials fear that defaults on commercial real estate loans and foreclosures on properties could cause the same sort of catastrophic fallout that resulted when homeowners began defaulting en masse on their mortgages nearly three years ago.

        Just like home mortgages, many commercial real estate loans were packaged into bonds by Wall Street banks and sold to investors.

        If those commercial loans turn bad the domino effect would ripple through the economy.

        Commercial real estate companies such as Maguire Properties (MPG) were lower Monday.

    • Good Morning USW, hope the wife is feeling better, pass on my get well wishes!

      I havn’t seen any signs that anything is over concerning the economy. If anything, I think it will get worse as winter starts to set in. Uitility bills will begin to grow again, and spending will slow, which could keep inflation in check for a few months, but the bottom is coming, just not sure when.
      Will follow today!

      G!

    • Hi USW….I see some inflation beginning to creep in here. I have also seen a reduction in spending and more saving. I am even guilty of that. So, I would say it is not over.

    • I will say that Bernanke is full of hawgdookey. This is simply a ploy to save Obama a little more time to get the UHC plan passed. If that puppy gets through the recession will NEVER be over. It will turn into a Depression.

    • Spin. When Bush was Pres., and the economy/unemployment was better it was all negative reporting. Now “the One” is leading and its all good, no matter what the numbers are.

    • Everyone:

      Pleaser remember that the beginning and end of a recession is a “technical matter”. It is based on pre-determined criteria regarding specific parameters.

      It is also impossible to make a determination when the line is being crossed. Remember that the “official” call of recession happened a year after the fact.

      Also keep in mind that after an economy shrinks by 6% it doesn’t take much to get it back to just above 0%. In fact all it would take is for the decline to stop.

      GDP before = 13 trillion
      GDP now = 10 trillion (recession)
      GDP tomorrow = 10.000000000001 trillion (recession is over)
      GDP in 10 yrs = 10.000000000001 trillion (recession is still over)

      The trillions are made up but I think you get the picture.

    • I know what we are seeing in our business which is international (petroleum, chemicals, pharmaceutical, & semiconductors). Sales dropped like a rock last fall and stayed down into this summer. We had one layoff in Jan. and another in May after which those remaining went on 4 day weeks while the manufacturing floor are on 3 day weeks. Sales are now picking up such that manufacturing will probably be doing 4-5 day weeks for the rest of the year. We are hopeful to go back to a full work week in Jan. What we do not know is if this is just the normal year end hockey stick sales were budgets must be spent before year end or an actual pick up in business. So 1Q10 is still unknow and unpredictable. All the cost cutting has worked for us in terms of the bottom line for the company. For the individuals it sucks. What is uncertain is if and how fast we can rehire.

      I am curious, has anyone seen auto sales numbers post clunkers? I’ll wager sales are slow the rest of the year.

      • hi T-Ray, this is from bloomberg via the market ticker

        Sept. 16 (Bloomberg) — Chrysler Group LLC, the U.S. automaker run by Fiat SpA, said nationwide industry sales are off 19 percent so far this month after a government purchase- incentive program ended.

        “We are going to see harsh reality in September,” Sergio Marchionne, the chief executive officer of Fiat and Chrysler, said at the Frankfurt Motor Show. He described the U.S. industry results as a “disaster.” Fritz Henderson, CEO of General Motors Co., said the market is “very weak” this month.

        The man who runs the Ticker, Karl Denniger, is outraged by the economic policy of the past several years, and I worry sometimes that he is past the point of wanting to see ‘perp-walks’. He has an article on this up at his site now”

        http://market-ticker.denninger.net/ c

        • Thanks, thought as much. Doesn’t take an Einstien to predict it.

          I saw a post, not sure if it was here, that the clunker program would only save 5 Mbbl/yr if the average increase in fuel mileage was 10 mpg. This works out to $350 M/yr at a cost of $3B. If the average life expectancy of the clunker was 5 yrs, we lost money. This does not include the net present value of the money. How much energy, thus carbon, did we expend making the new vehicles?

      • As csm shows, and I concur:

        I will not bet against you in Vegas.

    • Alert in Michigan says:

      Bernanke needs to read Dent (see #27) who says we’re in a temporary (few months at most) uptick before the bottom falls out the rest of the way in commodities & real estate (incl. commercial), and we are officially in the Next Great Depression. While my husband’s company hasn’t folded yet, and hopefully won’t, he is seeing potential writing on the wall and making plans for that “what if”. For our family, we’re in the mode of saving & preparing as much as possible and “hunkering down,” as someone (BF) suggested.

      • We are too, I just scare myself sometimes playing ‘worst case scenario’, which involved our leaders negating property ownership the other day…

      • So, my assessment – (take it or leave it – you are all smart enough to know yourselves, so make your own judgments)

        A Depression is a monetary contraction – that is, currency (which is modern money) is being withdrawn from the economy.

        We are in a Depression.

        Debt is being repaid, but not re-lent. This removes currency (modern money) from the economy.

        This is a Depression.

        The Government has spent trillions of new currency – from a electronic printing press.

        This adds currency (modern money) to the economy. This is called “inflation”.

        The government – to date – has done this inflation into the accounts of banks.

        The banks, instead of taking this ‘money’ and lending it out to “you” have banked it with their bank – the FED. The inflation has not entered the economy.

        BUT the government has done more than that.

        They bought car companies. They are funding all sort of things at a whim.

        All of this is printed currency (modern money).

        This is “inflation”.

        At some point, the banks will need to lend. They cannot afford their costs (employees, rent, taxes, etc.) simply sitting on ‘money’.

        This will add to “inflation”.

        Inflation is our future. When? I cannot tell you.

        A rock in a river will move. When? (shrug) Even God does not know. But God does know it will move. Thus, I know it will move.

        Inflation destroys the savers.

        Eventually, there are no more savers, and thus, inflation does not ‘do anything’. Prices move as fast as inflation.

        (If it cannot, it is hyper-inflation. Then prices no longer measure economics. When this happens, the economy stops. Dead. If the economy is dead – so are you, not figuratively but in reality
        . Unless you know and own a horse to hitch a plow to plow a field to grow your food – you are dead in hyper-inflation. Therefore, millions upon millions will die)

        We will suffer (hopefully, because the alternative is deadly) high inflation for a decade, then a depression for a couple of decades, then a return to solid prosperity.

        But, at any point government may intervene, and mess the whole thing up.

        • Did you see/hear Jim Puplava’s interview with Peter Schiff?

          • No.

            …but I very much respect Peter Schiff.

            However, he is mega-pessimist. He believes the government will overwhelm the Elite and take out Western Civilization.

            If he is right, we are all doomed.

            He has been very right in the past.

            I do not believe he is right this time.

            I do understand I maybe whistling past a graveyard.

        • Alert in Michigan says:

          I respect your opinion and I really hope you are wrong. So few of us have horses & plows …. and I don’t personally know any Amish to move in with. I know inflation would destroy savings; is there any way to really prepare for every “worst case scenario”? My guess is no one even knows what all the scenarios would be, much less how to prepare. And of course there are events, government meddling, terrorist attacks, and other potential “wild cards” that could impact things.

          It seems like economists are currently arguing whether it will be inflation or deflation next – inflation b/c of the conditions you described (too much money in the economy) and deflation b/c of the upcoming crashes and corrections to bubbles.

          You said “We will suffer (hopefully, because the alternative is deadly) high inflation for a decade, then a depression for a couple of decades, then a return to solid prosperity.” Dent’s cycles predict 10-13 years of depression (deflation) then about 20 of gradual inflation (growth/stability). Can you please help me understand why you believe in the conditions and timetable you outlined as opposed to what Dent suggests?

  4. USWeapon Topic #4

    Obama backs extending Patriot Act Provisions

    The Obama administration supports extending three key provisions of the Patriot Act that are due to expire at the end of the year, the U.S. Justice Department told Congress in a letter made public Tuesday.

    Lawmakers and civil rights groups had been pressing the Democratic administration to say whether it wants to preserve the post-Sept. 11 law’s authority to access business records, as well as monitor so-called “lone wolf” terrorists and conduct roving wiretaps.

    Read the rest of the article from MSNBC here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32863188/ns/politics-white_house/

    This one simply shows me how in sync the two parties are. BF often states they are the same team simply wearing different color shirts. And I agree 100% at this point. Each one runs out there and does their little campaign stump speech, proclaiming the other party as horrible and doing things that they would never do. And then they get elected and do the same thing.

    President Obama campaigned on a couple of things. One of his big promises was to end the wars that President Bush started. In fact this platform position dominated the news cycles for months right up until the financial trouble started happening. But you know, here we are 8 months into the administration and he has done absolutely nothing different than what Bush did. The current withdrawal timeline in Iraq is the one set by the Bush administration prior to his leaving office. As for Afghanistan, he not only has not ended that war, he is pushing more troops there and doing nothing to disengage us from the region.

    The other big point against Bush, even used in Obama’s inaugural address, was that we would no longer allow the politics of fear to usurp American’s rights (I know this is laughable since the Democrats simply use fear of a different thing to the same ends). This was a clear dislike of the Patriot Act. An act that I think was a horrible transgression against the United States citizens. Yet here we are 8 months into the administration and nothing has been done to repeal the Patriot Act. And now we get the announcement that Obama is going to extend the provisions of the Patriot Act.

    These two parties in Washington have no intention of upsetting the apple cart in our favor, folks. They are only interested in more power. And no matter what the campaign promises were, we will never see the federal government perform any action that reduces the power they wield over the population. They play a game of pitting us against one another on these issues so that we can never come together and take control of them.

    • bottom line says:

      Count me in on the belief/knowlege/awareness that the DNC and the GOP are one and the same. I’ve been telling folks this for years. There is no difference between Republicrats and Demopublicans. As you pointed out USW, the agenda is the same.

      As for the “PATRIOT” act… Just my humble opinion, but everyone that signed that garbage should first be impeached, then tried for treason. There is absolutley NO excuse for signing such a document.(shakes head in disgust)

    • The difference between a career Democratic politician and a career Republican politician:

      A Democratic politician throws you on the floor and rapes you and tells you the whole time it is for the greater good of society. (Sorry GG could not resist the temptation)

      A Republican politician sweet talks you, makes useless promises and tricks you into feeling safe, then rapes you.

      I know this is crude and if it offends anyone, I will apologize up front, but this is how I see the Washington crowd and their treatment of the citizens of this country. They have zero interest in us; it is all about what they can get out of their office. Boot them all out.

    • I disagree. Not with the fact that both Parties are not interesting in helping us. But with the fact that the Democrats are using fear for different ends. They are using it for the same reason the Republicans did. POWER.

      And our President and his group of radical morons are going to take it to a whole new level if we sit around and allow it. If we last that long, by 2012 we will have no rights left at all. Then the Government, thanks to their messiah, who will be deified and almost certainly a holiday made for, will just continue from there with even more restrictive law and we will truly begin to see what true Socialism will be like.

    • Whats the big deal? Surely we can trust or government.

      The White House is collecting and storing comments and videos placed on its social-networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube without notifying or asking the consent of the site users, a failure that appears to run counter to President Obama’s promise of a transparent government and his pledge to protect privacy on the Internet, the Washington Times reported

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/09/16/obama-collecting-web-users-data/?test=latestnews

    • I’ll say it, these extended measures are not intended for use on “Muslim Extremists”. Too bad its going to be difficult proving such until the pendulum swings back because I’d wager on his doing such right now. Hell, Glenn Beck is likely under as much electronic scrutiny as North Western Pakistan. Of every American turning over rocks he’s the dangerous one to this current incarnation of POTUS who has already shown himself to be “above the office”.

      • I agree that they are watching Beck. Right now they can just ignore him, as they are doing. But what will happen if they suddenly CAN’T ignore him? What if too many qusetions start to be asked by too many?

        • That’s always the danger in speaking out against the game of thrones. The American politico have an insane amount of power and NEVER refrain from abusing it. There needs to be a blog completely focused on “Friday night” legislation. If anyone knows of such, I’d be very much interested.

      • Beck at one time had to hire protection for his family due to threats, I think that was before the election. Just the other day he said he has 3 private eyes following him, I assume not of his hiring.

        O’Reilly commented a few months ago that when he was criticizing Clinton, he kept getting IRS audits, until he threatened to sue.

        And now Stossel is coming to Fox, I hope he unleashes all his investigative experience on DC.

    • It seems many people dislike the Patriot act and its implications on loss of freedom and privacy. For all the complaining, however, I have not heard how we can accomplish the security mission by different, less intrusive means. Spying on the enemy is a long accepted international practice. Prior to WWII, the communications companies, AT&T, Western Union, etc., allowed the government to intercept Japanese messages. We all have seen the massive efforts to decode Japanese and German messages. Times have changed. Messages can now be sent via the internet with sophisticated encription, one time use cell phones, etc. These connections are instantaneous and short in duration. The communication connection is long done and over before any judge can issue a wire tap order. So what is the alternative? Do we let the enemy use our own technology against us?

    • I saw a clip that somewhere (maybe CA?) there is a push to have teachers give a Miranda rights-like speech (you have the right to remain silent) to kids before the pledge was said each day.

  5. I'm learning! says:

    A little humor to start the morning…

    Posted to Craig’s List / Personals:

    To the Guy Who Tried to Mug Me in Downtown Savannah night before last. Date: 2009-05-27, 1:43 A M EST. I was the guy wearing the black Burberry jacket that you demanded that I hand over, shortly after you pulled the knife on me and my girlfriend threatening our lifes. You also asked for my girlfriend’s purse and earrings. I can only hope that you somehow come across this rather important message.

    First, I’d like to apologize for your embarrassment, I didn’t expect you to actually crap in your pants when I drew my pistol after you took my jacket. The evening was not that cold, and I was wearing the jacket for a reason.. My girlfriend had just bought me that Kimber Model 1911 .45 A CP pistol for my birthday, and we had picked up a shoulder holster for it that very evening. Obviously you agree that it is a very intimidating weapon when pointed at your head … isn’t it! I know it probably wasn’t fun walking back to wherever you’d come from with that brown sludge in your pants. I’m sure it was even worse walking bare footed since I made you leave your your shoes, cellphone, and wallet with me. [That prevented you from calling or running to your buddies to come help mug us again].

    After I called your mother, or “Momma” as you had her listed in your cell, I explained the entire episode of what you’d done. Then I went and filled up my gas tank as well as four other people’s in the gas station on your credit card. The guy with the big motor home took 150 gallons and was extremely grateful! I gave your shoes to a homeless guy outside Vinnie Van Go Go’s, along with all the cash in your wallet. [That made his day!] I then threw your wallet into the big pink “pimp mobile” that was parked at the curb … after I broke the windshield and side window and keyed the entire driver’s side of the car.

    Later, I called a bunch of phone sex numbers from your cell phone. Ma Bell just now shut down the line, although I only used the phone for a little over a day now, so what’s going on with that? Earlier, I managed to get in two threatening phone calls to the DA’s office and one to the FBI, while mentioning President Obama as my possible target. The FBI guy seemed really intense and we had a nice long chat (I guess while he traced your number etc.). In a way, perhaps I should apologize for not killing you … but I feel this type of retribution is a far more appropriate punishment for your threatened crime. I wish you well as you try to sort through some of these rather immediate pressing issues, and can only hope that you have the opportunity to reflect upon, and perhaps reconsider the career path you’ve chosen to pursue in life.
    Remember, next time you might not be so lucky. Have a good day!

    Thoughtfully yours,
    Bill
    P.S. Remember this motto…An armed society makes for a more civil society!

  6. ITS ON!!!

    GREENWICH, Conn. – The chief executive officer of World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. says she’s seeking the Republican nomination to run against Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd.

    Linda McMahon announced her candidacy Tuesday, saying Washington is “out of control” and Dodd has “lost his way and our trust.” McMahon says she has the experience and strength to stand up to special interests and bring much-needed change to Washington.

    The 60-year-old Greenwich resident is up against three other Republicans — former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, state Sen. Sam Caligiuri and former U.S. Ambassador to Ireland Tom Foley. Dodd plans to run for a sixth term next year.

    McMahon says she will use her own money to pay for most of her campaign and won’t accept donations from political action committees.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/16/connecticut-senate-smackdown-mcmahon-eyes-seat/?test=latestnews

  7. Richmond Spitfire says:

    Hi all,

    White House is now butting it’s nose into Massachusett’s State Business…Advocating that a bill be passed to fill Kennedy’s seat until the Special Election.

    From Fox:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/16/white-house-lobbies-interim-kennedy-seat-appointment/

    Best Regards to all,
    RS

    • I think it deplorable that MA be asked to overturn a law made especially for Ted Kennedy himself to keep the then Republican Gov. Mitt Romney from picking a Republican to fill a seat.

      They should be forced to follow the letter of the law and wait on the special election. They wanted the law, they passed it, now they should live with it.

  8. According to FoxNews, the Health Care Debate is turning ugly over charges of Racism.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/15/charges-racism-inflame-health-care-debate/

    I am SO sick… of seeing that damn race card being played it makes me want to puke.

    In my eyes, those who would play this card have completely marginalized it for anyone who may need to use it for a real reason in the future. It is thrown into the middle of any debate now where a Black and White person are in together to shut down the debate and stop disagreement.

    I am going to say this even though some may think it Racist for me to say so. I will also say up front that I am not a Racist just so I have it out there up front before some big mouth says it to me and pisses me off. ‘Cause then I won’t be nice when I reply.

    I think that a lot of people who use the race card are themselves Racists, no matter what color they are. They use it because they KNOW that no one wants to be labeled that and will go out of their way to give the Racist what they wanted to begin with.

    So what is my solution? Well I don’t know about anyone else, but if you are debating or arguing with me and you want to convince me of your view, it would not be in your interest to whip out that card. That will not shut me up. It will not convince me of anything EXCEPT the fact that you are in fact a Racist yourself. And not only that, but that you are a stupid Racist as well who has to use Race issues to shut down conversations they are not smart enough to deal with.

    I had hoped we were past a lot of the race issues when the Nation elected a Black man for President. I knew better but I still held out that small hope. But there are some people out there, unfortunately a lot in positions of power who use it as a weapon to win debate and destroy enemies. And they are the biggest Racists out there. And yes folks. Many of them are Black. In fact most of them are. I say that because most whites in power are usually to afraid to do anything that even remotely could possibly be construed as Racist. Only Blacks can use Race as a weapon.

    Fortunately for the rest of the saner folks out there these racists have about spent all their capital on the race issue in politics. Anyone who has a functional brain should know that you will be revealed a racist long before you ever reach the halls of power if you are white. Only BLACK racists can get away with that. examples are: Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Hank Johnson, Charlie Rangel, Van Jones, AG Holder.

    Notice please that Obama’s name is not there. That is because I don’t think he is a Racist. He has Racists around him but I don’t believe he himself is.

    Do I believe that there is Racism still in the US? Why hell yes there is!! There is and always will be morons of all colors, races, and creeds. And they are worldwide. That is just a darker side of humanity (no pun intended). But we thoughtful, unbiased people far outnumber them, at least in the US. And that number will continue to grow. It would grow a lot faster if people would keep that damn card in the deck where it belongs or even better throw it in the trash of history.

    • Idiocy is color independent.

    • I remember seeing a 20/20 story on blacks relocating to Atlanta because of the better atmosphere. That the new south has less bigotry than the north does today. Its sad Carter seems to be getting senile, and should stay out of the news.

      • LOI, Jimmy Carter is not going senile. Jimbob is just a flippin’ idiot.

        Let me tell you a story. Back when my pappy was still preaching he went, to the Ga. State Southern Baptist Convention. There they were voting on whether they were going to recognize women and gay PREACHERS AND DEACONS. Because they overwhelmingly voted against that move, Ol’ JimBob walked out of the convention in a huff with his like minded compadres. A while later they started another Baptist Org. that was very liberal. It is almost universally ignored. When a church member asked my daddy what he thought of Mr. Carter walking out, my daddy replied that he just wished that Jimmy could have taken the rest of his liberal buddies with him when he did it.

        Jimmy Carter is the biggest liberal on the planet. He makes Obama look like Rush Limbaugh. And he ain’t jus’ liberal. He’s also stoopid!

        I am not even suprised that he made that comment. He is an asskissing professional. And don’t yourself that that isn’t all that comment was.

        • Oh well, you have to live with Carter being a Georgian,
          I am stuck with Bill Clinton. At least we don’t have Franks or Pelosi to ever answer for.

          • Richmond Spitfire says:

            We’re stuck with Tim Kaine…

            You want to know what is sad about Tim Kaine…When he was on the Richmond City Council, he seemed VERY conservative compared to the other nuts and crooks.

      • Senility speaks of an intellect lost. I’d make the case that it wasn’t there to begin with.

    • I have to agree 100%. The people who are playing the race card are making it meaningless. People of intelligence know it is a load of BS. Funny how we were in such a hurry ro do Health Care Reform but have wasted almost a week between the “You lie” comment and some senile peanut farmer. And don’t even get me started on ACORN.

  9. OK FOLKS, I ADMIT I LIFTED THE FOLLOWING FROM FOX. IT RELATES TO USW’S FIRST ISSUE TODAY, KIND OF.

    BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT SHOWS WHY THE RESURRECTION OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY WILL TAKE MANY YEARS IF NOT DECADES.
    THE AUTHOR IS A SENIOR AT HARVARD. THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE COUNTRY.

    “West, Wilson Forget Free Speech Is a Responsibility
    We all know this truth on some level: free speech deserves better than insults, mockery and stealing other people’s moments of honor.

    Author Matt Cavedon is a senior at Harvard University.
    Between Kanye West and Rep. Joe Wilson, Americans are finally starting to get it: free speech is a right to act responsibly, not a license for stupidity.
    Last week, America saw its president called a “liar” in the middle of one of the most important speeches that he has made yet, on the floor of Congress, no less. That his accuser is a duly elected member of the House of Representatives made it almost embarrassing. Granted, it could always be worse: at least our politicians are still yelling and not throwing punches, but that’s hardly a sign that we have a civilized democracy.
    The immaturity of one congressman was matched by the arrogance of one hip-hop superstar at the MTV’s Video Music Awards only four days later, when Kanye West seized Taylor Swift’s microphone to tell the world that Beyonce Knowles deserved Swift’s award — setting off the biggest Facebook status storm since Michael Jackson died.
    People across this country didn’t necessarily shake their heads at Wilson and West because they disagreed with what each man said, or because we don’t like dissent from authorities, whether that authority is the president of the United States or MTV. There are a lot of critics of Obamacare, and perhaps even more Beyonce fans who would have agreed with Wilson and West under different circumstances. And, let’s face it: Americans have a proud tradition of disagreeing with powerful politicians and establishment cultural critics.
    No, the real reason Americans were dismayed at the jabberers during the past seven days is that we know, on some level: that free speech deserves better than insults, mockery and stealing other people’s moments of honor.
    Unlike what some postmodernists mean when they talk about their love of “art for art’s sake,” people don’t love “free speech for free speech’s sake.” We love our freedom because we all want to be able to meet our responsibilities as citizens of a democratic republic. The reason that we so jealously defend the right to free speech is not because we believe that people like Wilson, West and the KKK should be able to shoot their mouths off whenever they want. We are just uncomfortable with the thought of being punished for freely expressing our beliefs in a civil manner, and we are uncomfortable about leaving the national political dialogue to a handful of politicians, pundits and special interests.
    We want freedom because we want to be able to live up to our duties. As Lord Acton, the nineteenth century historian of freedom, put it: “Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right to do what we ought.” We all know that we oughtn’t interrupt each other and resort to name-calling. We all know that Wilson and West were not men enjoying their liberty; they were fools taking advantage of our cultural willingness to accept whatever comes out of people’s mouths.
    Ultimately, nothing tangible will come of Wilson’s and West’s childish outbursts.
    If, however, these unfortunate incidents get Americans to think twice about why we have freedom, and about the differences between liberty and indulgence, then this can serve as a lesson about the purpose of rights.
    We all know that there was something wrong about the two biggest news-grabbing gaffes of the past seven days. Now, let’s take it to the next step and get back our ability to discriminate between what is morally justifiable as free speech and what is just dumb blather, what is freedom well-used and what is just superfluous.”

    NOW LET THAT SINK IN A BIT, READ IT AGAIN VERY CAREFULLY.

    I WANT YOU FOLKS TO TELL ME WHY THIS IS A REFLECTION OF A PROBLEM AND NOT A REASONABLE SOLUTION.

    Happy Thinking
    JAC

    • Well name calling, being called a liar, in the house has happened before twice to Bush so I’d hope this individual was outspoken then also. If not, nice words but hypocrisy. That the interruption was the bad bit, sure. Let POTUS speak the same thing for the hundredth time and if you nod off, so be it… unless there’s a rule there too? There a pee break rule where you have to hold it? I’d have chosen that strategy. “Sorry Mr President, urinary tract infection.”

      • Alan F:

        The guy was too young to remember what happened to Bush. Unless he wrote a paper for his high school.

        You are missing the point, the reason I posted this. It is not about the lie or the yelling out of lier.

        I know you get it so try again.

        • I do. Its always been the lot of us all to fail at appreciating what we have and at what price it was purchased. I’ll continue to to laud your example of what freedom can be even after you lose it… if you lose it.

    • JAC
      Ok I’ll bite. Don’t like the following:

      1. “free speech is a right to act responsibly”

      2. “We love our freedom because we all want to be able to meet our responsibilities as citizens of a democratic republic.”

      3. “We want freedom because we want to be able to live up to our duties.”

      4. “Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right to do what we ought.”

      Free speech is free speech, who decides what is responsible for me? Me.

      If I am truly free I only have a responsibility to me and mine, not the republic.

      If I am truly free I only have a duty to me and mine.

      Liberty and freedom is the power to do what I want with me and mine as long as I don’t infringe upon others. This writer is more concerned with the we instead of the me. Besides being polite has nothing to do with freedom and liberty, being moral does.

      • That sounds right to me Bama, I bet your right to JAC also.

      • Bama:

        Good job. But you missed this one: “Unlike what some postmodernists mean when they talk about their love of “art for art’s sake,” people don’t love “free speech for free speech’s sake.” ” It goes WITH the your other example.

        Can you name the philosphical basis for these statements?

        I almost forgot. Also notice how this fellow tried to link the bad behavior of a rapper at the MTV awards with Joe Wilson and political free speech. If we accept such a linkage we allow the devaluation of true “rights” which eventually result in our accepting some control of those rights.

        This kids parents should be sueing Harvard for a refund.

  10. IBD has an editorial on doctors’s quitting if Obamacare is passed.

    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=337909690110379

    • Do we need to learn Hindi or Chinese? Maybe we can create a RoboDoc. Just go take a bunch of tests and submit them and all your syptoms to a computer and get a diagnosis.

  11. During the campaign we saw shows like SNL and Stewart had a pretty big impact on how the public received their news and formed their opinions. Stewart has a good clip on ACORN:

    http://www.thefoxnation.com/acorn/2009/09/16/stewart-skewers-acorn-blasts-media-getting-scooped

  12. Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris

  13. Cedo nulli.

    • OK, WTF

      When did you start speaking Japanese? Or is that Greek?

    • My turn:

      While Nero fiddles, Rome burns.

      • In July 18 to July 19, 64 AD, the Great Fire of Rome occured. The popular myth surrounding this event is that Nero fiddled whilst he watched Rome burn, and later benefited from its burning by using cleared land for his new palace.

        Suetonius and Cassius Dio said that Nero sang the “Sack of Ilium” in stage costume while the city burned. However, Tacitus’ account has Nero in Antium at the time of the fire. Tacitus said that Nero playing his lyre and singing while the city burned was only rumor. In fact, According to Tacitus, upon hearing news of the fire, Nero rushed back to Rome to organize a relief effort, which he paid for from his own funds. After the fire, Nero opened his palaces to provide shelter for the homeless, and arranged for food supplies to be delivered in order to prevent starvation among the survivors. In the wake of the fire, he made a new urban development plan. Houses after the fire were spaced out, built in brick, and faced by porticos on wide roads. Nero also built a new palace complex known as the Domus Aurea in an area cleared by the fire.

        Incidentally, the violin (fiddle) would not be invented for a full 1,000 years after the Great Fire of Rome.

        http://listverse.com/2007/11/29/top-10-common-historical-myths/

    • Vah!
      Denuone Latine loquebar?

      Me ineptum!

      Interdum modo elabitur.

      *Oh! Was I speaking Latin again? Silly me. Sometimes it just sort of slips out.

    • True story. Years ago an ambulance was passing thru a stop light, siren blaring, its lights all flashing. Traffic on both sides had stopped. They were “T” boned in the side by a little old lady. Poilce aske her if she heard the siren? Yes, she said. Did you see the warning lights flashing?
      Again, yes. Then why did you not stop? My light was green.

      Moral of the story, there are times we all have to yield.

  14. A few weeks back there was discussion on the death penalty. I am for sending this
    scum to Allah.

    D.C. Sniper Mastermind John Allen Muhammad to Be Executed in November

    RICHMOND, Va. — A judge has set a Nov. 10 execution date for John Allen Muhammad, mastermind of the 2002 sniper attacks in the Washington, D.C., area.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,550780,00.html

    • Death Penalty is immoral and evil.

      Killing a man who is of no current threat violates civil behavior.

      Death penalty is merely revenge – and as such, despicable.

      • You can call me Despicable Illusion from now on. At least I know others think the same. Alanis Morissette

        “All I Really Want”

        Do I stress you out
        My sweater is on backwards and inside out
        And you say how appropriate
        I don’t want to dissect everything today
        I don’t mean to pick you apart you see
        But I can’t help it
        There I go jumping before the gunshot has gone off
        Slap me with a splintered ruler
        And it would knock me to the floor if I wasn’t there already

        If only I could hunt the hunter

        And all I really want is some patience
        A way to calm the angry voice
        And all I really want is deliverance
        Do I wear you out
        You must wonder why I’m so relentless and all strung out
        I’m consumed by the chill of solitary
        I’m like Estella
        I like to reel it in and then spit it out
        I’m frustrated by your apathy
        And I am frightened by the corrupted ways of this land

        If only I could meet the Maker

        And I am fascinated by the spiritual man
        I am humbled by his humble nature
        What I wouldn’t give to find a soulmate
        Someone else to catch this drift
        And what I wouldn’t give to meet a kindred
        Enough about me, let’s talk about you for a minute
        Enough about you, let’s talk about life for a while
        The conflicts, the craziness and the sound of pretenses
        Falling all around…all around
        Why are you so petrified of silence
        Here can you handle this?

        Did you think about your bills, your ex, your deadlines
        Or when you think you’re gonna die
        Or did you long for the next distraction
        And all I need know is intellectual intercourse
        A soul to dig the hole much deeper
        And I have no concept of time other than it is flying

        If only I could kill the killer

        All I really want is some peace man
        a place to find a common ground
        And all I really want is a wavelength
        All I really want is some comfort
        A way to get my hands untied

        And all I really want is some justice…

        • If one accepts Death Penalty, you have to accept the killing of innocent people.

          Death is final – there is no “Opps, sorry about that”.

          Thus, one cannot accept Death Penalty.

          Initiation of Violence is evil. Response to initiation of violence with violence is measured to stopping the attack – to do more turns such defensive violence into initiation of violence.

          Death penalty is an initiation of violence on an non-violent person. There is no moral basis to do this.

          Once you agree to an exception to use evil, evil will become acceptable.

          Then you end up with exactly what you rant and hate right now.

          Until you can cleanse the need to use evil from yourself, evil will exist against you forever.

          “We have met the enemy, and it is us”

          • Sorry. Nope. That won’t wash. That dawg won’t hunt.

            There is nothing immoral in a mercy killing.

            • Then you accept and agree to killing innocent people.

              Such is the consequence you now bear.

              Good luck!

          • BF said:

            “Death penalty is an initiation of violence on an non-violent person.”

            John Allen Muhammad is a non violent person? Do tell.

            • Richmond Spitfire says:

              Hi Bama Dad,

              I interpreted Black Flag’s statement as meaning that John Allen Muhammad is a non-violent person because he has been removed from society (put into prison) and is no longer capable of performing his voilent acts.

              Best Regards,
              RS

      • And you can in turn call me EsomHill “The Despicable One” Gazette. Fry his butt.

        • Esom

          I have often read from you your claim of being a Christian.

          I remind you:

          Jesus was killed by the Death Penalty.

          You are supporting that….

          • PS:

            I was a supporter of the Death Penalty.

            It contradicted by core principles.

            Guess which part of the contradicted position of mine that needed to be changed to be no longer in contradiction?

            • But see BF, it doesn’t violate MY core principles. I see it as Justice. True Justice for a horrible crime.

              Saying he is not in society anymore so he is now a non-violent person just doesn’t cut it.

              If there were some doubt of his guilt then I might think different, but there’s not.

              In my core principles you sacrifice your rights when you commit premeditated violent murder. From that point you cease to be a member of society and others should not be punished by having to pay for your upkeep. And turning him loose is NOT an option.

              Killing and murder are two totally different things.

          • BF

            You’re twisting some facts a bit.

            Jesus died by the death penalty, but had done no wrong. Imposing the death penalty on a guilty person is something else entirely.

            I agree with you, though, that the death penalty is wrong.

            • JB

              No, it is not a twist – it is my point.

              The threat of Death Penalty completely encircles the possibility of killing innocent people

        • Flag,

          You seem to be a part of our society, and a resident of the US. Where is the moral justification for denying this man his freedom? Is there morally any difference in taking his life than keeping him in prison for life? Either way, we have denied him his life.

          And I object to having to pay to keep him fed, housed and rendered free medical treatment. He chose to live here, knowing our laws allow us to take his life for certain crimes. He chose to commit those crimes. His death is as much his choice as it is our societies.

          • And I bear no responsibility whatsoever for him dying. He took his own life when he shot those REALLY innocent people for the fun of watching them hit the ground.

            And as far as Jesus goes. That was a really innocent man who did absolutely nothing wrong but get on the wrong side of authority. It quite frankly offends my christianity when you try to compare Jesus to a serial killer.

            For one thing Jesus went willingly to the cross. He knew in advance where he would wind up and why. I would not be a Christian if not for his sacrifice. Nobody would.

            I am quite sure God doesn’t mind the state killing poor old Muhammad. After all BF, and this really is not a joke, it’s not God’s not going to do worse to him when he goes to the upper room.

      • Richmond Spitfire says:

        It is so hard to reconcile a person’s emotions to his or her own rationale logic or vice versa.

        My emotions tell me that the bastard should be put to death — good riddance (hey, I lived through the sniper attacks even down here in Richmond… — it was frightening and the people of Virginia, DC and Maryland were held hostage for a long period of time)… — we worried about our children waiting at the bus stops and walking into the schools, we worried when stopping to get gas, we worried when walking from our cars into our office…IT WAS A HORRIBLE AND WORRISOME TIME!

        My logic tells me that if we “take” his life, then we are no better than he.

        **************

        Up until a couple of years ago, I was a VERY FIRM believer in the death penalty, now, I just don’t know…I’m having a very hard time reconciling my emotions with my logic and value system of right and wrong.

        **************

        and LOI…I too resent and object to having to keep this bastard fed, housed and healthy considering the emotional torture and terror that he put millions of people through — then the torture and emotional duress that he put the families of his “murdered” victims through. The entire US was victimized by this man and his young friend.

        **************

        It is hard for me to get my thoughts around this…I go down the emotional path, branch down the logical path…do the “but” and repeat this cycle over and over.

        Best Regards to all,
        RS

        • I think we all are conflicted at times, even Flag. If he is against all taxes, who pays to keep this AH locked up?

          I am pro-choice, but think there should be restrictions.
          The US is supposed to be the beacon of freedom, yet we allow
          partial birth abortion, and the left says that’s OK. And then they scream about us putting down a mad dog like this.

          Some crimes demand we say, never again!

          In the mornin you go gunnin’
          For the man who stole your water
          And you fire till he is done in
          But they catch you at the border
          And the mourners are all singin’
          As they drag you by your feet
          But the hangman isn’t hangin’
          And they put you on the street

          CHORUS:
          You go back Jack do it again
          Wheel turnin’ ’round and ’round
          You go back Jack do it again

          Steely Dan

          • Pro-choice? Can you really call it that? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say pro-choice-then-change-your-mind? I mean, if someone chooses to have unprotected sex and gets pregnant (their choice!), should they live up to that choice? Or can they just kill their baby if they change their mind? If you don’t think it is a human, let me ask you this; what species is the fetus?

            Homo Sapiens = Human Being

            I think abortion should be used only as a medical procedure to save a woman’s life. The only exception I will concede is in the case of rape as longs as it is a morning after pill or something.

            Bottom line, abortion should not be means of birth control! There are plenty of other methods available.

            • JB,

              I agree abortion should not be used as birth control. A little honesty here, will Roe vs Wade ever be overturned? No.
              So we are stuck with abortion being legal.
              I do not like or agree with some of the liberal abortion laws currently in place.
              I think partial birth abortion should be outlawed except to save the mother’s life.

              But being honest, if I agree with the morning after pill being legal, that is pro-choice as its being debated today.

              Parents rights was touched on a bit yesterday. In California is legal for a girl to get an abortion without her parents permission. It is ILLEGAL for them to notify the parents. I would like to see that one before the
              Supreme Court!

  15. bottom line

    Q: Are there any steps we can take to begin making this Congress into a group of actual statesmen?
    A: No, but we can replace them. I’ve said it before, and I will reiterate… What we need to do as a voting populace is vote in mass against encumbents and parties. If they’re a Republicrat or a Demomopublican or are currently in office, vote for the other guy…and if there isn’t another guy, run for the office yourself, or just don’t vote. It’s time to clean house. What we need is a new set of 545.

    JB said
    September 16, 2009 at 7:26 am
    Nope. No matter who we vote in, they will still play the same partisan politics. Even I can see that there is no “change” in Washington. There is nothing new under the sun!

    Exactly, JB!
    The People have to wake up and understand that it does not matter who sits in the chairs the results will be the same

    The sugar coating maybe different – instead of ‘security’ it will be ‘welfare’ – but the tactics and consequences are identical. It is a “One Party” system – run by the elite for the elite. It is not their kids dying in foreign wars nor is it their kids suffering economic pain.

    It is their kids that may lose their ill-gotten gains – so that is what they are trying to save – mercantile business and the banks.

    Believing that a ‘different’ set of politicians would do something ‘different’ – when by observation over the last 150 years demonstrates exactly the opposite – is insanity.

    • bottom line says:

      So don’t vote for those controlled by the parties or elite or anyone that doesn’t represent the people. Do you still not get it? We have been choosing between option A and B for a long time. Whats option C? Do you have a better idea? Maybe we can have no government at all? Hmmmm?

      • Sir,

        I do not vote for someone who does not represent me.

        Therefore, I do not vote

        There is no Option C for voting – it does not exist.

        Therefore, the only option is Zero – that is no vote.

        • bottom line says:

          Mr. Flag Sir,
          I don’t vote either. I never have. And from what I can tell, our reasons aren’t much different. My point is that the only way it makes sense to vote is to vote for the candidate, if any, that will most likely represent their constituants and the constitution, rather than cater to curruption. Demopublicans and Republicrats obviously don’t qualify. We already know what they are about.

          Q: Would you rather have
          (A)frog turd soup?
          (B)cow puke caserole?

          A:(C) a medium cooked grilled porterhouse, fried jumbo shrimp, baked potatoE, onion rings, french bread, salad, and a glass of wine.

  16. Re:Bernanke: Recession Is Very Likely Over

    Do you think that the recession is likely over.

    Take a look at this picture, does this look like an end to a recession?

    Those are ships – more ships then the combined navies of USA and UK – and 3 times the tonnage – parked near Singapore. Empty. Not moving.

    Ships that carried tonnage at a rate of $50,000 per day are now working for $5,000 a day.

    Brevior vita es, quam pro futumentibus heu agendo*

    *Life is too short to listen to idiots.

  17. Goldie

    I DON’T KNOW IF ANYBODY SAW THIS STATEMENT OR NOT, BUT A FEW MONTHS AGO, OBAMA SENT HILARY TO CHINA AND SHE TOOK WITH HER A DOCUMENT GIVING CHINA EMINENT DOMAIN IN USA

    Dont’ worry, goldie, the USA is safe.

    China wanted some sort of understanding from the US government over the massive Treasury Bills (debt) that China holds of the US.

    Hope I can keep this understandable:

    A Treasury Bill (T-Bill) is merely a ‘fancy’ IOU.

    China wants to believe that the IOU is still ‘good’.

    There is three ways that an IOU is ‘dealt with’.

    1) The USA can give China Real Wealth in return for the IOU – that is, China ‘sells’ IOU back to US – US sends Harley motorcycles, movie stars, oil, etc. equal to that value.

    This is what China hopes for…

    2) The USA can give China US dollars. A T-bill says “Pay me $1 million” – so that is what the US does, sends over $1 million crisp, newly printed green paper.

    This will cause inflation. It will lower the real value of ALL of the Chinese T-bills.

    China does not want this – it will make their investment in US debt worth less than when they bought it.

    3) The US ‘shrugs’ and says “Oh well, nice toilet paper you have there!’ – The US defaults and refuses to pay.

    Why? The US does not want to inflate the dollar by printing dollars to pay off China (they do not want to do option 1 or option 2).

    China would be devastated by this. This is the last thing China would want. This is what China fears – and wanted a guarantee from the US that this would not occur.

    This guarantee is exactly the same value as the IOU China holds – that is, worthless.

    Hope that helps!

  18. Good Morning or Afternoon All

    Topic #1. Joe Wilson apologized to Obama, he accepted. That’s good enough for me. He already apologized twice, why should he have to apologize on the senate floor. Time to move on.

    Topic #2. Government does not belong in the marriage business either. What two people decide to do, should not be a government interference or an okay on their part, whether gays decide they want to get married or not. Personally, I think it’s nobody’s business on what gay people do with their lives. I said it before, and I’ll say it again who are we to judge on the life style of others, for I would not want to be judged on my life style either. Would you? Let them live they way they want, they don’t bother me, they shouldn’t bother you.

    Topic #3. As for the recession being over, I don’t think so. Don’t know where Bernanke gets that idea, but I don’t see it.

  19. From: https://standupforamerica.wordpress.com/2009/09/15/an-official-denial-from-the-white-house/

    dcgrrl

    :
    Why do I want health coverage reform? I’ve said it before, but I have personally experienced a need for:
    1 – insurance for those with pre-existing conditions,
    2 – cost controls on COBRA
    3 – dental and vision wrapped in with other insurance: I see no reason to separate this out.

    Why should I have to pay for you?

    If you believe I should pay for what you need, I will demand that you pay for what I need! And, DCgrrl, I am a very needy guy.

    I know this is a philosophical response to your physical need.

    However, it is very important to understand that this is exactly why the economy is crashing and the nation is failing. It is not because I am ‘heartless and cruel’.

    It is because of the LAW of HUMAN ACTION.

    If you believe you can force others to pay for you, others with force you to pay for them.

    Simple human understanding states that when we can force others to pay for our wants and needs, our wants and needs increase by a very large multiple because “we” are no longer constrained by what “we” can provide for ourselves – we have ‘others’ we can coerce to provide for us.

    Thus, the consequence – “I” completely exhaust ‘your’ economic ability while “you” completely exhaust ‘my’ economic ability – we both crash.

    “Thou shalt not steal” has no qualifiers, including ‘need’.

    • Oh, BF, you won’t demand anything of her, because your own morals won’t allow it. Sorry. Don’t beat up on my left-leaning friends in my absence – I’ll be back for you soon enough.

      And thou shalt not steal absolutely has qualifiers. You just choose not to see them. How long would you need to go without eating before you found it acceptable to take from my table? (Though, really, all you would need to do is ask).

      And with that, I go back to work.. Wish me luck (it would be awesome if I can land my project.. otherwise I should probably start looking for a new job..)

      • Matt,

        Do not confuse the ME with the “me” – it is strategy to internalize the thinking about one’s position – and not make it ‘a bunch of people way out there that have no meaning to me’.

        And you hit the nail squarely, sir.

        There is never a need to steal, all one needs to do is ask! (or earn)

        If one steals – you are doing evil. Period.

        —-

        *Break a Leg*

    • 1. Insurance for those with pre-existing conditions.

      When will people realize that there is a reason pre-existing conditions get a higher insurance premium? If you already have a medical condition, the insurance company can be SURE that they will have to pay out to you. Why on Earth would they not charge you more? They have to at least cover their costs, right? Do you expect them to not try to make a profit from you because you have a medical condition? Honestly? If you want coverage for people like this, look to a charity, it is the only reasonable solution!

      2. Dental and Vision wrapped in with other insurance.

      I’m not sure if you mean you want these added for no additional price or not. I assume you do since it would be silly to argue for this type of coverage when you’re willing to buy it anyway. That being the case, I find your argument lacking. I’ll give you a reason why they should not be, THEY COST MORE FOR THE EMPLOYER! If you cannot afford new glasses, then you don’t get new glasses. By the way, a pair of new glasses can have a reasonable price. Drop the cable TV for a few months and you’ll have it all paid up!

      If you believe I should pay for what you need, I will demand that you pay for what I need! And, DCgrrl, I am a very needy guy.

      It even goes beyond this. If you think I SHOULD pay for what you need (I’ll add the qualifier “and can’t afford”) you may have a point, but this does not mean I MUST pay for what you need. I believe we have a moral obligation to help those who can’t help themselves, but that is much different from a lawful obligation to do so. And by the way, to help does not require government.

  20. This is a true story, but there is some questions on complete accuracy. I have read on report that the burglar was shot in the back, trying to flee.

    You’re sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

    One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you’re in trouble.

    In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered.. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

    “What kind of sentence will I get?” you ask.

    “Only ten-to-twelve years,” he replies, as if that’s nothing. “Behave yourself, and you’ll be out in seven.”

    The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you’re portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can’t find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both “victims” have been arrested numerous times. But the next day’s headline says it all: “Lovable Rogue Son Didn’t Deserve to Die.” The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

    Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he’ll probably win. The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you’ve been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

    A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven’t been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn’t take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.

    The judge sentences you to life in prison.

    This case really happened.

    On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term.

    How did it become a crime to defend one’s own life in the once great British Empire ?

    It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns.

    Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

    Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

    The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of “gun control”, demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

    Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

    For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.

    During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

    Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, “We cannot have people take the law into their own hands.”

    All of Martin’s neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

    When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn’t were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn’t comply. Police later bragged that they’d taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

    How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed.

  21. Mathius,

    You brought up E-Cigarettes the other day and I wanted to say Thank You! I hadn’t heard of them before but after you mentioned them I went and did some research. Have been smoking them since last Friday-have cut down to about 5 real
    cigarettes a day and that’s mainly because my batteries keep going dead-one problem with this product is the battery life. Need to go buy a couple more and I actually think I can stop inhaling smoke-that is if the FDA doesn’t outlaw them-So thank you very much for the info.

    • V.

      What brand did you get? I got a starter kit from a seller on Amazon, it works OK, but the starter cartridges have too strong a tobacco flavor, more cigar like, yuk!

      • I decided to get Luci because they sell them at the local mall-it’s costing me a little extra but I like the fact that I can just run there and pick stuff up if anything breaks and to buy cartridges. The atomizers have life time warranties and that’s one of the problems that people have been complaining about(atomizers burning up) you can also try all the different cartridges before you buy them which is nice. I think it does a pretty good job although it took me a couple days to figure out how to use it the right way-light longer draws-the first day my jaws hurt from trying to get more vapor-he he -but now with a little change I am satisfied.

    • Glad I could help. I hope they’re better for you than the real thing 🙂

  22. Heirs to Fortuyn?

    Muslim immigration and sclerotic welfare states push Europe right (sort of).
    Spring 2009

    When the New Left emerged in the 1960s, something else was born that would mark American elites for decades thereafter: the notion that social-democratic Western Europe was far superior to the capitalist United States. Pity the poor American professor whose every junket to a European academic conference was marred by his continental colleagues’ sneering over cocktails about his nation’s shame du jour—Vietnam, Watergate, Iraq—or about American racism, capital punishment, or health care. For much of the American Left, Western Europe was nothing less than an abstract symbol of progressive utopia.

    This rosy view was never accurate, of course.

    Europe’s socialized health care was blighted by outrageous (and sometimes deadly) waiting lists and rationing, to name just one example. To name another: Timbro, a Swedish think tank, found in 2004 that Sweden was poorer than all but five U.S. states and Denmark poorer than all but nine. But in recent years, something has happened to complicate the Left’s fanciful picture even further: Western European voters’ widespread reaction against social democracy.

    The shift has two principal, and related, causes. The more significant one is that over the last three decades, social-democratic Europe’s political, cultural, academic, and media elites have presided over, and vigorously defended, a vast wave of immigration from the Muslim world—the largest such influx in human history. According to Foreign Affairs, Muslims in Western Europe numbered between 15 and 20 million in 2005. One source estimates that Britain’s Muslim population rose from about 82,000 in 1961 to 553,000 in 1981 to 2 million in 2000—a demographic change roughly representative of Western Europe as a whole during that period. According to the London Times, the number of Muslims in the U.K. climbed by half a million between 2004 and 2008 alone—a rate of growth ten times that of the rest of that country’s population.

    http://redstatepatriot.com/

  23. Gold: $1017

  24. BF

    You say you’re against the death penalty, that it is evil, right. Then what about those who kill somebody, say like during a robbery, or how about the Manson group when they killed Sharon Tate, her unborn baby, and all those other people. Then proceeded to kill again the next night? Are you saying you’d rather they spent the rest of their rotten lives in prison, instead of being put to death? WHY? You would rather have to pay for them with your taxes in feeding, clothing, bedding, and what ever else instead of being pout to death? Sorry, BF, but that’s where you and I differ. I do believe in the death penalty, and it’s not some sort of revenge either, like you might think it is. I believe we had this very talk a few weeks ago, and if I recall, I think we had a stalemate.

    • Top of the seventh,
      Judy’s at bat,
      Flag pitches, curve ball, a lot of movement on that one
      Judy swings, its a hit! Going, going, its out of here!

      Flag, you are against the government forcing us to pay taxes. So how does his life incarceration get paid for?

      • Hi LOI

        Exactly. Thank you very much.

      • I think the ornery cuss just wants to argue. I don’t see how he defends it, especially with how he tried to with me.

      • Come on people! Don’t you know flag better than that by now? He doesn’t think he should be incarcerated either. He thinks he should be left on the street, and eventually he’ll try to shoot the wrong person and get himself dead by perfectly legitimate means.

        • Richmond Spitfire says:

          Hi Jennie…

          Actually, I have (and had) hopes that a Jeffrey Dahmer would have been pulled on the @sshole. That way, no decent person would have to dirty their hands or soul.

          Best Regards,
          RS

      • See reply below #29 and #31

    • Judy

      If you want to defend the death penalty you must do so on moral and justice grounds.

      Don’t fall into the trap of using “cost to feed them for life” as an excuse, because it is just a rationalization.

      Once you accept cost as a criteria then you authorize its use for such things as “deciding who gets health care”.

      If the death penatly it not revenge then what is it?

      • Justice?

        • Preventive maintenance

        • Yes Esom:

          Can you defend the death penalty on the basis of justice?

          • JAC. The only way Justice could be any better for a cold-blooded killer like that is if they turned them over to the families of the ones they killed.

            Had my family been killed by them that is all I would ask for. And yeah. I am cold blooded as hell when it comes to that crap. I have no mercy in me for them. They can maybe get mercy from God when they see him. Because they would most definitely be seeing him. Eventually.

            • I am not talking, asking, nor proposing “mercy”.

              But since you brought it up, what is “mercy”?

              Now, what is “justice”?

              Given your opening, how can you have justice that is “any better” with one option vs another? Isn’t justice a binary concept, you have it or you don’t?

              Now, is it “just” to kill someone who is guilty of murder?

              I assume you will say HELL YES.

              Now, explain why you think it is just. Use your moral foundation, core principles, to defend and explain.

      • Oh Please JAC

        What moral grounds did these people have when they murdered in cold blood? You tell me that, okay. And don’t go putting in the cost criteria then tell me I am deciding who gets health care. That’s bull. Naturally anybody in prison gets health care, and yes we pay for that too, I know. The death penalty is not revenge, it’s justice. BTW, JAC, I’m not falling for any trap as y ou put it.

        • read my comment again.

          Your response is far off base, except your mention of “justice”.

          Now express how “justice” fits with the concept of “death penalty”.

          • You didn’t answer my question either JAC. What morals did these people have when they committed cold blooded murder? There should not have to be any morals in using the death penalty. The death penalty has been around for a long time JAC, and I’m sure when it was first invented, they didn’t think to take into consideration if it was a moral thing or not.

            • I’m sure they didn’t either. They were SAVAGES.

              But this has nothing to do with my comment and question. Neither does your question regarding the murderer’s morality.

              And I asked first so you must answer first.

              You are still not reading my words as I wrote them. Stop projecting your assumptions onto my words. Once again:

              “If you want to defend the death penalty you must do so on moral and justice grounds.”

              If you don’t justify killing someone on moral grounds then what grounds do you use? Because the cave man invented it? Sorry, but not good enough for me.

              Defend your position on the basis of morality and/or justice. If you can’t you have no defense that is rational.

              • JAC. Those are my beliefs, and no, I can’t explain the morality of the death penalty. What’s with everything having to be explained with morals all the time. Can’t you or anybody else just accept what I said, and that it is what and how I believe, and let it go with that.

                Why must there constantly be a moral issue with everything?

              • Because if there isn’t a moral basis then we are nothing but SAVAGES destined for self destruction.

              • Sorry JAC, but you’re not going to change my mind on how or what I believe.

              • Show me where I tried to change your mind about what you believe.

                All I have asked is that you defend it on rational grounds.

                That requires using justice and morality and perhaps ethics.

                But “just because” is not rational and will eventually destroy you.

              • Judy:

                Reposting response here to reduce squishy.

                Show me where I tried to change your mind about what you believe.

                All I have asked is that you defend it on rational grounds.

                That requires using justice and morality and perhaps ethics.

                But “just because” is not rational and will eventually destroy you.

              • JAC I didn’t say you are trying to change my mind. I said no matter what you or anybody else says about how and what I belive in will not chnage my mind.

              • What JAC said
                Then you have declared yourself a “closed minded” person.

                Is that really who you are?
                _______________________________________________________________-

                Why, because of what I believe in, and now I’m a closed minded person?

              • Judy:

                Then you have declared yourself a “closed minded” person.

                Is that really who you are?

              • Judy:

                YOUR declaration is your statement not mine.

                You said “I said no matter what you or anybody else says about how and what I belive in will not chnage my mind.”

                That is the definition of a closed mind.

                I ask again, “Is that really who you are?”

                Being “closed minded” has nothing to do with the opinion you hold or “what” you believe. It has everything to do with a willingness to consider facts, logic and reason to validate your position or to change if needed. In short, it is all about “how” or “why” you believe what you do.

                To declare in advance that you will not change your mind no matter what information is provided now or in the future is a description of a closed mind.

      • Justice. Crimes have penalties

        • Expand on the concept of justice.

          • Wikipedia
            Justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, fairness, religion and/or equity.

            The law of justice defines crimes and their punishment. You do X then Y happens. If you are looking for mercy talk to god.

            • Bama

              I am not looking for anything other than a rational defense of the death penalty.

              If we are trying to build a MORAL society then the death penalty must be defended on the basis of justice and morality.

              So far all I’ve gotten is “it’s not right to pay their upkeep” and “death penalties were invented a long time ago”.

              Oh, the other is “preventitive maintenance” but we all know that doesn’t wash as a defense.

              Don’t know about you but I find the Wiki definition less than helpful. Of course philosophers have been wrestling with the concept of justice for centuries.

              Hope you are well
              JAC

        • Bama

          Crimes have penalties = a statement of revenge

          Crimes require restitution = a statement of justice

    • Hello Judy. Here are some thoughts.

      Thou shalt not kill.

      Simple enough.

      Are you saying you’d rather they spent the rest of their rotten lives in prison, instead of being put to death? WHY? You would rather have to pay for them with your taxes in feeding, clothing, bedding, and what ever else instead of being pout to death?

      I believe a human life is invalueable. That is, I believe a human life is of infinite value. That being the case, there is no question of spending money to spare their lives. Nothing can compare to the miracle of life!

      That being said, I believe that prison should not be a hotel stay. It should be work for 40 hours a week, whatever that may be. Try to get them to be somewhat productive to society as an effort to repay their debts.

      What moral grounds did these people have when they murdered in cold blood? You tell me that, okay.

      It is folly to say someone disobeyed a moral code when they killed someone, then use that as an excuse to kill them. Don’t sink to their level, as it were.

      The death penalty is not revenge, it’s justice.

      This is your most compelling argument, IMO. I quoted a commandment above, but I think a better translation would be, thou shalt not murder. Big difference! I simply cannot get over the fact that a life is being taken, no matter how horrid the being.

      With all of this for thought, I am still on the fence. I think at best, the death penalty should be used only on the MOST EXTREME cases. Even then, I am not completely sold.

      I look forward to your thoughts.

      • Hi JB

        Sorry, I stick with what I said. If someone commits cold blooded murder, why should they be given the opportunity to live the rest of their lives in prison? If it’s a bank robber, yeah,as long as he didn’t kill anybody. But a cold blooded murderer, do you really think they can be rehabilitated, and sent back into the world? Maybe, and then maybe not. How many murderers have been released, then only to commit that crime again?

        There are some who have said, if released, they would most likely commit another murder. Do they have any remorse for what they have done? Some maybe yes, but I think for the most part, they don’t.

        Did you happen to hear Charles Manson say, he had no remorse, I did, and if I recall, he said he would kill again given that chance. I remember seeing it on some program here a while back. Can’t remember which though. How come some of his group were released, but some not. How about Susan Atkins who went up for parole, but only to be denied, even though she is dying from cancer?

        If life is invaluable, then why is there so many murders? Okay, let me ask you this then. I am against abortion, but yet for the death penalty, Am I a morally wrong person with that belief? If I am, Why.

        Those are my thoughts, and my opinion, and I don’t expect anybody to agree with me. Sorry if they don’t abide with everybody else’s thinking or morals here.

        • But a cold blooded murderer, do you really think they can be rehabilitated, and sent back into the world?

          Absolutely not. They have given up their right to walk free. They should be held in prison for the rest of their lives because they are dangerous to other people and themselves.

          If life is invaluable, then why is there so many murders?

          Because not everyone believes as I do. The fact that they murder does not compel me to do the same. That being said, I have made the distinction that the death penalty may not be murder, per se, but I’m on the fence.

          I am against abortion, but yet for the death penalty, Am I a morally wrong person with that belief?

          I don’t think so. You make the distinction between taking an innocent life and taking a guilty life. That is an altogether moral debate. I simply cannot justify taking a life with the actions of a person, no matter how wrong.

          Sorry if they don’t abide with everybody else’s thinking or morals here.

          You have nothing to apologize for! There can be no debate without contradicting opinions. And I do value yours! 🙂

  25. Okay, BF

    This is exactly what I’m talking about. He killed 10 people just for the heck of it, and you think he shouldn’t be put to death for that. Please tell me I’m wrong, even though I think I’m right.
    ______________________________________________________

    John Allen Muhammad

    RICHMOND, Va. — A judge has set a Nov. 10 execution date for John Allen Muhammad, mastermind of the 2002 sniper attacks in the Washington, D.C., area.

    The attorney general’s office had requested a Nov. 9 execution. But Muhammad’s attorney Jonathan Sheldon says Prince William County Circuit Judge Mary Grace O’Brien delayed it one day.

    That’s because Nov. 9 is a Monday and they want government offices to be open the day before in case of last-minute court action.

    Muhammad was sentenced to death for the slaying of Dean Meyers, one of 10 people shot to death during a 2002 rampage that terrorized the Washington, D.C., area.

    Sheldon says Muhammad will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court and ask the governor for clemency.

    • “Sheldon says Muhammad will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court and ask the governor for clemency.”

      WHAT??????

      Wait a minute!!!!

      I thought those islamic murderers were proud to go to heaven for killing the infidels!!!!! He can’t get his 72 virgins without us killing him first. Of course that part might sting just a little, but hey! 72 VIRGINS Muhammad!

      • Well, I stick to my guns on this one. ( No pun intended here. ) That’s the problem with the justice system, they get too many appeals. Maybe one, and if it still comes out with the same verdict, then, that’s it, done, finito, no more appeals, Capich. Sorry, I don’t know how to spell that, and I’m married to an Italian too. Look how long people have been sitting on death row, 15, 20, sometimes 25 years, for what, waiting to be put to death, At that rate, they’re probably too old then.

        How many appeals did O.J. have? He was found not guilty, but then found guilty of wrongful death. Excuse me, but what’s the difference. He never did find the real killers, did he. Hard to find them on the golf course, don’t ya think?

        • I’m with you Judy. Maybe back before DNA there could be some doubt about some. But that is another issue anyway.

          These guys were just tickled as hell with themselves to begin with. Looks like at least one ain’t so tickled anymore.

          I am interested to see how de’ Flag would handle a Capital Murder.

  26. Alert in Michigan says:

    I am finishing reading “The Great Depression Ahead” by Harry S. Dent Jr. I believe someone(s) here recommended this book and/or his writing. The book is largely about how a collection of economic, social, and other cycles are playing out in the world today and how this will impact the next decades. Is anyone familiar with the book? If so, what are your thoughts? (Agree? Disagree? Why?)

    • No, I haven’t read it – I see if the Library has a copy.

      I’ve read Dent before so I expect the book to be fairly accurate in the conclusions.

      We will have to suffer a Great Depression.

      The only other alternative is hyper-inflation. The Western world will not survive that.

    • The cyclical business sounds similar with what I’ve been reading in ‘The Fourth Turning’ by Wm Strauss and Neil Howe. Have you read that? c

      • Alert in Michigan says:

        No, I haven’t.

        • My library has 2 copies of the Dent book, I’ll grab a copy tomorrow. You’ve got my curiousity going… the historical cycle fits my interest lately. thanks – c

          • Alert in Michigan says:

            You’re welcome. Actually, in a way the book has been very reassuring. Much of the economic stuff I’ve read lately basically says “The World As We know It Is Ending.” But Dent (& co.) says we’re in a series of downward cycles that are all landing at the same time. And Dent would agree with BF that we have to go through another Great Depression. So, books on the 1930’s are now on my list to read…

  27. This death penalty talk is quite humorous. We, as a supposedly free people, would never be having this discusion if not for the bleeding heart gun control nutjobs, who over the centuries has made carrying a gun politically incorrect if not illegal. This IS the real problem, not what morals one may have. How many violent crimes would occur if EVERYONE were armed (and trained)?

    My idea of a death penalty is simple, break in my home, you die for that mistake. Hurt my family in anyway (in the commission of a moral crime), you once again have to deal with the same penalty. I will not kill anyone, unless they choose that path.

    I hereby refer to this cade as the “G-Man Penalty”. And yes, for those of you who would like to know, I believe that payback should be a total bitch.

    PEACE to All!

    G!

    • Despicable Illusion lives by that code! But it won’t be out of anger, when I kill a poisonous snake, I do not feel hate or anger, regret maybe.

      • LOI, Regret is what one feels after a mistake. Killing a snake to protect yourself and your family is puposeful, and no regret should exist. Regret will only make you weak minded, when you need your mind the most!

        Hope you are doing well today my friend!

        G!

    • Hey G

      Thank you for you post. I just get tired of always having to come up with morals for everything. I don’t believe we are a savage people in believing in the death penalty. If it was so immorally wrong, then why do we have it? Nobody is going to change my mind on how I believe, or what I believe in.

      Hope you’re doing good today.

      Judy

      • Hi Judy

        I’m well today. I’ve been following all day. What I asked myself was based on my post. Would I feel OK with penalizing the savage during the act of a crime, or be a disassociated citizen making that decision sitting on a jury? I wrote my answer.

        I’ll answer your email later!

        G!

        • G I agree with what you said too. Someone tries to break into our house, and they will be met with a barrel in their face.

          We were told be the cops when they came here for some other reason, and they said, if someone breaks into your home, and you shoot them, you had better make sure they don’t crawl out the door, then you can be chrged with a felony.

          If they do crawl out, drag them back in, so you don’t get charged. Now mind you, that coming from the RPD.

          • Judy,

            (they will be met with a barrel in their face.)

            Never let them see the weapon, just shoot.

            (you had better make sure they don’t crawl out the door, then you can be chrged with a felony)

            They are wrong, the blood trail would vindicate you. And if your still worried, unload the gun on them, they won’t be crawling anywhere!

            G!

  28. Life of Illusion

    Flag,

    You seem to be a part of our society, and a resident of the US. Where is the moral justification for denying this man his freedom?

    Clear and Present Danger.

    He has shown he is dangerous – he needs to be isolated.

    However, that does not justify killing him.

    Reason #1 against Death Penalty: Innocent people are killed. No matter how sure one is, mistakes are will happen.

    Is there morally any difference in taking his life than keeping him in prison for life?

    Yes. You cannot correct death, but you can free the innocent.

    Either way, we have denied him his life.

    No. You are merely interchanging multiple definitions of “life” to suit your argument – which is a fallacy.

    “We” have denied him freedom of choice. He is still alive.

    And I object to having to pay to keep him fed, housed and rendered free medical treatment.

    Fair objection.

    He, like you, needs to earn his keep.

    Further, servitude for his crime could be considered as well (and is Constitutional, for those that care about the such things).

    He chose to live here, knowing our laws allow us to take his life for certain crimes.

    Whether the law (little “L”) legalized evil or not is no argument against me.

    He chose to commit those crimes. His death is as much his choice as it is our societies.

    That is a statement worthy of any Statist – you chose to break law. Therefore the law is righteous in doing evil.

    The consequences of killing innocent people is infinitely too high to justify the risk of the Death Penalty.

    • BF & LOI:

      “Either way, we have denied him his life.” (LOI)

      “No. You are merely interchanging multiple definitions of “life” to suit your argument – which is a fallacy. “We” have denied him freedom of choice. He is still alive.” (BF)

      LOI is in fact using the “definition” of life as was used in the defense of liberty and freedom. It is the definition that was used by our founders when they included the term in the Dec. of Indep. It includes much more than just the biological function of being alive.

      His definition is legitimate and applicable to this issue as it is others. It is not a fallacy. The argument for or against the “death penalty” should hold regardless of which definition is used.

      But if we are going to use the expanded meaning in our defense of liberty and freedom then we should stick with it in this case.

      The flaw was not in LOI’s definition of life but in your argument against it. You see, if we use LOI’s definition then we have in fact “denied his life” by imprisoning him for life. Once his life has been denied then on what basis do we justify his death?

      LOI would have actually been in a better defensive position using your definition, in my humble opinion. Because the only way to deny his life would be to kill him.

      Look at that. Two change ups simultaneously to two different hitters. Now lets see you two hit them out of the park.

      • JAC,

        No question you are a major leaguer. Think I will bunt and try to steal home. One problem is I am not trying to win an argument, but to express my thoughts on the issue.

        We advocate being responsible here. Wreck someones car, pay to have it fixed. Kill someone by accident, you will be judged. You were DUI at the time, prison.

        But when we get to heinous crimes, as a member or guest of our society, we have decided on rules that the only payment is with their life. Those who commit such a crime willingly have knowingly given up their right to live.

        • And, therefore, you will surrender your life if, by your insistence of revenge, a mistake is made?

      • I am specific about the definition of life, for reasons you demonstrate.

        I do not criticize Jefferson et al for adding poetry to their defense of freedom. If challenged, they would most certainly define life to be life vs. loss of choice, and restate their position likewise.

        • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

          Or it could be that they meant exactly what they said in that poetry, and would not change their postition one bit… the world may never know 🙂

    • Flag,

      Did you just re-institute slavery?

      If you are going to require him to work and pay of his debt, who will have the job of watching him? A violent criminal would have to be kept where the public is safe, so its still prison. And it still has to be paid for.

      How will you pay for his being kept locked up for life?
      Full medical and HBO?

      • I am amazed that people demand a return to the Constitution have no idea what the Constitution says.

        Amendment 13 – Slavery Abolished.

        1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

        2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation

    • I don’t have a lot of time right now but I would like to add that one of my problems with the death penalty is that another human being has to kill this defenseless person-I understand that they do things so that no one is sure who actually killed the person but still it seems to put a heavy burden on another human being.

  29. Not as serious as the death penalty – but in a trash bin???

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32863398/ns/us_news-weird_news/?GT1=43001

    • Romance is not dead!!

      Well, I was raised in a sophisticated kind of style.
      Yeah, my taste in music and women drove my folks half wild.
      Mom and Dad had a plan for me,
      It was debutantes and er-symphonies,
      But I like my music; I like my women wild.
      Yeah, an’ I like my women just a little on the trashy side,
      When they wear their clothes too tight and their hair is dyed.
      Too much lipstick an’ er too much rouge,
      Gets me excited, leaves me feeling confused.
      An’ I like my women just a little on the trashy side.
      Shoulda seen the looks on the faces of my Dad and Mom,
      When I showed up at the door with a date for the senior prom.
      They said: Well, pardon us son, she ain’t no kid.
      That’s a cocktail waitress in a Dolly Parton wig.
      I said: I know it dad, ain’t she cool, that’s the kind I dig.
      Yeah, an’ I like my women just a little on the trashy side,
      When they wear their clothes too tight and their hair is dyed.
      Too much lipstick an’ er too much rouge,
      Gets me excited, leaves me feeling confused.
      An’ I like my women just a little on the trashy side.
      Instrumental break.
      I like ’em sweet, I like ’em with a heart of gold.
      Yeah an’ I like ’em brassy, I like ’em brazen and bold.
      Well, they say that opposites attract, well, I don’t agree
      I want a woman just as tacky as me.
      Yeah, I like my women just a little on the trashy side.
      Yeah, an’ I like my women just a little on the trashy side,
      When they wear their clothes too tight and their hair is dyed.
      Too much lipstick an’ er too much rouge,
      Gets me excited, leaves me feeling confused.
      An’ I like my women just a little on the trashy side.
      Yeah, I like my women an’ I like ’em on the trashy side.

      Confederate Railroad Trashy Women lyrics

  30. JudyS.

    BF You say you’re against the death penalty, that it is evil, right. Then what about those who kill somebody, say like during a robbery, or how about the Manson group when they killed Sharon Tate, her unborn baby, and all those other people. Then proceeded to kill again the next night?

    Are you saying you’d rather they spent the rest of their rotten lives in prison, instead of being put to death?

    WHY?

    Because doing evil does not resolve evil.

    The risk of killing innocent people is too high.

    As I said to Esom –

    Jesus was killed by Capital Punishment – legal and all.

    You would rather have to pay for them with your taxes in feeding, clothing, bedding, and what ever else instead of being pout to death?

    No, to taxes.

    No, to paying for them. (Heck, I don’t want to pay FOR YOU, and you’re not evil!)

    No, to killing them.

    So, what’s left?

    How about them earning their keep (just like you do).

    How about them compensating their victims? (Something is better than nothing).

    Sorry, BF, but that’s where you and I differ. I do believe in the death penalty, and it’s not some sort of revenge either, like you might think it is. I believe we had this very talk a few weeks ago, and if I recall, I think we had a stalemate

    Doing evil upon men will never end evil upon men.

    • BF

      And just how could they compensate their victims? By doing counseling, repenting, say they are sorry, What? I thought they earn their keep already by doing work in the prison, but how is that going to make any difference? Deduct their pay for their food, bedding, clothing, health care.

      The death penalty is legal BF, if it wasn’t, they wouldn’t have it, or use it.

      How do you suppose the victims families feel when they hear these murderers just get life? Do you not think that they are disappointed because the murderer didn’t get the death penalty. I know, it doesn’t bring back that person, I understand that, But, what more can I say. I feel the way I do, and I think the way I do, and always have. That’s just me I guess, and I can’t apologize for that. Other than that, I am a sweet loving person who gets along with most people.

      • Judy S.

        BF And just how could they compensate their victims?

        Transfers of wealth – that is the way we compensate for loss.

        If I destroy one of your son’s 15 vehicles, how do I compensate your son?

        I pay him money.

        By doing counseling, repenting, say they are sorry, What? I thought they earn their keep already by doing work in the prison, but how is that going to make any difference?

        Do not confuse an immoral system of (in)justice of today’s model for one of true justice.

        Reread the above paragraph.

  31. Our campaigner-in-chief put on a good one yesterday in Pittsburgh. Skim through the transcript of the speech and the audience response. Truly makes you ill.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/09/barack-obama-afl-cio-speech-text.html

  32. EsomHillGazette

    And I bear no responsibility whatsoever for him dying. He took his own life when he shot those REALLY innocent people for the fun of watching them hit the ground.

    Their deaths does not supply enough justification for innocent people being put to death by the State.

    Doing evil does not stop evil.

    And as far as Jesus goes. That was a really innocent man who did absolutely nothing wrong but get on the wrong side of authority. It quite frankly offends my christianity when you try to compare Jesus to a serial killer.

    You miss my point – and I charge you with doing so on purpose.

    If you agree to the Death Penalty – you also agree to killing innocent people who are legally put to death.

    Such agreement is totally contrary to the teaching of the Christ.

    For one thing Jesus went willingly to the cross.

    He did not.

    He did not go up to the Centurion and say “Kill me on a cross”.

    He defended himself in court. He lost.

    I am quite sure God doesn’t mind the state killing poor old Muhammad.

    God does not judge humans. He has no judgment on Muhammad for Muhammad is as much a child of God as you are.

    We do fine enough job judging ourselves all by ourselves.

    After all BF, and this really is not a joke, it’s not God’s not going to do worse to him when he goes to the upper room

    Muhammad lives under the exact same Laws of the Universe as you do. He is and will continue to be treated in exactly the same manner by those Laws are you are.

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Sorry BF,

      Jesus knew he trial was a farce, and he knew what the outcome would be. He did go willingly to the cross.

      He also said (essentially), “Hey God, if there is any other way out of this, you let me know, ok?”, but he knew that there was not, and did what he had to do.

      Christians believe that Jesus had the power to completely avoid his fate if he had wanted to, but in spite of this, he accepted his fate willingly, so your argument does not hold.

      • According to the writings, the trial was not a farce.

        He did not go “willingly” to the cross. He defended himself in court. He was imprisoned. He did not ‘volunteer’.

        He did not have the ‘power’ to avoid his fate by supernatural means. He was subject to the exact same Laws of the Universe as you are. His Temptations by Satan discusses this.

        What other people believe in what they read (shrug)

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Now, I will say, if you are arguing from the point of view that Jesus was merely human and we are all equally “Children of God”, then your argument does hold, but contradicts Christian belief (which is fine, but you should have made that more clear).

      • Christian belief?

        Which one?

        The gospels of the disciples or the gospels of Paul and the First Council of Nicea?

  33. Richmond Spitfire says:

    More evidence to JAC’s point yesterday about people behaving oddly and inappropriately….

    **************************

    Woman Arrested After She Allegedly Spanked Stranger’s 2-Year-Old in Store
    Wednesday, September 16, 2009

    CINCINNATI — Police say a woman has been arrested for allegedly spanking another person’s 2-year-old son in a Cincinnati store.

    Gloria Ballard was due in a Hamilton County on Wednesday to face an assault charge.

    Cincinnati police say the toddler said something that apparently annoyed Ballard inside a Salvation Army store on Tuesday. Police say she then told the boy’s mother she didn’t know how to take care of her son, put him over her knee, and spanked him three times.

    Police say the two women didn’t know each other and that the 44-year-old Ballard wasn’t given permission to touch the child.

    There was no attorney listed for Ballard.

    ***********************

    Best Regards to all,
    RS

    • My wife told me this morning about two employees at work who have suddenly started acting in an obnoxious and irritating manner.

      Going on about 2 weeks now.

      Got so bad at a recent meeting that some folks left before it was over.

      So what is it that’s in the air?

      Didn’t get a chance this morning so, Big Hug to you RS,
      JAC

    • HI RS

      She interfered when she shouldn’t have. It was NOT her place to spank some one else’s child, and I don’t care what the child said. Sorry, but if that happened to me, I would have told that woman where to go, and that it was non of her business. But, my first thought, would have been to punch her in the nose. I wouldn’t have, because I wouldn’t have wanted a law suit against me.

      • Richmond Spitfire says:

        Hey Judy,

        From a legal perspective, I don’t think you would get in trouble (as in fines/jail time) for assault by protecting (i.e. whomping the #itch’s @ss) your child from a person who is obviously abusing the child. Please note that you would need to emphasize that the @ss whomping was done purely to stop the abuse, and that after the evil woman fell to the floor, clutching her belly in agony and trying to gather up all the hair so that she can have a wig made to cover the huge bald spot she now has that you no longer had any physical contact with her (except maybe to hold her still until Police arrived.

        Now, from a tort perspective, I’m not so sure …Could you be persecuted (yes, in this case persecuted) for protecting your child in a Civil Lawsuit…? My logic tells me NO (the person was abusing the woman’s child — she was trying to stop the abuse). But say the perpetrator was permanently injured during the @ss whomping — with today’s liberal court system, I think that the perpretrator would quite possibly win a settlement for pain, suffering and medical bills EVEN THOUGH SHE BROKE THE LAW BY ABUSING A CHILD.

        Sucks, doesn’t it…

        Best Regards,
        RS

  34. To All Death Penalty Advocates

    (1) You are advocating killing people who murder innocent people.

    (2) Capital Punishment kills innocent people.

    Therefore, as advocates of Capital Punishment, you are co-conspirators to this murder of innocent people and are culpable.

    Since you’ve agreed (1) that people who kill innocent people should die, which one of you is willing to give up your life for the mistakes?

    • Why should we give up our life for what they have done?

      • Executions of innocent people

        There are numerous persons who have been heralded as innocent victims of the death penalty, persons who, if their cases were able to be reopened, may be declared innocent or at least not guilty due to lack of solid evidence [10].

        Cameron Todd Willingham was executed by lethal injection on February 17, 2004 by the state of Texas for murdering his three daughters—two-year-old Amber Louise Kuykendall and one-year-old twins Karmon Diane Willingham and Kameron Marie Willingham— in 1991 by setting his house on fire. In 2009, a report conducted by Dr. Craig Beyler, hired by the Texas Forensic Science Commission to review the case, found that “a finding of arson could not be sustained”.

        Since you advocated for his killing, and he is innocent – by your own demand, you are guilty of capital murder.

        Are you willing to put yourself up for the punishment you have demanded upon others?

        • Okay, okay, I see your point. I know there have been people who have been wrongly executed, and I do feel bad when I hear that. That’s like that movie with Clint Eastwood, Absolute Power, when that guy was suppose to have killed that girl, and he didn’t, he was innocent, and that was a true story also.

          Well, I hope you’re happy with yourself now, because you really got me thinking about things here BF. But it’s hard to really know who’s innocent and who isn’t, even with all the evidence that they collect, either way can still go, you know.

          • That’s my self-appointed job – make you think. 🙂

          • But, I still believe in the death penalty. If a person commits a horrendous crime, and all evidence points to him, then I believe he should be put to death. But in all reality, you know it will be years before anything would happen anyway.

            So, in a sense,they are still serving a life sentence, are they not, even though they are on death row.

            • As long as you believe in the Death Penalty, you are guilty if the innocent die.

              I ask again, are you willing to put yourself on Death Row if an innocent dies?

        • I suppose my basic belief in the death penalty would surely cause me no end of moral dilemma, but since I am against it for that very reason Black Flag demonstrates (human error in convictions) perhaps a moot point.

          Must be the influence of a movie I saw when I was a kid, “I Want to Live” with Susan Hayward.

    • You are assuming that we do not change the threshold for assigning Captial Punishment.

      The dude in question who started this conversation is GUILTY of his crimes of murder.

      I know of nobody, including him, who disputes this.

      Am I wrong on this little point?

      • There are still cases of innocent people admitting guilt – therefore, simply because an innocent man declares himself guilty is still insufficient evidence to kill him.

        Earl Washington was nine days away from execution for a rape and murder he didn’t commit. He eventually served 18 years before DNA testing cleared him and implicated a convicted rapist. Now waging a civil suit expected to end soon in Charlottesville, Washington and his plight have put a spotlight on false confessions, an emerging topic on the national scene and one that a few folks believe may have caused some local teens to be jailed indefinitely.

        Why would someone confess to a crime he didn’t commit? It happens more often than you’d think.

        http://www.readthehook.com/Stories/2006/05/04/newswashington.aspx

        • I agree, that is why confession is not by itself adequate. For any crime.

          But we must also recognize, that with the exception of the mentally ill, all such confessions I have ever studied can be found to result from coersive interrogation and manipulation by overzealous prosecutors.

          In fact many of the “found guilty” are equally victim to this same evil. If we can not find a way to root out such we will be lost, even under your system. Because to even shun someone based on a Lie is just as evil, for it is the use of force on an innocent.

          The standard of the law should be to seek TRUTH and JUSTICE. The second requires the first. If our legal profession is committed to truth and not “clients” or “defense of the system” perhaps we will get better results.

          As I have said before, there is much more to the task than just fixing the Constitution.

          • So true, wise friend.

            Our current system derives from this theory.

            “We cannot know the truth because someone claims the truth.

            The truth must come from conflict – pit one side against the other in a fight – winner take all – will bring the best of both to the surface. The “adversarial method”. “God will chose the truth” (Same theory in ‘dueling’ – God will guide the truthful bullet…)

            It honestly admits that it is not perfect – that evil and lies, will occasionally, win.

            Do we know of a better theory?

  35. For those interested:

    CIA Secret Experiments

    During the Cold War the CIA exposed unknowing individuals to biological agents, hallucinogenic drugs and psychological techniques aimed at mastering mind control.

    National Geographic 9 PM Eastern Time

  36. Dee

    Great question, Dee!

    BF, If not a single vote had been cast last election, what would the result be now? We would be stuck with the incumbents, and if so what would that solve

    NO!

    The government would have suffered what is called:

    A crisis of legitimacy

    A government exists on two absolute requirements:

    (1) monopoly on initiation of violence; which is required to enforce edicts and obtain funds via taxation

    (2) legitimacy to do so

    If it failed (2), the government – all of it – collapses.

    • BF,

      I have a feeling that you would have to be the one to go to DC and let them know they are no longer legitimate.

      I just don’t see them collapsing, and going away. I see them using it as an excuse to stay put.

      • Dee

        Have you ever asked yourself…

        – Why do “they” bother will elections then, if -by your own admission- they wouldn’t go away?

        – Why does N. Korea have elections?

        – Why Hitler, every four years – without fail and never late, from 1933 to 1945, go back to the Reichstag to renew the “Enabling Act” and get voted back in as “Leader”?

        …. if legitimacy does not matter?

  37. Too morbid today. What sadist brought all this up? Me, well fudge.

    Water Displacement #40. The product began from a search for a rust
    preventative solvent and degreaser to protect missile parts. WD-40 was created in 1953 by three technicians at the San Diego Rocket Chemical Company. Its name comes from the project that was to find a “water displacement” compound. They were successful with the fortieth formulation, thus WD-40. The Corvair Company bought it in bulk to protect their atlas missile parts.

    The workers were so pleased with the product, they began smuggling (also known as “shrinkage” or “stealing”) it out to use at home. The executives decided there might be a consumer market for it and put it in aerosol cans. The rest, as they say, is history.

    It is a carefully guarded recipe known only to four people. Only one of them is the “brew master.” There are about 2.5 million gallons of the stuff manufactured each year. It gets its distinctive smell from a! fragr a nce that is added to the brew.

    Ken East (one of the original founders) says there is nothing in WD-40 that would hurt you.

    When you read the “shower door” part, try it. It’s the first thing that has ever cleaned that spotty shower door. If yours is plastic, it works just as well as glass. It’s a miracle!

    Then try it on your stovetop… Voila! It’s now shinier than it’s ever been. You’ll be amazed.

    Here are some of the uses:

    Protects silver from tarnishing.

    Cleans and lubricates guitar strings.

    Gives floors that ‘just-waxed’ sheen without making it slippery.

    Keeps flies off cows.

    Restores and cleans chalkboard s.

    Removes lipstick stains.

    Loosens stubborn zippers.

    Untangles jewelry chains.

    Removes stains from stainless steel sinks.

    Removes dirt and gri! me from the barbecue grill.

    Keeps ceramic/terra cotta! garden pots from oxidizing.

    Removes tomato stains from clothing.

    Keeps glass shower doors free of water spots.

    Camouflages scratches in ceramic and marble floors.

    Keeps scissors working smoothly.

    Lubricates noisy door hinges on vehicles and doors in homes.

    Gives a children’s play gym slide a shine for a super fast slide.

    Lubricates gear shift and mower deck lever for ease of handling on riding mowers.

    Rids kids rocking chairs and swings of squeaky noises.

    Lubricates tracks in sticking home windows and makes them easier to open.

    Spraying an umbrella stem makes it easier to open and close.

    Restores and cleans padded leather dashboards in vehicles, as well as vinyl bumpers.

    Restores and cleans roof racks on vehicles.

    Lubricates and stops squeaks in electric fans.

    Lubricates wheel sprockets on tricycles, wagons, and bicycles for easy handling! .

    Lubricates fan belts on washers and dryers and keeps them running smoothly.

    Keeps rust from forming on saws and saw blades, and other tools.

    Removes splattered grease on stove.

    Keeps bathroom mirror from fogging.

    Lubricates prosthetic limbs.

    Keeps pigeons off the balcony (they hate the smell).

    Removes all traces of duct tape.

    Folks even spray it on their arms, hands, and knees to relieve arthritis pain.

    Florida’s favorite use is: “cleans and removes love bugs from grills and bumpers.”

    The favorite use in the state of New York–WD-40 protects the Statue of Liberty from the elements.

    WD- 40 attracts fish. Spray a LITTLE on live bait or lures and you will be catching the big one in no time. Also, ! it’s a lot cheaper than the chemical attractants that are made for just that purpose.

    Keep in mind though, using some chemical laced baits or lures for fishing are not allowed in some states.

    Use it for fire ant bites. It takes the sting away immediately and stops the itch.

    WD-40 is great for removing crayon from walls. Spray on the mark and wipe with a clean rag.

    Also, if you’ve discovered that your teenage daughter has washed and dried a tube of lipstick with a load of laundry, saturate the lipstick spots with WD-40 and re-wash. Presto! Lipstick is gone!

    If you sprayed WD-40 on the distributor cap, it would displace the moisture and allow the car to start.

    It removes black scuff marks from the kitchen floor!

    Use WD-40 for those nasty tar and scuff marks on flooring. It doesn’t seem to harm the finish and you won’t have to scru! b nearl y as hard to get them off. Just remember to open some windows if you have a lot of marks.

    Bug guts will eat away the finish on your car if not removed quickly! Use WD-40!

    P. S. The basic ingredient is FISH OIL

    • A married couple was on holiday in Jamaica. They were touring around the marketplace looking at the goods and such when they passed this small sandal shop. From inside they heard the shopkeeper with a Jamaican accent say, “You foreigners! Come in. Come into my humble shop!”

      So they walked in. The Jamaican said to them, “I have some special sandals I think you would be interested in. Dey make you wild at sex. ”

      Well, the wife was really interested in buying the sandals after what the man claimed, but her
      husband felt he really didn’t need them,being the sex God he was.

      The husband asked the man, “How could sandals make you into a sex freak?”

      The Jamaican replied, “Just try dem on, Mon.”

      Well, the husband, after some badgering from his wife, finally gave in, and tried them on. As soon as he slipped them onto his feet, he got this wild look in his eyes… . something his wife hadn’t seen in many years!

      In the blink of an eye, the husband grabbed the Jamaican, bent him violently over a table, yanked down his pants, ripped down his own pants, and grabbed a firm hold of the Jamaican’s hips.

      The Jamaican then began screaming, “YOU GOT DEM ON DE WRONG FEET! YOU GOT DEM ON DE WRONG FEET!

      • A Guy walked into the local welfare office, marched straight up to the counter and said, “Hi.
        You know, I just HATE drawing welfare.
        I’d really rather have a job.”

        The social worker behind the counter said, “Your timing is excellent. We just got a job opening from a very wealthy old man w ho wants a chauffeur and bodyguard for his beautiful daughter you’ll have to drive around in his Mercedes, and he’ll supply all of your clothes. Because of the long hours, meals will be provided. You’ll be expected to escort the daughter on her overseas holiday trips and you will have to satisfy her sexual urges.
        You’ll be provided a two-bedroom apartment above the garage. The salary is $200,000 a year.”

        The guy, wide-eyed, said, “You’re bullshittin’ me!”

        The social worker said, “Yeah, well . . . you started it.”

      • Golf Couple

        Some people know where their priorities are.

        On the 2nd tee of the golf course with his wife, the husband says,”Twenty
        years ago I had a brief affair, it meant nothing. I hope you can forgive
        me.”

        His wife was hurt, but said, “Dearest, those days are long gone.What we
        have now is far more valuable. I forgive you.”

        They embraced and kissed.

        On the 17th tee, the husband was starting his back swing when the wife
        blurted out, “I’m sorry darling, I’ve been so conscience-stricken since
        you told me of your affair. Since we’re being honest with each other,I have
        something to tell you also. Thirty-two years ago I had a sex change operation, I
        was a man before I met you. I hope you can forgive me”

        The husband froze at the top of his back swing, and then threw a fit! He
        slammed the driver into the ground, kicked the ball into the woods,stormed
        off the tee, pushed the golf cart over on its side, broke the rest of his
        clubs one by one, then started on hers. He screamed and ranted, “You liar! You
        cheat! You despicable deceiver! How could you? I trusted you with all my heart
        and soul…and all these years you’ve been playing off the ladies tees!”

        Some things are sacred!

      • DICTIONARY FOR DECODING WOMEN’S PERSONAL ADS:

        40-ish……………………………..49.
        Adventurous………………………Slept with everyone.
        Athletic……………………………No breasts.
        Average looking…………………Moooo.
        Beautiful…………………………..Pathological liar.
        Emotionally Secure……………On medication.
        Feminist………………………….Fat.
        Free spirit………………………..Junkie.
        Friendship first………………….Former slut.
        New-Age…………………………Body hair in the wrong places.
        Old-fashioned…………………..No BJs.
        Open-minded……………………Desperate.
        Outgoing………………………….Loud and Embarrassing.
        Professional…………………….Bitch.
        Voluptuous……………………..Very Fat.
        Large frame…………………….Hugely Fat.
        Wants Soul mate……………..Stalker.

        WOMEN’S ENGLISH:
        1. Yes = No
        2. No = Yes
        3. Maybe = No
        4. We need = I want
        5. I am sorry = You’ll be sorry
        6. We need to talk = You’re in trouble
        7. Sure, go ahead = You better not
        8. Do what you want = You will pay for this later
        9. I am not upset = Of course, I am upset, you moron!
        10. You’re certainly attentive tonight = Is sex all you ever think about?

        MEN’S ENGLISH:
        1. I am hungry = I am hungry
        2. I am sleepy = I am sleepy
        3. I am tired = I am tired
        4. Nice dress = Nice cleavage!
        5. I love you = Let’s have sex now
        6. I am bored = Do you want to have sex?
        7. May I have this dance? = I’d like to have sex with you.
        8. Can I call you sometime? = I’d like to have sex with you.
        9. Do you want to go to a movie? = I’d like to have sex with you.
        10. Can I take you out to dinner? = I’d like to have sex with you.
        11. I don’t think those shoes go with that outfit =I’m gay

      • They walk among Us

        Some guy bought a new fridge for his house. To get rid of his old fridge, he
        put it in his front yard and hung a sign on it saying: “Free to good home.
        You want it, you take it.” For three days the fridge sat there without even
        one person looking twice at it. He eventually decided that people were too
        un-trusting of this deal. It looked to good to be true, so he changed the
        sign to read: “Fridge for sale $50.” The next day someone stole it.
        Caution… They Walk Among Us!

        ====================
        One day I was walking down the beach with some friends when someone
        shouted….”Look at that dead bird!” Someone looked up at the sky and
        said…”where???” They Walk among us!!
        ====================

        While looking at a house, my brother asked the real estate agent which
        direction was north because, he explained, he didn’t want the sun waking him
        up every morning. She asked, “Does the sun rise in the north?” When my
        brother explained that the sun rises in the east, and has for sometime, she
        shook her head and said, “Oh, I don’t keep up with that stuff.” They Walk
        Among Us!!

        ====================

        I used to work in technical support for a 24/7 call center. One day I got a
        call from an individual who asked what hours the call center was open. I
        told him, “The number you dialed is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.” He
        responded, “Is that Eastern or Pacific time?” Wanting to end the call
        quickly, I said, “Uh, Pacific” . . They Walk Among Us!!!

        ====================

        My colleague and I were eating our lunch in our cafeteria, when we overheard
        one of the administrative assistants talking about the sunburn she got on
        her weekend drive to the shore. She drove down in a convertible, but “didn’t
        think she’d get sunburned because the car was moving”. They Walk Among
        Us!!!!

        ====================

        My sister has a lifesaving tool in her car it’s designed to cut through a
        seat belt if she gets trapped. She keeps it in the trunk… They Walk Among
        Us!!!!!

        ====================

        My friends and I were on a beer run and noticed that the cases were
        discounted 10%. Since it was a big party, we bought 2 cases. The cashier
        multiplied 2 times 10% and gave us a 20% discount…. They Walk Among
        Us!!!!!!

        ====================

        I was hanging out with a friend when we saw a woman with a nose ring
        attached to an earring by a chain. My friend said, “Wouldn’t the chain rip
        out every time she turned her head?” I explained that a person’s nose and
        ear remain the same distance apart no matter which way the head is turned…
        They Walk Among Us!!!!!!!

        ====================

        I couldn’t find my luggage at the airport baggage area. So I went to the
        lost luggage office and told the woman there that my bags never showed up.
        She smiled and told me not to worry because she was a trained professional
        and I was in good hands. “Now,” she asked me, “has your plane arrived
        yet?”… They Walk Among Us!!!!!!!!

        ====================

        While working at a pizza parlor I observed a man ordering a small pizza to
        go. He appeared to be alone and the cook asked him if he would like it cut
        into 4 pieces or 6. He thought about it for some time before responding.
        “Just cut it into 4 pieces; I don’t think I’m hungry enough to eat 6 pieces.
        Yep, They Walk Among Us, too.!!!!!!!!

        ====================

        They walk among us, AND reproduce!

      • Why Did The Chicken Cross The Road?

        DR. PHIL: The problem we have here is that this chicken won’t realize that he must first deal with the problem on “THIS” side of the road before it goes after the problem on the “OTHER SIDE” of the road. What we need to do is help him realize how stupid he’s acting by not taking on his “CURRENT” problems before adding “NEW” problems.

        OPRAH: Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is why he wants to cross this road so bad. So, instead of having the chicken learn from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I’m going to give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road, and not live his life like the rest of the chickens.

        GEORGE W. BUSH: We don’t really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not. The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground here.

        DONALD RUMSFELD: Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the satellite image of the chicken crossing the road.

        ANDERSON COOPER/CNN: We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have not yet been allowed to have access to the other side of the road.

        JOHN KERRY: Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now against it! It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the chicken’s intentions. I am for it now, and will remain against it.

        JUDGE JUDY: That chicken crossed the road because he’s GUILTY! You can see it in his eyes and the way he walks.

        PAT BUCHANAN: To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.

        MARTHA STEWART: No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was going. I had a standing order at the Farmer’s Market to sell my eggs when the price dropped to a certain level.

        DR SEUSS: Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, the chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I’ve not been told.

        ERNEST HEMINGWAY: To die in the rain. Alone.

        JERRY FALWELL: Because the chicken was gay! Can’t you people see the plain truth in front of your face? The chicken was going to the “other side.” That’s why they call it the “other side. Yes, my friends, that chicken is gay, and if you eat that chicken, you will become gay, too. I say we boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination that the liberal media whitewashes with seemingly harmless phrases like “the other side.” That chicken should not be free to cross the road. It’s as plain and simple as that!

        GRANDPA: In my day we didn’t ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.

        BARBARA WALTERS: Isn’t that interesting? In a few moments, we will be listening for the first time, the heart-warming story of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish its life long dream of crossing the road.

        JOHN LENNON: Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together–in peace.

        ARISTOTLE: It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.

        BILL GATES: I have just released eChicken 2006, which will not only cross roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your check book. Internet Explorer is an integral part of eChicken. The Platform is much more stable and will never crash.

        ALBERT EINSTEIN: Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move beneath the chicken?

        BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What is your definition of chicken?

        AL GORE: I invented the chicken!

        COLONEL SANDERS: Did I miss one?

      • Taxes

        A woman walks into her accountant’s office and tells him that she needs to file her taxes. The accountant says: “Before we begin, I’ll need to ask you a few questions.” He gets her name, address, social security number,
        etc, and then asks, “What is your occupation?”

        “I’m a whore,” she says.

        The accountant balks and says, “No, No, No, that won’t work; too gross.
        Let’s try to rephrase that.”

        The woman says, “OK, I’m a high-end call girl.”

        “Sorry, that is still too crude. Try again.”

        They both think for a minute, then the woman says, “How about “Elite chicken farmer”?

        Stunned, the accountant asks, “What does chicken farming have to do with being a high-end call girl?”

        “Well, I raised over a thousand little peckers last year.”

        “Good enough!”

      • Several centuries ago, the Pope decreed that all the Jews had to convert, or leave Italy.

        There was a huge outcry from the Jewish community,
        so the Pope offered a deal.

        He would have a religious debate with the leader of the Jewish community.
        If the Jews won, they could stay in Italy;
        if the Pope won, they would have to leave.

        The Jewish people met and picked an aged, but wise,
        Rabbi Moishe to represent them in the debate.
        However, Moishe spoke no Italian, and the Pope spoke no Yiddish,
        so they all agreed that it would be a “silent” debate.

        On the chosen day, the Pope and Rabbi Moishe sat opposite
        each other a full minute before the Pope raised his hand.
        He showed three fingers.
        Rabbi Moishe looked back.
        He raised one finger.

        Next, the Pope waved his finger around his head.
        Rabbi Moishe pointed to the ground where he sat.

        The Pope brought out a communion wafer and a chalice of wine.
        Rabbi Moishe pulled out an apple.

        With that, the Pope stood up and declared he was beaten.
        Rabbi Moishe was too clever and the Jews could stay.

        Later, the Cardinal met with the Pope, asking what had happened.

        The Pope said, “First, I held up three fingers to represent the Trinity.
        He responded by holding up one finger to remind me that there
        is still but one God common to both our beliefs.

        “Then, I waved my finger to show him that God was all around us.
        He responded by pointing to the ground to show
        that God was also right here with us.

        I pulled out the wine and wafer to show that God absolves us of all our sins.

        “He pulled out an apple to remind me of the original sin.
        He had me beaten, and I could not continue.”

        Meanwhile, the Jewish community was gathered around Rabbi Moishe.

        “How did you win the debate?” they asked.

        “I haven’t a clue,” said Moishe.
        “First, he tells me that we had three days to get out of Italy,
        so I gave him the finger.

        Then he tells me that the whole country would be cleared of Jews,
        and I said to him ‘We’re staying right here.'”

        “Then what happened?” asked a woman.

        “Who knows?” said Moishe.
        “He took out his lunch, so I took out mine.”

        Beer 30, pleasant evening to all.

    • Okay WD-40 and duct tape and you can take care of just about everything.

    • Can you use it on the new laminate wood floors to make them shine-haven’t been able to find anything to make mine shine.

  38. What BF said
    It makes you guilty of supporting the killing of innocent people.

    ________________________________________________________________

    BF, How can that make me guilty of killing innocent people if the ones who are truly guilty aren’t? I really don’t understand that. If I’m willing to go to death row for the truly innocent, but not the innocent, how ma I guilty? I don’t see how, please help me to understand that, because now I’m really getting confused. You have a way of explaining things to me where I can understand better. That’s if you still talking to me.

    • BF, How can that make me guilty of killing innocent people if the ones who are truly guilty aren’t?

      Many are guilty – but because one man is guilty does not absolve you of culpability in supporting the killing of an innocent man who was killed by Capital Punishment

      ..innocent from ‘truly’ innocent..

      What’s the difference?

      How can you tell – for sure – guilty from the innocent?

      I don’t see how, please help me to understand that, because now I’m really getting confused. You have a way of explaining things to me where I can understand better. That’s if you still talking to me.

      • So, am I in the dog house now or what? I’m trying BF, really I am.

        • Never in the dog house!

          You are honest in yourself.

          That is your most powerful trait. (Which is why I never need to bring my sword and pistol to ‘your house’ – as JAC once explained)

          You represent – most completely – the honesty and understanding of America for me.

          When you understand me, I know my message will be understood by America

          JAC understands me before I type the words.

          PeterB is me – in a different set of clothes.

          USWep knows me, hates the style of hair I wear at some parties….but still accepts me.

          But you (and others, too!) represent -for me- what the People – the Remnant – those that carry this Nation – are all about.

          You are never in the dog house and you are not evil!

          If I can show -perhaps- a contradiction to you; and you know, and accept, and change to eliminate that… then I know that I have spoken to the soul of the Nation.

          You are my ‘bellwether’

  39. Judy:

    YOUR declaration is your statement not mine.

    You said “I said no matter what you or anybody else says about how and what I belive in will not chnage my mind.”

    That is the definition of a closed mind.

    What JAC said

    I ask again, “Is that really who you are?”

    Being “closed minded” has nothing to do with the opinion you hold or “what” you believe. It has everything to do with a willingness to consider facts, logic and reason to validate your position or to change if needed. In short, it is all about “how” or “why” you believe what you do.

    To declare in advance that you will not change your mind no matter what information is provided now or in the future is a description of a closed mind.

    __________________________________________________________________

    JAC

    NO! I don’t want to be closed minded, and yes I am willing to do all I can in waiting to see what the facts are and logic and validation before I make up my mind. BUT, say, a person is found to be innocent, but is really guilty after all the evidence is in, and they are give death by the jury and judge, are they then considered to be guilty themselves?

    I ask this, because if the justice system is so screwed up and wrong, then why do we even have one. Hasn’t this been the way ever since the beginning of time?

    I’m trying with all my might here to understand everything, but I feel I’m getting over whelmed here.

  40. New Haven police say it may be hours until they receive DNA results from items seized from a Yale research technician, in relation to the murder of graduate student at the university.

    Chief James Lewis said at a press conference held early Wednesday evening that police were awaiting results from DNA that taken from animal research technician Raymond Clark III. the results are expected to show if it connects hom to more than 250 pieces of evidence collected from the crime scene.

    Lewis described Clark, 23, as a Yale staff member who did custodial work at the laboratory, such as cleaning mouse cages. He said that he has three relatives — his fiance, his sister and brother-in-law — that do similar work at the Yale lab.

    Lewis did answer questions on the relationships between Clark, his family members and graduate student Annie Le.

    “[Clark] is the only person we currently have a search warrant for at this time,” said Lewis.

    Lewis says Clark and several other people are under constant surveillance. He declined to say who those people were were.

    He said charges will be filed against anyone whose DNA matches evidence found at the crime scene.

    Police also said two new search warrant were issued for a Ford Mustang belonging to Clark and for other undisclosed items.

    Dr. Wayne Carver in a brief statement said an autopsy of Le, 24, determined that she was murdered by “traumatic asphyxia” due to neck compression. There were no other details immediately available.

    Clark was released from police custody Wednesday at 3 a.m. after authorities collected DNA samples from him, questioned him and searched his apartment. No charges have been filed against him.

    He said through his lawyer that he wanted to cooperate with the investigation. His attorney David Dworski said Wednesday his client is “committed to proceeding appropriately with the authorities.” He would not comment further.

    L

    Clark was taken into police custody in handcuffs Tuesday night while officers and FBI agents searched the Middletown, Conn., apartment he shares with his fiancee for DNA and other physical evidence that might tie him to Le’s killing.

    Le disappeared suddenly on Sept. 8, less than a week before she was to be married. Her body was discovered Sunday — the day her wedding had been planned for — hidden behind a wall in a Yale lab building where Clark worked and she did research for her doctoral program in pharmacology.

    Clark lives in his apartment with fiancee Jennifer Hromadka, whom he plans to marry in December 2011, according to the couple’s wedding Web site.

    Among the possible motives detectives are mulling over is Clark’s reported criticism of Le for her handling of the lab mice the two worked with, according to the New York Daily News.

    Citing e-mails the pair reportedly exchanged, the Daily News said Clark had accused Le of failing to follow protocol when handling the mice, and she’d promised to do better.

    Late Tuesday, capping a weeklong hunt first for Le and then for her killer, Clark was escorted out of his apartment and into a silver car. Neighbors leaned over the building’s iron railings and cheered as police led him away.

    New Haven Police Chief James Lewis described Clark as a person of interest, not a suspect, in the death of Le.

    Lewis wouldn’t confirm that Clark had scratches on his body and had failed an FBI-administered lie detector test, but denied rumors that Clark had been on the run.

    “We’ve known where he was all along,” Lewis told reporters.

    The chief also declined to comment on reports that Clark’s fiancee had contacted authorities Tuesday night when he came home with scratches, wearing different clothes than the ones he’d left for work in.

    Hromadka wrote on her MySpace page that she’s not perfect, but cautioned people not to judge her.

    “Who are you to judge the life I live? I know I’m not perfect and I don’t live to be, but before you start pointing fingers make sure your hands are clean!!” the 23-year-old wrote.

    The date of the MySpace posting is unclear. The page has since been taken down.

    Overnight, state police officers sorted through items on a card table set up outside Clark’s ground-floor apartment’s door. A tow truck took away a red Ford Mustang neighbors say was used by Clark.

    A resident of the complex, Rick Tarallo said he, his wife and 6-month-old daughter live in a unit next to Clark and his fiancee, Jennifer Hromadka.

    He said the couple was “really quiet” and lived with an older man, whom he speculated was one of their fathers.

    “He seemed like a good guy,” Tarallo said of Clark. “They didn’t strike me as someone who would try to kill somebody.”

    Police started tearing down the yellow crime scene tape as daylight broke. At that point there had been no sign of Clark’s return to his apartment, and neighbors said they hadn’t seen Hromadka in the area for days.

    Loraine Falcon, 32, a nurse aid who lives in Clark’s building, said the police activity kept her and her three kids — ages 15, 10 and 8 — up much of the night and left her fearful for their safety.

    “I just want to know if he did it,” Falcon said.

    Clark’s apartment appeared empty Wednesday morning after police left. No one answered the door.

    During the search, one officer commented that the apartment smelled like animals. Multiple neighbors said they saw Clark and Hromadka load luggage, cats and two rodents into a vehicle on Saturday.

    Falcon said she also saw Clark loading a suitcase and a duffel bag into a car Sunday at about 5 p.m.

    Police have collected more than 700 hours of videotape and sifted through computer records documenting who entered what parts of the research building where Le was found dead.

    In addition to Clark and Hromadka, Clark’s sister and brother-in-law were also technicians at Yale’s Animal Resources Center, according to Yale records.

    On Tuesday, state prosecutors blocked the release of Le’s autopsy results, reasoning that they could hinder their investigation. The Connecticut medical examiner had already called the death a homicide but hadn’t reported the manner of Le’s death.

    • So, what do you think should happen to this guy who killed this girl?

      • Judy,

        The best thing I can do is understand. Understand your position and BF’s JAC’s and the others. When I posted this afternoon, I did attempt to make a point, although a suttle one.

        In reallity, I can only condemn someone to death if that person is a direct threat. It falls on my shoulders, and I choose to act.

        With the Death penalty, as with many other convictions, like rape, that some convicted of these crimes are wrongly convicted, as has been proven through DNA evidence, and many have been spent decades in jail for doing nothing.

        This is Bf’s point, the justice system is flawed, as prosocuters are ELECTED!!! The Duke Rape case awhile back is proof of this.

        While your position is solid, and if the system was perfect, you would not have had this conversation today.

        Problem is, the system is not perfect, and not enough Americans are armed to stop the mess that is occurring. Your not wrong, but BF and JAC are not wrong either. What they are tryig to establish is the fact that the system is flawed, and a flawed system can’t be what we want it to be, it is not capable of deciding life and death, because it is flawed. Only you and I and everyone who lives free can decide that, at the time of the occurance, not in our flawed court system.

        Hope that helps a little!
        G!

        • Read what I just said below.

        • Funny, I’m against the death penalty-but the fact that our system is flawed brings up the fact that the court system has the ability, which they have used to release people who should never have been released and then these people go out and kill, rape, and abuse innocent people again-one could use this reasoning as a basis to support the death penalty.

          • VH, You have a strong point, but would it not be more effective to arm yourself, and solve this problem once and for all. Would you not want have the choice, rather than a flawed system?

            Good evening my friend, hope times find you well!

            G!

            • So far in this Country-we have the right to arm ourselves, although actually shooting someone, even when it’s justified can be tricky-I’m against the death penalty for several reasons but I find that in most cases(that I have been aware of) when it has been used I can’t seem to feel any real strong righteous indignation against it-not sure what that says about me.

    • Le was from Placerville, CA also known as “Old Hangtown”. Too bad they cut down the hanging tree years ago. We could use it right now for the Jaycee kidnappers currently in the Placerville jail and for Le’s killer. Her high school teachers and classmates here have nothing but praise for this young woman. It is hard to such a bright mind lost.

  41. This is for BF and JAC

    Alright guys, you’ve convinced me. I have been doing some really deep thinking about what we’ve been talking about today. Here is what I have to say, and I hope it makes you both happy, because what you both said has really gotten to me.

    Here is my thoughts on what you both have said to me, and I hope I can get a gold star for it because I feel I have earned it.

    If a person commits a violent crime against another person, and they go to prison for it, then instead of putting them to death, then my thinking is, they spend the rest of eternity in prison, without ever seeing daylight again. I would hope that they will see the person’s face that they committed the crime against every single night for the rest of their life. I hope that, that scene replays itself in their mind over and over and over on how they snuffed that person’s life out, and that it will set in their conscience forever.

    I hope that the person who commits rape and murder will hear the screams every night, and will see their face. I hope that the person who kills a child will hear that child’s cries when they close their eyes at night. I hope that when that person tries to sleep after killing an entire family, that he will see all their faces.

    I know some will not have any remorse in what they did, and some I’m sure will feel guilty for everything they have to to another person, and they will have to live with that guilt every single day for the rest of their life. But, what does it do to the people’s families? Are they not victims themselves for what happened to their loved ones? Are they suppose to forgive the person who killed one of their loved ones. I guess at some point in their life, they might be able too, and some will never be able too.

    If these people who committed these crimes against others stay in prison for the rest of their life, without the possibility of parole, then I guess that’s punishment enough. I really can’t decide on how I feel about parole with good behavior.But, If they get released with that, and really make an effort in turning their lives around and going straight, then I will applaud them, but if they go back and do what they have done before prison, then I really hope they rot in prison for the rest of their life, never to be released again.

    Those are my thoughts now after thinking everything through.

    • Judy:

      You are going to hate this but I must do it.

      You have changed your position.

      Why?

      As I tried to say earlier. My questions were not to get you to change but to develope a rational argument to support your position. Such an argument, given the topic, must be based on sound moral principles, or as we often say here….”core values”.

      BF presented to you “HIS” argument from “HIS” moral position.

      My purpose today was to get you and others to defend yours in the same way. If you can’t then you must consider changing to make the position consistent with the core that supports it.

      It is the argument, or the “reason” you take the position that is important. Because it must be consistent with your other values.

      I think you new position may be more in line with “your” core values but I am not sure you have really explored and identified those. If you have, then I have not understood.

      Now I want you to know I do not think you are closed minded. But I needed to show you how falling back on an easy “slogan” such as “I’m not going to change my mind no matter what” in fact sanctions a closed minded culture. When we use such phrases we not only validate the premise behind it, but we eventually start to believe in it.

      To be open minded does not mean you “have to change”. It only means you will consider the facts and apply reason and logic and then decide whether to change or not change. If your understanding of reality changes from applying reason then it is rational to change your views to be consistent with reality.

      Conversely, it would be irrational to change your views in a way that is not consistent with reality. I see this in the world all the time. The Pragmatist is the worst example. They ignore reality because they have no core value to guide. There guide is to DO SOMETHING AND DO IT NOW.

      I also hope that now you understand why BF and I, and others here, are always falling back to core values, morals, principles, and ethics when discussing these types of issues. These are the foundation on which we build our lives. Everything we do must be consistent with that foundation or we will fail in the pursuit of a full and happy life.

      Every issue discussed here does not have to evolve into a discussion of morals. But many discussed here do.

      I am proud of you for reconsidering and spending the time to think hard about the issue and the information presented today. I know it is hard and tiring. Especially as the day gets long.

      Take the rest of the evening off and relax. No more hard questions tonight. You can deal with the Why some other day.

      Best to You and Your Family
      JAC

      • JAC

        What can I say, you and BF said a lot today, and it really made me stop and think about things. Just give me time for it to all sink in because I thought I would never, ever change my thinking.

        I’m glad I made you proud, now I hope BF will feel the same. Hope I didn’t get him mad at me, I really like him and value his opinion as well as yours and everybody else.

        Have a good night dear JAC.

        Judy

      • JAC, as usual, is the Gandalf of our little band here.

        I, too, was pro-Capital Punishment. Staunch supporter.

        I mean, Dad was a real C.o.P. – a man of peace, power and strength. Evil needs to be destroyed!…type of a guy.

        I was already “Black Flag” when I met my wife…confident that I already “figured out everything” about being a Black Flag.

        And, the topic came up about some child-killer. “Hang’m high!” I said.

        But – then – an argument from principle – My Principle! was laid against me! From my wife!?!

        And, as all contradictions are – and all truth is – the principle is always rightIt Never Fails

        I was humbled – and proud, because Mrs. Flag had become my peer. I was no longer the ‘teacher’ but now, a willing student too.

        It was a huge, huge, huge day for me.

        I learned (again) I do not know everything – even things about me. I am, forever, a student to the Universe.

        I confirmed – that one must always reach and touch their core principles for guidance.

        It is solid, perfect solid, in all weather.

        The difference between “right” and “wrong” is only a finger-touch away – it is inside all of us – we need only to reach -so small a reach- to confirm it.

    • Hi all My feeling are like this you kill someone someone should kill you .this keeping people in prison all there life is bull poop we have millions of people starving and freezing yet were paying to house feed and give medical they eat 3 times a day yet we have vets liveing in the strees. I live in the mountains and the rules here are you mess with my property you get shot and a dead man cant talk
      {my property means come in my house] I dont shoot to wound i shoot to kill
      Judy dont let noone talk you out of what you beleave

  42. Update on ACORN!

    It’s not posted yet on the web, but a 5th video from San Diego is next. From reports, the ACORN person has connections in Tiahuana (SP) to help get the young girls from Central America in the states.

    This has become discusting and these freaks need to be shut down!

    G!

    • Just seen some of this video. Sickening! These a$$holes need to be crushed! They have no business doing Business in OUR country.

      G!

  43. DO YOU FELLOWS THINK CHANGING THE VOTING AGE FOR CITIZENS MIGHT HELP TO VOTE MORE RESPONSIBLY? DURING CAMPAIGN I SAW A VIDEO OF YOUNG HIGH SCHOOLS WHO SAID: WE ARE BLACK, SO WE VOTED FOR OBAMA. MAYBE IF BACK TO 21 FOR ALL CITIZENS, EXCEPT LEAVE MILITARY AT 18 AFTER ALL THEY ARE WILLING TO GIVE THEIR LIFE FOR US. NOT SURE WHAT THE REST OF THE COMMENTS WERE.

    • Goldie, Your question deems thought. I have a 21, a 19 (in the USCG), and a 17 year old. My 17 year old will be able to vote in 2010. Not convinced she can vote with an educated check mark. Must think on this awhile.

      Hope tonight finds you well!

      G!

      • My daughter surprised me the other day-she just turned 20-when she said -I didn’t feel like I should vote in the last election because I wasn’t sure how I felt about the issues-but I’m going to vote in the next election because I have thought about things and have decided that I agree with you. 🙂 🙂 🙂 I’m so proud-would have been proud if she had disagreed with me too-but much happier that she agrees with me.

        • Isn’t that a great feeling!

        • Now that I have shouted out my motherly pride -I have to say that I too feel that most people are not ready to vote before the age of about 21 but with the responsibilities that are put on them at a young age, and the past arguments of people on this site-I have to say let them vote -but I’m really not happy about it.

    • Hans Hoppe – a genius (and if the world was “fair” would win a Nobel prize) stated:

      A broadly based “good” makes more good.

      A broadly based “bad” makes more bad.

      Government, when its exercise was restricted (ie: monarchy – that is, only one) was a “small” bad, because only “one” bad was at work.

      Government, when its exercise was broad (ie: democracy – that is everyone) is really big “bad”, because everyone is a work doing bad.

      His argument empowers my position.

      Democracy will be found to be the worst possible government formation.

      It marries diffuse responsibility with unlimited justification.

      “It’s not me, it was a majority” with “everyone said it was ok”

  44. Things have gotten a little sad with talk of death and jail so maybe this will liven things up a little-unless you don’t like Elvis(which is almost a sin)-the song sorta relates to the topic. 🙂

    • VH, This has been my mantra. I really love music, and since this song came out, I really think it works for me!

      Peace!

      G!

      • I really need to learn how to do more on this site., you post a video, others have got this quote thing down, geez, I’m so far behind!! LOL

      • J. Bon Jovi)

        I wake up in the morning
        And I raise my weary head
        I’ve got an old coat for a pillow
        And the earth was last night’s bed
        I don’t know where I’m going
        Only God knows where I’ve been
        I’m a devil on the run
        A six gun lover
        A candle in the wind

        When you’re brought into this world
        They say you’re born in sin
        Well at least they gave me something
        I didn’t have to steal or have to win
        Well they tell me that I’m wanted
        Yeah, I’m a wanted man
        I’m a colt in your stable
        I’m what Cain was to Abel
        Mister catch me if you can

        I’m going out in a blaze of glory
        Take me now but know the truth
        I’m going out in a blaze of glory
        Lord I never drew first
        But I drew first blood
        I’m no one’s son
        Call me young gun

        You ask about my conscience
        And I offer you my soul
        You ask if I’ll grow to be a wise man
        Well I ask if I’ll grow old
        You ask me if I’ve known love
        And what it’s like to sing songs in the rain
        Well, I’ve seen love come
        And I’ve seen it shot down
        I’ve seen it die in vain

        Shot down in a blaze of glory
        Take me now but know the truth
        ‘Cause I’m going down in a blaze of glory
        Lord I never drew first
        But I drew first blood
        I’m the devil’s son
        Call me young gun

        Solo

        Each night I go to bed
        I pray the Lord my soul to keep
        No I ain’t looking for forgiveness
        But before I’m six foot deep
        Lord, I got to ask a favor
        And hope you’ll understand
        ‘Cause I’ve lived life to the fullest
        Let this boy die like a man
        Staring down a bullet
        Let me make my final stand

        Shot down in a blaze of glory
        Take me now but know the truth
        I’m going out in a blaze of glory
        Lord I never drew first
        But I drew first blood
        And I’m no one’s son
        Call me young gun
        I’m a young gun

        Quite a mantra, my friend, and I see the desire to STAND but I hope for you peace in your old age(when you get there):)

  45. Black Flag recent posted the ‘ghost fleet’ of empty transport vessels. Here’s a followup from zerohedge:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/thousands-rusting-ship-hulls-are-fitting-tribute-speculative-market-bubble

    The text is below, but the pictures with the original are something to see.

    Thousands Of Rusting Ship Hulls Are A Fitting Tribute To The Speculative Market Bubble

    Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/16/2009 13:08 -0500

    The Daily Mail recently made waves with a photo exposing what it called the “ghost fleet of the recession” where hundreds of ships were shown on anchor off the straits of Singapore, doing nothing except rusting: a tribute to the unprecedented collapse in world trade, the bulk of which is seaborne, and the huge amount of excess slack in shipping.

    Zero Hedge decided to probe this idea further, and for that we took advantage of the very useful real time ship tracker functionality provided by vesseltracker.com (any reader who has Google Earth can easily replicate these results using the following data file).

    The results

    First we wanted to show how traditionally functioning critical routes are still heavily trafficked, as can be seen by the large amount of green highlights in the following snapshots (green indicates operating ship, red denotes a ship out of spot/charter and currently unused).

    Gibraltar:

    Denmark:

    Red Sea (one hopes the Somali pirates do not have access to Vesseltracker):

    Yet where it gets interesting is when one scours for comparable packets of inactivity as that captured by the Daily Mail. As a first example of just how bad it really is, we recreate the image of the Singapore Strait that is shown on the picture at the top:

    What is surprising is how prevalent this pattern is around the globe. Some comparable areas we discovered were the following:

    Coast of Britain:

    Qinhungdao (Chinese coast) – note the pattern that allows any active ships to actually enter the harbor. This is probably not a good indication of the Baltic Dry Index to going up any time soon.

    Putuo – another representation of Chinese overzealousness in building drybulkers:

    Belgian coast:

    Dubai: the gateway to the middle east is essentially closed. All that expensive oil, and nobody is transporting it…At least if you look closely you can see some very nice man made islands, that are the only remnants of the great Dubai experiment in recreating the US credit/real estate bubble:

    Most shocking is the situation around the Bosporus: the transit corridor between Russia and the rest of the world is orders of magnitude worse than even the Singapore case.

    As for our own back yard, this is the situation in the Gulf of Mexico: a sea of red. One wonders how many of these ships are merely filled with crude, happily waiting for oil to hit $145 one more time.

    The bottom line: world trade has collapsed, shipping lines, once flourishing, have become graveyard archipelagos populated by rusting ship skeletons. Yet all of this is beyond the land, and thus far from sight. Of course, who needs trade when you have a speculative market trading in its own bubble, hitting yearly highs day after day, thanks only and exclusively to the Chairman’s printing press. It is a pity these ships can not sail in the sea of hundred dollar bills that is being created each and every day at the Federal Reserve, whose only use these days it seems is to buy junker stocks and to feed the algos that lift whatever offers are stupid enough to float in the equity market.

%d bloggers like this: